There are now multiple stories about the company Proctorio trying to silence academics critical of their product and algorithmic proctoring in general. For instance, Ian Linklater, a Canadian ed-tech specialist, was sued by Proctorio for investigating how their product works (IHE, Oct 20). A computer science student in the U.S. who looked into the workings of the product and published a short analysis on the web was told by the company to delete his analysis (Vice Motherboard, Sep 24). The company has also tried to pressure the peer-reviewed journal Hybrid Pedagogy into retracting an article critical of proctoring software (Vice Motherboard, Oct 21). Meanwhile, evidence that use of Proctorio and related systems is ableist and discriminatory is mounting (IHE, Apr 8; MIT Technology Review, Aug 7). Their effectiveness is also very much in question. For these and other reasons, students around the world are resisting the use of these systems, recognizing them to be needlessly invasive surveillance systems (Vice Motherboard, Sep 24).
Given all this -- which in my view strongly shows that using Proctorio runs counter to values of free inquiry, sound pedagogy, and a safe and respectful environment for teaching and learning -- will the University take a principled stand against the use of this product?