[Infowarrior] - New Systems Keep a Close Eye on Online Students at Home

[Richard Forno]

New Systems Keep a Close Eye on Online Students at Home
Richard H. Hersh and Richard P. Keeling: On a 'Liberal Education'

http://chronicle.com/free/v54/i46/46a00103.htm

By ANDREA L. FOSTER

Tucked away in a 1,200-page bill now in Congress is a small paragraph  
that could lead distance-education institutions to require spy cameras  
in their students' homes.

It sounds Orwellian, but the paragraph — part of legislation renewing  
the Higher Education Act — is all but assured of becoming law by the  
fall. No one in Congress objects to it.

The paragraph is actually about clamping down on cheating. It says  
that an institution that offers an online program must prove that an  
enrolled student is the same person who does the work.

Already, the language is spurring some colleges to try technologies  
that authenticate online test takers by reading their fingerprints,  
watching them via Web cameras, or recording their keystrokes. Some  
colleges claim there are advantages for students: The devices allow  
them to take tests anytime, anywhere. Many students must now travel to  
distant locations so a proctor can watch them take exams on paper.

But some college officials are wary of the technologies, noting that  
they are run by third-party vendors that may not safeguard students'  
privacy. Among the information the vendors collect are students'  
fingerprints, and possibly even images from inside their homes.

"This is taking a step into a student's private life," said Rhonda M.  
Epper, co-executive director of Colorado Community Colleges Online. "I  
don't know if we want to extend our presence that far."

The officials also want flexibility to comply with the proposed law.  
They worry that the government will force them to use a particular  
method that could be too expensive or that would emphasize exams over  
other assessments. They also complain that the provision implies that  
cheating is more of a problem among students online than among  
students in a classroom.

Biometric Solutions

Three technologies, which vendors have been promoting at college  
conferences and which colleges are evaluating, illustrate the promises  
and pitfalls of this kind of monitoring.

Troy University, in Alabama, has been testing a gadget that features a  
mirrored sphere suspended above a small pedestal. Called Securexam  
Remote Proctor, it's about the size of a large paperweight and plugs  
into a standard port on a home computer. The pedestal includes a  
groove for scanning fingerprints, a tiny microphone, and a camera. The  
sphere reflects a 360-degree view around the test taker, which the  
camera picks up.

Students are recorded during exams, and anything suspicious — such as  
someone else's presence or voice in the room — is flagged.

To use the system, a student sits in front of a computer and places a  
finger on the pedestal. Securexam checks whether the digital  
fingerprint and the image of the student match those the student  
provided at registration. Then the test opens online via a course- 
management system. The student is prevented from viewing anything else  
online.

The system is not cheap. Students pay $150 for the device. Further, it  
works only with the Windows operating system and an Internet Explorer  
browser, creating a problem for students who have Macs, for instance.

Software Secure Inc., based in Cambridge, Mass., developed the device  
with $1.1-million in seed money from Troy. In return, the university  
gets the first 10,000 Securexams that the company produces. If it  
sells more than that, the university receives a share of the proceeds.

By the end of this fall, the university anticipates that about 800 of  
its 17,000 eCampus students from across the world will have used  
Securexam. Thousands more will begin using the device in January.

World Campus, the online arm of the Pennsylvania State University  
system, is testing another system called Webassessor. It uses  
proctors, Web cameras, and software that recognizes students' typing  
styles, such as their speed and whether they pause between certain  
letters. Students purchase the cameras for $50 to $80 apiece. They  
allow proctors to view a student's face, keyboard, and workspace.

The Phoenix-based provider of the system, Kryterion Inc., employs  
proctors who remotely observe and listen to as many as 50 students at  
a time. If the keystroke pattern of a student who is taking an exam  
does not match the one he or she provided at registration, or if the  
image of a student taking an exam does not match a digital photograph  
that the student provided at enrollment, then the student cannot start  
the exam. A proctor can also stop a student who is acting suspiciously  
from completing an exam. Students must have a broadband connection to  
use the service.

Kryterion charges institutions $20,000 to customize the software and  
for training. It also charges colleges each time students sit for an  
exam.

World Campus has been trying out Webassessor this summer on  
undergraduates in two courses. "At the moment, things look promising  
for a complete rollout," says Rick L. Shearer, interim director of  
World Campus.

Challenging Questions

Several other universities are forming partnerships with Acxiom  
Corporation. The company's system relies on test takers' answering  
detailed, personal "challenge" questions. Acxiom, based in Little  
Rock, Ark., gathers information from a variety of databases, including  
criminal files and property records. The company uses the data to ask  
students questions, such as streets they lived on, house numbers, and  
previous employers. If students answer the questions correctly, they  
proceed to the exams.

National American University Online is testing the system on its  
students, and the Colorado community-college consortium is also  
considering using it.

Jeffrey L. Bailie, dean of online instruction for National, says he  
anticipates that the system will be used on students when they take  
final exams or other high-stakes assessments. "We want to take just  
one added step to make sure that the person on the other end is who  
they're reporting to be," he says.

He declines to reveal how much the system costs. But Michael A.  
Jortberg, who is leading Acxiom's higher-education efforts, says it  
costs roughly $10 a student.

Unfair Burdens?

Despite the lure of these technologies, many college officials have  
decided to wait to test them on their students, noting the cost.  
Furthermore, officials say, it's unclear what requirements the  
Education Department would impose on institutions to comply with the  
proposed law.

"It's going to reduce access," says John F. Ebersole, president of  
Excelsior College, an online institution based in Albany, N.Y. "It's  
going to increase costs."

Other officials are disturbed that the proposed law singles out online  
education.

"We're feeling a little picked on," says Lori McNabb, assistant  
director of student and faculty services at the UT TeleCampus, the  
online arm of the University of Texas system.

She says there's no evidence that cheating or fraud happens more often  
with its students than with students in face-to-face classes.

How do professors know that a student enrolled in a large lecture  
class is the same one handing in an assignment or test, she asks?

She and others say online instructors rely more on discussions,  
writing assignments, quizzes, group work, and "capstone" projects to  
judge their students' performance, and less on big exams. Tests, when  
they are administered, are often randomized so students in the same  
class get different questions, which must be answered quickly, making  
it difficult for those unfamiliar with the material to take tests for  
students. Instructors become familiar with students' writing styles so  
they can spot fraudulent work, officials add.

Mr. Ebersole, despite his worries about reduced access for students,  
does see one upside to the proposed law. If the provision causes  
online colleges to document that their enrolled students are indeed  
the same ones completing course work, online education could garner  
more respect, he says.

"If it raises confidence and credibility in the eyes of regulators and  
traditional educators," says Mr. Ebersole, "it's worth it."
http://chronicle.com
Section: Information Technology
Volume 54, Issue 46, Page A1