On Friday, September 25th Provost Chilton sent out a statement about the University’s utilization of ProctorU to “monitor tests administrated remotely.” As a faculty member and librarian, this statement felt wholly insufficient to address real concerns held by students, parents, and other stakeholders. Not only did this statement insufficiently address issues of privacy and surveillance, but it directly ignored concerns surrounding the inequities that proctoring technologies uphold.

These concerns include, but are not limited to:
– Exacerbated mental distress during testing
– Utilization of racist, ableist, and transphobic technologies
– Inaccessibility based on technological needs and ability to have an adequate space free of noise, background movement, and distraction

Some of these concerns are inherent to the way that proctoring tech functions while others are a more intrinsic aspect to the coding and software that is employed during testing. President Chilton’s statement urged readers to review the ProctorU’s privacy policy. I have done so at length and find issue with how ProctorU values users (utilization of vague language that is institution/instructor focused instead of student focused) and in its extensive use of biometric technologies.

There is a lot more that can be said here, and I am prepared to discuss at further length if necessary. I am also able to provide relevant literature on the subject as needed.