Winnipeg, MB – Last week, the University of Manitoba Students’ Union Board of Directors, comprised of members from 34 different faculties, voted unanimously to oppose the University of Manitoba’s implementation of Respondus Monitor. The vote came after weeks of UMSU talks with the university.
The UMSU executive team was first alerted to student concerns surrounding the remote video-proctoring software in August 2020 when the university was running its pilot program. The most common concerns among students surrounded personal privacy, accessibility for those with disabilities, interface functionality, impact on performance, and the risk of false positives, with added uncertainties surrounding which movements are flagged by the program and what do to if a student experiences an interruption, like needing to use the bathroom.
In response, the UMSU submitted a proposal to the University of Manitoba administration containing five recommendations for the implementation of Respondus Monitor:
a. Professors who wish to use Respondus Monitor administer a practice test to their students before exam day, allowing for familiarization with the interface and pre-emptive flagging of potential problems;
b. Environment scans be instituted as a mandatory step before a video-proctored exam, meant to lower student anxiety and limit undue suspicion cast by false flags;
c. Professors be required to receive training before employing the software in their classroom;
d. The contract between Respondus and the University explicitly prohibit the sharing of student videos to third parties; and
e. Clarity be provided surrounding how student videos could be used under FIPPA and the University of Manitoba Act.
While certain recommendations were adopted by the university, the UMSU Board still felt that too many gaps remained and has opposed the system’s implementation, calling for the creation of wider-reaching policy to govern video-proctoring.
In their letter of response to UMSU’s proposals, the university administration noted that they are unable to create institution-wide policy due to considerations of academic freedom. In a presentation to the UMSU board, a representative from U of M administration explained that academic freedom exists in tension with other considerations like social responsibility, but in this case, those other considerations are not significant enough to warrant greater institutional oversight.
Said UMSU VP Advocacy Kristin Smith, “Even though Respondus Monitor is the University’s vetted platform for video proctoring, professors can actually elect to use any other proctoring tool they see fit due to protections on academic freedom – even if it has a 90% false-positive rate, no practice function, and shares its data with every third party imaginable. When weighing considerations of academic freedom against the protection of students in this case, it’s pretty clear where the scales tip.”
She continues, “Web proctoring absolutely has a role to play in preserving academic integrity – we’ve just got to get it right, which means a wider effort to standardize best practices.”
Added UMSU President, Jelynn Dela Cruz: “While the UMFA collective bargaining occurs within the backdrop of remote learning, UMSU has experienced additional reluctance when proposing matters that coincide with academic freedom. At this time of great uncertainty, the least that students deserve is a safe learning environment that is conducive to positive engagement. It is difficult to define this implementation as such when ambiguity exists within what professors are able to mandate.”
The UMSU executive team continues to be in contact with campus administrators to explore next steps.
For media inquiries, please contact:
Kristin Smith
UMSU VP Advocacy
Jelynn Dela Cruz
UMSU President
