We want UBC to stop using Proctorio for assessments. Proctorio is known to be an ineffective tool to enforce academic integrity. It is an invasive technology that violates student privacy. We don’t want our education driven by tools of mass surveillance. 

There have been many red flags along the way, from the CEO releasing a student’s chat log (1, 2) just to be “right” in the UBC subreddit of all places, to suing UBC’s staff (3, 4, 5), Ian Linkletter, for sharing “confidential information” (see: link to an unlisted YouTube video by Proctorio, the company we are trusting with tons of sensitive data) who began a dialogue around the unethical nature of tools like Proctorio and its impact on student privacy. We see the aggression and intimidation Proctorio perpetuates, this is not the first time Proctrio CEO has resorted to intimidation (6), and we refuse to support their services. 

Even after the AMS put out a letter against Proctorio (7), UBC has continued on with Proctorio (8, 9), just recently renewing their contract with the company. UBC chose not to take a strong stance for its students, so now we must demand it LOUD AND CLEAR. 

There is a severe lack of transparency around how the video recorded by Proctorio is used, what gets flagged, and who gets to see it. UBC Students should know that Proctorio flags “suspicious behaviour” by tracking/ controlling a host of things, including: 

1. Your Microphone 
2. Your Webcam
3. Your Physical Location 
4. Your Identity 
5. Your Eye Movement 
6. Your Head Movement 
7. Scans your room/ testing environment via webcam 
8. Your Browser Size 
9. Browser Tabs and Windows You Have Open 
10. Your Cursor Movements 
11. Your Entire Screen 
12. Any Applications Running on Your Computer (got apps running in the background? Proctorio is tracking that too) 
13. Number of Display Screens Connected to Your Computer 
14. Your Clipboard (text you have copied) 
15. Any Website You Visit

This gives Proctorio WAY too much control within a student’s computer. It is also, very clearly, a tool that disadvantages neurodivergent students, students with disabilities, or those who are unable to take their exams in a distraction-free and private environment due to child-care or other familial responsibilities or limited resources. This enhances the negative effects of inequities amongst students, and upholds ableist and racist values (e.g. not recognising dark faces, flagging head coverings). (10, 11, 12, 13) 

“suspicious behaviour” ≠ cheating 

Academic integrity cannot be enforced by policing student behaviour. Instead, building a culture of trust and a focus on learning & building community will further incentivize learner centric values. Moreover, there are many alternatives to Proctorio, including assessment styles that challenge students and test knowledge effectively, where critical thinking and analysis are centred. Technological “solutions” like Proctorio are unnecessary for issues rooted in pedagogy. 

An education system that reinforces distrust, and poses students and teachers as rivals trying to outsmart each other is NOT an education system we want. We want to be part of a supportive community, a kind, compassionate knowledge society. And that means rejecting spyware in our education technology. 

This is an equity issue. This is a privacy issue. This is a student dignity issue. 

Sources: 

1. Proctorio CEO releases student’s chat logs, sparking renewed privacy concerns [June 30, 2020] https://www.ubyssey.ca/news/proctorio-chat-logs/ 

2. CEO of exam monitoring software Proctorio apologises for posting student's chat logs on Reddit [July 01, 2020] https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/jul/01/ceo-of-exam-monitoring-software-proctorio-apologises-for-posting-students-chat-logs-on-reddit

3. Software company sues UBC employee over tweets involving confidential videos [September 03, 2020]

   https://vancouversun.com/news/software-company-sues-ubc-employee-over-tweets-involving-confidential-videos

4. In Defence of Ian Linkletter [September 03, 2020] https://blog.communityofpraxis.ca/2020/09/03/in-defence-of-ian-linkletter/
5. Proctorio sues UBC staff member for tweets sharing ‘confidential’ information about the software [September 03, 2020] https://www.ubyssey.ca/news/proctorio-sues-linkletter/
6. Students Are Rebelling Against Eye-Tracking Exam Surveillance Tools [September 24, 2020] https://www.vice.com/en_ca/article/n7wxvd/students-are-rebelling-against-eye-tracking-exam-surveillance-tools
7. [AMS] Open letter regarding the usage of Proctorio [July 3, 2020] https://www.ams.ubc.ca/news/open-letter-regarding-the-usage-of-proctorio/

8. Facing student privacy concerns, UBC maintains relationship with Proctorio [July 03, 2020]  https://www.ubyssey.ca/news/ubc-maintains-proctorio-relationship/

9. Letter to the community regarding Proctorio [July 03, 2020] https://academic.ubc.ca/academic-community/news-announcements/news/letter-community-regarding-proctorio

10. Our Bodies Encoded: Algorithmic Test Proctoring in Higher Education [April 02, 2020] https://hybridpedagogy.org/our-bodies-encoded-algorithmic-test-proctoring-in-higher-education/

11. Software that monitors students during tests perpetuates inequality and violates their privacy [August 7, 2020] https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/08/07/1006132/software-algorithms-proctoring-online-tests-ai-ethics/ 
12. Paranoia about cheating is making online education terrible for everyone [May 4, 2020] https://www.vox.com/recode/2020/5/4/21241062/schools-cheating-proctorio-artificial-intelligence
13. Mass school closures in the wake of the coronavirus are driving a new wave of student surveillance [April 1, 2020] https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2020/04/01/online-proctoring-college-exams-coronavirus/

Note: The University of California, Berkeley banned online exam proctoring on April 20, 2020. It wouldn't be ground-breaking for UBC to do the same thing. 

• https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/10/us/online-testing-cheating-universities-coronavirus.html
• https://academic-senate.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/guidance_and_recommendations_from_the_working_group_on_exams_and_proctoring.pdf