Navigation
Search
New Comments
Handy Links
Syndication
« Link and Run #3 (6/15/07) | Main | Link and Run #4 (7/6/07) »
Robotic Proctor Proctors Robotically
On June 22, 2007 by Jamie Madigan
This story has been making the rounds on technology websites lately. It talks about a device that purveyors of online university degrees can use to help make sure that their students aren't cheating during online tests. The device plugs into one's computer, then during the test it locks things down so that students can't consult Google or Wikipedia for their test answers. But what's more, the device is equipped with a microphone and 360-degree camera that will flag movement and sounds for future review by a proctor in absentia. It does not, unfortunately, instantly vaporize the offending student.
The devices are really pretty cheap at $125, which begs the question of whether or not this kind of roboproctor will migrate from the world of educational testing to the one of pre-employment screening. Unproctored, online testing is a hot topic in the I-O world right now, mainly because many companies are trying to figure out how to leverage information technology and the Internet in general to drive down the costs of testing, especially in far flung locations. Which would you rather do, pay mileage or even airfare for someone to come in to your office or overnight one of these roboproctors to her house and have her take the test at home?
Still, people are already raising the issue of privacy with these devices. And to be sure, I'm not sure I'd want a potential employer to have a 360-degree view of the room where I keep my computer, cluttered as it is. And what about dress? Should I wear my jammies while sitting in front of this thing, or do I have to dress up? And you know, I'm not too crazy about the idea of plugging some strange device into my precious computer and having it install all kinds of wonky stuff that is designed by nature to spy on me.
In the end, I think a more likely use for devices like this wouldn't be at home, but in the field. One testing company with which I've worked has already created test-taking rooms that contain various cameras and microphones instead of stools for proctors to perch upon, with careful hunts for cheaters happening electronically, several testing rooms at a time, from elsewhere in the building.
But I think you could go smaller than that, even. I could easily envision remote testing offices having things like this on hand to oversee tests where more fleshy proctors don't want to make the trip. Testing could be done more easily in retail locations, too, where applicants could walk right in, apply, and test all at once.
Now, if we could just strap a laser death ray onto that thing we'd be in business.
Existing comments:
Posted by BryanB at June 23, 2007 7:57 AM:
Makes me wonder whether the downsides associated with remote monitoring outweigh the upsides--I think they do. Which gets us back to either (a) accepting the "cheating" risks, and/or (b) following up with a proctored version.
What I'd like to see is UIT move toward self-screening, allowing the candidates to use instant results as more information to judge their suitability for the position. Customer friendly and (presumably) takes away the motivation.
Posted by Jamie at June 25, 2007 7:55 AM:
Yeah, I'm a fan of the "test and retest those who pass" model, too. It still cuts costs way down, and you still have an on-site test to prevent cheating. I know seveal companies that are doing it this way.
Post your own comment:
