3 ms·

The software sounds faulty. The black screen is terrible UX; it should just silently set a bookmark and let the student continue. The overall outcome (and the

by mkl 6y ago

The software sounds faulty. The black screen is terrible UX; it should just silently set a bookmark and let the student continue. The overall outcome (and the student's experience and stress) is ultimately a staff issue. The professor should have been on call, and should have been able to get the student back into the questions, or, failing that, to offer another sitting. I have done both of these, among other remedies, and setting student expectations ahead of time is crucial for avoiding massively stressful problems (stuff like "If something goes wrong, stop and email me. I can add lost your time back and get you into the test again, no matter how long it takes to sort out. You won't lose marks from this." and actually follow through). Software inevitably fails sometimes, and it is just a tool. Staff need to make their own decisions.

cycomanic 6y ago
You are correct this is a staff failure, the failure lies in using the software in the first place. If we agree that the current situation is so exceptional that we need to fully monitor all students taking exams (and that's still a big if, I also am a university teacher, we don't use any monitoring system. There are other solutions as well such as taking oral exams...), one could simply hire a bunch of proctors who watch the video feed. Considering the savings that universities have made they could send one to everyone's home even.
- mkl 6y ago
  Copy-pasting from my other comment: > I see it as a currently-necessary annoyance, as the least bad option. The alternatives have greater deficiencies: human invigilators using Zoom etc. don't scale (institution experience); oral exams don't scale (my experience moderating such assessments); no invigilation leads to cheating (by few students but enough to be a real problem, especially for professional qualifications - my direct experience and institution experience); shutting down education until the pandemic's over is unfeasible. Last year, we tried not monitoring, we tried Zoom invigilation, we tried orals. Lockdown rules prevented us from sending in-person invigilators in one semester (and we couldn't have hired even 10% of what that would take) and the other we invigilated in person like normal. We are spending more than ever before, so there are no savings. All of these methods failed. This year, grudgingly, we have moved to proctoring software.
  - scrollaway 6y ago
    The bar to use such invasive, buggy, user hostile spyware should be a lot higher. Just because this solves your problem (it clearly doesn't) doesn't mean it's a good idea. Killing half the students also solves your problem. You need to live in a world where this is not an option, period. What's the next solution then? People forget there are always more manual solutions even if they take more time...
  - amcoastal 6y ago
    As both a TA and a student during the virus, we did better and so can you. Stop trying to shoehorn your in person lesson plans and exams into virtual and design new material and tests. Dont be a shitty teacher just because you're too lazy to change your now dated ways.
    - mkl 6y ago
      Please don't make assumptions or resort to baseless insults. We have designed entirely new fully-online interactive courses in response to this. In other courses, where we have e.g. 640 local students and 10 online, they need to sit the same test for it to be fair.
      - amcoastal 6y ago
        Sounds like you need to design an online version of that course if you're going to allow online students to take it.
        mkl 6y ago
        The expense isn't justified for 10 students, since this may well be the only year that course is offered online. They are not getting a bad deal out of it. The fully new online courses are first year, and the expectation is that students will come to study in person for the remaining years of their degree. The other course I'm talking about is second year, but those 10 students can't get into the country at present - a temporary obstacle.
fxtentacle 6y ago
I fully agree with you here that bugs in the software can be mitigated by having knowledgeable staff. But people can only be prepared for it if they hear about the issues beforehand. That's why I find it so offensive that Proctorio is suing what appears to be university staff to silence them.

by mkl 6y ago

cycomanic 6y ago

You are correct this is a staff failure, the failure lies in using the software in the first place. If we agree that the current situation is so exceptional that we need to fully monitor all students taking exams (and that's still a big if, I also am a university teacher, we don't use any monitoring system. There are other solutions as well such as taking oral exams...), one could simply hire a bunch of proctors who watch the video feed. Considering the savings that universities have made they could send one to everyone's home even.

mkl 6y ago
Copy-pasting from my other comment: > I see it as a currently-necessary annoyance, as the least bad option. The alternatives have greater deficiencies: human invigilators using Zoom etc. don't scale (institution experience); oral exams don't scale (my experience moderating such assessments); no invigilation leads to cheating (by few students but enough to be a real problem, especially for professional qualifications - my direct experience and institution experience); shutting down education until the pandemic's over is unfeasible. Last year, we tried not monitoring, we tried Zoom invigilation, we tried orals. Lockdown rules prevented us from sending in-person invigilators in one semester (and we couldn't have hired even 10% of what that would take) and the other we invigilated in person like normal. We are spending more than ever before, so there are no savings. All of these methods failed. This year, grudgingly, we have moved to proctoring software.
- scrollaway 6y ago
  The bar to use such invasive, buggy, user hostile spyware should be a lot higher. Just because this solves your problem (it clearly doesn't) doesn't mean it's a good idea. Killing half the students also solves your problem. You need to live in a world where this is not an option, period. What's the next solution then? People forget there are always more manual solutions even if they take more time...
- amcoastal 6y ago
  As both a TA and a student during the virus, we did better and so can you. Stop trying to shoehorn your in person lesson plans and exams into virtual and design new material and tests. Dont be a shitty teacher just because you're too lazy to change your now dated ways.
  - mkl 6y ago
    Please don't make assumptions or resort to baseless insults. We have designed entirely new fully-online interactive courses in response to this. In other courses, where we have e.g. 640 local students and 10 online, they need to sit the same test for it to be fair.
    - amcoastal 6y ago
      Sounds like you need to design an online version of that course if you're going to allow online students to take it.
      - mkl 6y ago
        The expense isn't justified for 10 students, since this may well be the only year that course is offered online. They are not getting a bad deal out of it. The fully new online courses are first year, and the expectation is that students will come to study in person for the remaining years of their degree. The other course I'm talking about is second year, but those 10 students can't get into the country at present - a temporary obstacle.

fxtentacle 6y ago

I fully agree with you here that bugs in the software can be mitigated by having knowledgeable staff. But people can only be prepared for it if they hear about the issues beforehand. That's why I find it so offensive that Proctorio is suing what appears to be university staff to silence them.