he case hinged on siding with one of two interests: student privacy versus school testing integrity. The school used third-party online proctoring provider Honorlock to record and store scans of each student’s room before testing.
Lead counsel Matthew Besser argued, “The Framers would have recoiled at the idea of a school official physically entering a student’s home without a warrant to preemptively search for evidence the student might cheat on a test. CSU’s use of webcams to snoop inside student homes is no different. It is an unnecessary and unreasonable intrusion on student privacy, and it violates the Fourth Amendment.”
Judge Calabrese agreed: “Mr. Ogletree’s subjective expectation of privacy at issue is one that society views as reasonable and that lies at the core of the Fourth Amendment’s protections against governmental intrusion. "Rooms scans go where people otherwise would not, at least not without a warrant or an invitation.”
Rosalyn doesn’t require room scans. Not only do students find them invasive, but they aren’t even effective. If students want to cheat, they’ll simply not include their cheating method in their room scan, which is easy to do since it’s directed by the student.
Excluding room scans does not decrease anti-cheating software effectiveness: Why? Because it detects what occurs during cheating: looking away from screens for extended periods, talking, or the presence of another individual in the room (who would, quite obviously, enter the room following a room scan anyway).
Organizations can detect and deter cheating while still being BIPA compliant and, beyond that, respectful as a common courtesy.
Rosalyn doesn’t just believe that, it’s proven it.
Learn how four students rate their online exam experience using the most popular proctoring platforms.
As educators and certifying organizations increase their reliance on remote testing, students’ voicing of concerns about privacy and the intrusiveness of the technology is reaching a crescendo. Ultimately, the issue is about much more than protecting the privacy of test-takers’ confidential information.
Educational institutions developing their online administration guidance spend a lot of time listening to technologists and test company vendors. There is one more class of stakeholders they should listen to: students.