Privacy complaints about online invigilation have been piling up since the start of the corona crisis. Youth organisations voiced their concerns, and the House of Representatives weighed in on the issue as well. So far, two universities of applied sciences have openly distanced themselves from the hotly debated monitoring software.
The University of Amsterdam (UvA) has not: it expects to hold another two hundred online exams using Proctorio invigilation software before the end of the spring semester. The software uses students’ webcams to monitor them as they take their exams at home.
The TU/e also made use of Proctorio invigilation software during the exam period of Q3 for 92 exams, almost a quarter of the total number of exams. At the time rector Frank Baaijens called it “the last resort” for a number of exams. He announced also that for the exam period of Q4 Proctorio would be used again, but it would be limited to a quarter of all the exams.
During the University Council meeting of May 25 the Council brought forward a statement in response to the criticism that circulates on a national level about the fact that codetermination bodies have no say in using online proctoring. Naomie Amsing of student fraction Groep-één/ESR: "With this statement we wanted to emphasize that the University Council in Eindhoven had been involved in this matter. The Council sees it as the only possibility to do a certain number of the exams. If that’s not done by using proctoring students will suffer a delay in their study program. Of course every student is free to decide if he or she wants to do the exam in this kind of way. But at least they have a choice.”
The Central Student Council of the UvA is now bringing the matter to court, reports university magazine Folia. The Council feels that students should be able to refuse the use of Proctorio during online exams without incurring study delays.
Under the Dutch Higher Education Act, new exam methods cannot be used without the consent of the central councils and faculty councils. In April, the Central Student Council of the UvA issued a negative recommendation on the use of Proctorio, but the university’s Executive Board decided to use the software nevertheless. The Council hopes that participation councils at other institutes of higher education will also benefit from the preliminary proceedings.
Difficult to predict
The case will be brought before the Amsterdam District Court on Thursday. The students’ chances of winning the suit are difficult to predict, says Paul Zoontjens, professor of education law at Tilburg University. “If the university can make it clear that it has neither the staff nor the facilities to hold exams in any other way, the judge will be sensitive to that. But if the students can demonstrate that other institutions do offer alternative options, that could sway the case in their favour.”
The question remains whether the students are going about this the right way, as there is also a national committee for these kinds of disputes, to which the council could have turned first. “It won’t help their case if it turns out they did not approach the committee”, says Zoontjens.
Minister of Education Ingrid van Engelshoven seems unsympathetic to the privacy concerns raised with regard to online invigilation. Earlier this year, she called on the participation councils to show adaptability and flexibility “where necessary” during the corona crisis.