Good Proctor or "Big Brother"? Ethics of Online Exam Supervision Technologies.

Philosophy & Technology Pub Date : 2021-01-01 Epub Date: 2021-08-31 DOI:10.1007/s13347-021-00476-1
Simon Coghlan, Tim Miller, Jeannie Paterson
{"title":"Good Proctor or \"Big Brother\"? Ethics of Online Exam Supervision Technologies.","authors":"Simon Coghlan,&nbsp;Tim Miller,&nbsp;Jeannie Paterson","doi":"10.1007/s13347-021-00476-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Online exam supervision technologies have recently generated significant controversy and concern. Their use is now booming due to growing demand for online courses and for off-campus assessment options amid COVID-19 lockdowns. Online proctoring technologies purport to effectively oversee students sitting online exams by using artificial intelligence (AI) systems supplemented by human invigilators. Such technologies have alarmed some students who see them as a \"Big Brother-like\" threat to liberty and privacy, and as potentially unfair and discriminatory. However, some universities and educators defend their judicious use. Critical ethical appraisal of online proctoring technologies is overdue. This essay provides one of the first sustained moral philosophical analyses of these technologies, focusing on ethical notions of academic integrity, fairness, non-maleficence, transparency, privacy, autonomy, liberty, and trust. Most of these concepts are prominent in the new field of AI ethics, and all are relevant to education. The essay discusses these ethical issues. It also offers suggestions for educational institutions and educators interested in the technologies about the kinds of inquiries they need to make and the governance and review processes they might need to adopt to justify and remain accountable for using online proctoring technologies. The rapid and contentious rise of proctoring software provides a fruitful ethical case study of how AI is infiltrating all areas of life. The social impacts and moral consequences of this digital technology warrant ongoing scrutiny and study.</p>","PeriodicalId":513391,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Technology","volume":"34 4","pages":"1581-1606"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8407138/pdf/","citationCount":"66","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13347-021-00476-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/8/31 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 66

Abstract

Online exam supervision technologies have recently generated significant controversy and concern. Their use is now booming due to growing demand for online courses and for off-campus assessment options amid COVID-19 lockdowns. Online proctoring technologies purport to effectively oversee students sitting online exams by using artificial intelligence (AI) systems supplemented by human invigilators. Such technologies have alarmed some students who see them as a "Big Brother-like" threat to liberty and privacy, and as potentially unfair and discriminatory. However, some universities and educators defend their judicious use. Critical ethical appraisal of online proctoring technologies is overdue. This essay provides one of the first sustained moral philosophical analyses of these technologies, focusing on ethical notions of academic integrity, fairness, non-maleficence, transparency, privacy, autonomy, liberty, and trust. Most of these concepts are prominent in the new field of AI ethics, and all are relevant to education. The essay discusses these ethical issues. It also offers suggestions for educational institutions and educators interested in the technologies about the kinds of inquiries they need to make and the governance and review processes they might need to adopt to justify and remain accountable for using online proctoring technologies. The rapid and contentious rise of proctoring software provides a fruitful ethical case study of how AI is infiltrating all areas of life. The social impacts and moral consequences of this digital technology warrant ongoing scrutiny and study.

好学监还是老大哥?网络考试监督技术伦理。
网络考试监督技术最近引起了很大的争议和关注。由于在COVID-19封锁期间对在线课程和校外评估选择的需求不断增长,它们的使用正在蓬勃发展。在线监考技术旨在通过使用人工智能(AI)系统,辅以人工监考人员,有效地监督参加在线考试的学生。这些技术让一些学生感到震惊,他们认为这些技术对自由和隐私构成了“老大哥”式的威胁,而且可能存在不公平和歧视。然而,一些大学和教育工作者为他们的明智使用进行了辩护。对在线监考技术进行关键的道德评估是迟来的。这篇文章提供了对这些技术的第一个持续的道德哲学分析,重点关注学术诚信、公平、非恶意、透明、隐私、自治、自由和信任的伦理概念。这些概念中的大多数在人工智能伦理的新领域中都很突出,而且都与教育有关。本文讨论了这些伦理问题。它还为对技术感兴趣的教育机构和教育工作者提供了关于他们需要进行的各种查询以及他们可能需要采用的治理和审查过程的建议,以证明并保持对使用在线监考技术的责任。监考软件迅速而有争议的崛起,为人工智能如何渗透到生活的各个领域提供了一个富有成效的伦理案例研究。这种数字技术的社会影响和道德后果需要持续的审查和研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信