Gaze detection technology uses computer vision and artificial intelligence algorithms to track the movement of a test taker’s eyes. By monitoring a student’s gaze, online proctors can detect instances of collaboration, distraction, or the use of unauthorized materials, and take appropriate actions.
<p id="">From not being able to validate the <a href="https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/8/22374386/proctorio-racial-bias-issues-opencv-facial-detection-schools-tests-remote-learning" target="_blank" id="">faces of people of color</a> to <a href="https://www.rosalyn.ai/blog/online-test-administration-software-cheating-prevention-and-student-dignity-ros" target="_blank" id="">flagging potential cheating</a> because a mother responded to her child during an online exam, problems with remote invigilation abound. But, it doesn’t have to be this way—better engineering and an equity mindset point to solutions.<br></p><p id="">When we say “discrimination,” we are talking about bias. There is the potential for conscious or unconscious biases of the developers in any automated system to encode bias into that system. In the remote proctoring world, these biases may result in people with darker skin not recognized by the system. Students who are neurodivergent with ADHD or Tourette’s may have their symptoms flagged as suspicious behavior. Students working on older computers or low bandwidth connections may be prevented from taking an exam. Remote proctoring discrimination is especially pernicious in AI systems because there is no way to root it out by examining the source code. The source code is an amalgamation of data and algorithms inscrutable to human beings without the proper development methodology.</p><p id="">Developers of online proctoring systems can do a lot to minimize bias in online proctoring systemsand ensure that all students are treated fairly when artificial intelligence systems monitor their test sessions.</p>
<p id="">Once the stuff of science fiction, artificial intelligence has become a part of our everyday lives. But the ethics and validity of AI-driven online proctoring solutions have many students and faculty questioning its reliability. Complex online proctoring AI issues have forced many institutions to wonder: is AI the best choice?</p>
<p id=""></p><p id=""></p>
Some proctoring platforms have drawn widespread scrutiny about how they may perpetuate systemic social bias.
Moving from in-person to primarily remote learning poses challenges in administering exams. Universities and colleges have adopted a range of solutions with varying success.
Online proctoring combined with artificial intelligence has presented tremendous opportunities for academic institutions and credentialing bodies alike, but it is not without its flaws.
Online proctoring systems using artificial intelligence promise to help schools keep online tests fair and secure. But the process can deliver mixed results without the right technology.
We are excited to announce some major updates to Rosalyn that will change the way universities conduct online exams. We have identified a need for more control over settings for any given exam based on customer feedback, and we are happy to announce that our new exam rules, web resources and calculator features have satisfied that need.
Learn how four students rate their online exam experience using the most popular proctoring platforms.
As educators and certifying organizations increase their reliance on remote testing, students’ voicing of concerns about privacy and the intrusiveness of the technology is reaching a crescendo. Ultimately, the issue is about much more than protecting the privacy of test-takers’ confidential information.
Educational institutions developing their online administration guidance spend a lot of time listening to technologists and test company vendors. There is one more class of stakeholders they should listen to: students.