updates

teach_online/academic_integrity.md

@@ -61,11 +61,19 @@ Is this infringement of student privacy a necessary evil {cite:p}`selwyn_necessa
 {cite:t}`eaton_remote_2024` provides an excellent exploration of the evidence for and against the use of remote proctoring,
 so I *highly* recommend reading it thoroughly.
 Here, I will briefly summarize the key points of discussion.
-With respect to deterrence of cheating,
+With respect to *deterrence* of cheating,
 many studies split students into "proctored" vs. "unproctored" groups
 and evaluate student grades across groups.
 Many of these studies find lower grades in the "proctored" group,
-a result which is commonly interpreted as evidence of deterrence.
+a result which is commonly interpreted as evidence of deterrence of cheating
+(though additional test anxiety could also be a contributing factor to lower performance).
+With respect to *detection* of cheating,
+while many remote proctoring services *claim* to be effective at catching cheating,
+the (*very* few) studies that stress-tested them found that
+remote proctoring services don't seem to actually be very effective,
+at least not if students have some reasonable technical know-how
+(or *know* someone with technical know-how)
+{cite:p}`burgess_watching_2022,bergmans_efficacy_2021`.
 
 ```{glossary}
 Detection

teach_online/ref.bib

@@ -474,3 +474,33 @@ @article{conijn_fear_2022
 	pages = {1521--1534},
 	file = {Full Text:C\:\\Users\\a1moshir\\Zotero\\storage\\N6LQPRVY\\Conijn et al. - 2022 - The fear of big brother The potential negative si.pdf:application/pdf},
 }
+
+@inproceedings{burgess_watching_2022,
+	address = {Boston, MA},
+	title = {Watching the watchers: bias and vulnerability in remote proctoring software},
+	isbn = {978-1-939133-31-1},
+	url = {https://www.usenix.org/conference/usenixsecurity22/presentation/burgess},
+	booktitle = {31st {USENIX} {Security} {Symposium} ({USENIX} {Security} 22)},
+	publisher = {USENIX Association},
+	author = {Burgess, Ben and Ginsberg, Avi and Felten, Edward W. and Cohney, Shaanan},
+	month = aug,
+	year = {2022},
+	pages = {571--588},
+	file = {Burgess et al. - 2022 - Watching the watchers bias and vulnerability in r.pdf:C\:\\Users\\a1moshir\\Zotero\\storage\\R2BIFV6X\\Burgess et al. - 2022 - Watching the watchers bias and vulnerability in r.pdf:application/pdf},
+}
+
+@inproceedings{bergmans_efficacy_2021,
+	title = {On the {Efficacy} of {Online} {Proctoring} using {Proctorio}},
+	volume = {1},
+	url = {https://csedu.scitevents.org/?y=2021},
+	doi = {10.5220/0010399602790290},
+	abstract = {In this paper we report on the outcome of a controlled experiment using one of the widely available and used online proctoring systems, Proctorio. The system uses an AI-based algorithm to automatically flag suspicious behaviour, which can then be checked by a human agent. The experiment involved 30 students, 6 of which were asked to cheat in various ways, while 5 others were asked to behave nervously but make the test honestly. This took place in the context of a Computer Science programme, so the technical competence of the students in using and abusing the system can be considered far above average. The most important findings were that none of the cheating students were flagged by Proctorio, whereas only one (out of 6) was caught out by an independent check by a human agent. The sensitivity of Proctorio, based on this experience, should therefore be put at very close to zero. On the positive side, the students found (on the whole) the system easy to set up and work with, and belie ved (in the majority) that the use of online proctoring per se would act as a deterrent to cheating. The use of online proctoring is therefore best compared to taking a placebo: it has some positive influence, not because it works but because people believe that it works, or that it might work. In practice however, before adopting this solution, policy makers would do well to balance the cost of deploying it (which can be considerable) against the marginal benefits of this placebo effect.},
+	language = {English},
+	booktitle = {Proceedings of the 13th {International} {Conference} on {Computer} {Supported} {Education} ({CSEDU} 2021)},
+	publisher = {SCITEPRESS},
+	author = {Bergmans, Laura and Bouali, Nacir and Luttikhuis, Marloes and Rensink, Arend},
+	editor = {Csapó, Beno and Uhomoibhi, James},
+	year = {2021},
+	pages = {279--290},
+	file = {Bergmans et al. - 2021 - On the Efficacy of Online Proctoring using Proctor.pdf:C\:\\Users\\a1moshir\\Zotero\\storage\\RAR4S9S6\\Bergmans et al. - 2021 - On the Efficacy of Online Proctoring using Proctor.pdf:application/pdf},
+}