During exams in front of a running camera, an artificial intelligence scans the movements of the exam participants for attempts at deception.

Trojans control that students do not call up search engines on their home computers.

A few years ago, such scenarios were considered dystopian excesses of a distant future.

They have been a reality for many students since last year.

The pandemic has catapulted German universities into the digital age.

Due to the risk of infection, exams were held online across the board for the first time.

In terms of oversight, many universities appear to have overshot the mark.

Anna Schiller

Volunteer.

  • Follow I follow

Universities find it difficult to find suitable rooms in which candidates can be distributed with sufficient spacing. So it makes sense to have exams written at home. But how do you ensure that the participants do not cheat in the supposed protection of their own four walls? Supervising exams online seems to have become the method of choice for some faculty.

For example, students dial into conventional video conference systems and leave the camera and microphone switched on for the duration of the exam. The examiner at the other end watches them - but that is extremely labor-intensive. So-called proctoring software provides a remedy: It automates examination supervision via the Internet. Proctoring can be translated from English as “supervision”. Students who take part in a digitally monitored exam must first install a program or browser add-on on their computer. Many of the programs have artificial intelligence that uses the webcam to determine the identity of the examinee and analyzes his or her movements during the exam for possible attempts at deception. Typing and browsing behavior is also evaluated.Last week, the Society for Freedom Rights published an opinion on the use of online proctoring. It states that, given the capabilities of this software, a “comparison with (government) monitoring software” was an obvious choice.

University software questionable in terms of data protection law

Rolf Schwartmann, head of the Cologne Research Center for Media Law at the Technical University of Cologne and Chairman of the Society for Data Protection and Data Security, sees the use of remote monitoring via video conference and, above all, proctoring software as critical. The "remote supervision is an act of sovereignty of the university, which in fact takes place with the students at home with their help". This constitutes an encroachment on the privacy of the students, which should be limited to the necessary extent. State universities are only allowed to process the data that are necessary to carry out their tasks - in this case, the fulfillment of the examination requirement. He considers proctoring to be unnecessary and particularly questionable in terms of data protection law,because the university or the software provider technically accesses the private hardware of the students on their behalf. He considers it questionable whether one can effectively consent to this.