由于全球卫生危机，一年前在人类发生的大量指示现在正在在线上进行。这种变化突出的一个主题是控制问题。当学生和我们一起建造时，我们有高度的控制环境吗in which instruction takes place and the materials the students have access to. We even have a significant level of power over students’ movements and choices, at least while they’re in front of us. This is most obvious in primary and secondary school, where there is usually a whole “disciplinary” administrative apparatus designed to support instructors’ ability to dictate the movements and choices of students. But even at college and university, where for example there is often no explicit rule against a student getting up and leaving the classroom or building at any time, physical and social aspects of the classroom setting serve as a mechanism of influence. Continuing the example, to leave a classroom in the middle of class you have to physically stand up and collect your stuff, which means everybody knows you’re not coming back, and then face everyone as you walk past them on the way out. The instructor will certainly notice, will probably be hurt, and won’t necessarily respond kindly. It’s very rare for students to do this—in fairness, this is probably (hopefully) mostly because they don’t want to—but it’s very rare even when they do.
A fundamental aspect of the switch to distance learning is its disruption of all the usual structures and processes by which this control is exercised. In our running example, you can leave a Zoom class just by clicking “Leave”, with no need to awkwardly face anyone and a reasonable likelihood, depending on the size of the class, that the instructor won’t even notice. To cover your bases, you can instead leave without leaving—just mute yourself, turn off video, and go about your business while remaining formally in the meeting.
For a different and much-discussed example, while we are used to being able to design students’ environments rather meticulously during exam proctoring to head off both distraction and temptation, there is no analogous form of control over the exam environment built into distance learning.
How are we collectively responding to the challenges this change presents?
Remote proctoring: an experiment in control
One major approach has been to use surveillance technology to try to claw back the lost control. For example, “remote proctoring” of examshas exploded那with colleges and universities spending millions of dollars on software that monitors students via webcam. When colleges first moved to distance learning last spring, 54% of institutionssurveyed经过这higher education IT association Educause said they were using remote proctoring software, while another 23% said they were planning on or considering it.
This is not going over especially smoothly. Objections have been raised to the disturbing privacy implications of video-monitoring students in their homes—
完成（希望）我上次的Proctoru考试，从来没有想过我会说我很高兴我不得不经过黑色的镜像测试，在那里他们跟踪你的眼球运动，看看你所有的房间4墙，并告诉你在自己的家中脱掉你的“头发帽”:)））））— Jonté (@noturaveragept2)12月17日，2020年
4. These packages allow an instructor to watch a student from up close, over a webcam, for the entire duration of an exam without the student's knowledge. The potential creep factor on that goes right off the scale.— Carl T. Bergstrom (@CT_Bergstrom)10月31日，2020年
—the inevitable glitchiness of the technology—
The fact that I have to put in my contacts to take proctorio is dumb. But what's extra dumb is that even with contacts, it still can fail to detect my eyes
— Shalyssa (@CallMeAlyssaD)2020年12月16日
I was doing a 120 min exam and 12minutes in the@ProctorUproctor wasn’t able to see my video. She put me through tech support for over 60min, got a new proctor and guess what!? I had 41 min when my exam resumed. Not 110 minutes.#failliterally
- Suzsuzbar（@suzsuzbar）December 20, 2020
— Dr. Marissa Kawehi (@MarissaKawehi)October 13, 2020
ExamSoft, Proctorio, & ProctorU must address the alarmingly long list of equity, accessibility, & privacy issues students are facing on their exam platforms. Students of color & those with disabilities must not be locked out of tests or wrongly accused of cheating.pic.twitter.com/Kp5Yb7sMRx
— Richard Blumenthal (@SenBlumenthal)2020年12月4日
—the stress and anxiety of having involuntary body movements scrutinized—
Yikes — schools are using 'learning integrity' software that tracks students' head and eye movements in an effort to deter cheating. Instructors are evidently dinging students for moving their heads and eyes too much.https://t.co/fUXnQ6yx93
— Christopher Ingraham (@_cingraham)September 11, 2020
Here are the requirements for my math midterm next week. You tell me if these instructions are easy to follow and don't make you nervous.pic.twitter.com/WnW0YSXmhr
— Spotted At Laurier (@SpottedLaurier)2020年10月22日
—and the list goes on.This articlein theWashington Post（上面也相关）进行了一些更全面的报告，包括透露坐在10月份纽约的第一个在线酒吧考试的法律学生在其席位中排尿，以避免违反在线的招聘规则。
Nonetheless, usage of online proctoring serviceshas continued to grow。
从一个角度,这个问题完全是言辞al. In preparing this blog post, I read a large number of tweets from students about their experiences with remote proctoring software. The main thought/feeling I was left with was horror that academia has embraced this Faustian deal. Surveilling students in their homes and subjecting them to suspicion based on automated interpretation of their involuntary body movements is transparently creepy, unfair, unreliable, and harmful to students. They arestressedout，它是制作它们do worse。Concerns about cheating are real, but they look petty and tiny in the face of these harms.
鉴于此，我认为学生（以及他们在教授，新闻等）的盟友正在反击，因为远程距离是一个艰难的。他们会把这个躺着吗？他们shouldbe fighting back! It’snaturalthat they’re fighting back. I hope their fight grows. I’ve decided to join it by writing this. I hope you will too.
That said, I would like to proffer an additional explanation that I believe illuminates the situation from an angle that is useful to educators. Remote proctoring is meeting resistance because it isgoing against the grain of the situation。
The global health crisis has forced us online. The online format presents the institution of education with a new challenge—the disruption of its usual mechanisms of control. The wide-scale adoption of remote proctoring software during the pandemic is, in my view, an attempt to wish that challenge away rather than confronting it. Online proctoring companies are selling educational institutions the fantasy that it is possible to recreate the important elements of in-person testing online. It’s a transparent falsehood, but we want to believe, because the alternative—a deep and serious reconsideration of testing in view of everything that has happened—feels like too much. The changes in our own and our students’ lives already forced by the pandemic are hard enough to wrap our minds around! And we have to rethink testing too?
From this point of view, the pushback was to be expected because institutions implementing remote proctoring are straining against reality. Reality always strains back.
Surrendering to reality and asking good questions
The reason why I think this angle might be useful to educators is that it seems—well, to me anyway—to point in a freeing, and expansive, direction. There’s somerelief可供我们录取我们承认远程教学无法重新创建合理的内部考试环境。当我们承认这一点时，我们可以开始想象什么？我们怎样才能工作with这situation, rather than against it?
More broadly, I think that surrendering to the reality that we don’t have as much control over our students when they’re far away encourages us to ask productive questions about the functions our control was serving in the first place, and how else these functions might be served.
In Spring 2020, when we first went online, circumstances conspired to compel me to relinquish some forms of control I didn’t even fully realize I was holding onto, leading to an experiment in letting go whose results surprised me. I hope to describe this experiment in a future blog post. In the meantime, here are some other folks, from both math and other disciplines, investigating the sorts of questions I have in mind:
- Jeff Suzuki，8月在这篇博客上，有一些关于“互联网抗拒”问题设计的思考。