In a surprising about-turn, a university professor used hidden cameras to watch students while they took a test and exposed many who attempted to cheat. The issue has kicked off heated debates on campus and on social networks recently, as most question the means by which a discipline had been imposed and the ethics behind surveillance methods applied in this case.
The incident occurred in a standard class of students who were seated to take a more-than-important exam, and their professor had installed hidden cameras-“just in time”-with the sole aim of capturing the habits of his dishonest students. When it was time to expose them, the professor showed footage from the hidden camera on the big screen right in front of the whole class. Evidently, it showed several of one’s students cheating, with hardly any room for doubt. Some of the students were said to have been deeply embarrassed by the public exposure of being caught in the act.
The approach, by the professor, polarized reactions across the board. Supporters praised the professor for standing his ground on academic integrity, saying this would effectively deter dishonesty. A number protested such drastic measures are needed for cheating to be contained.
The use of hidden cameras for others was an invasion of privacy, with questions of consent. Critics say that even in a place of higher learning, students have a right to know if they are being surveilled. This is a very strong feeling among those who have felt that he crossed the line of ethics in class by violating trust and privacy without notice. The use of spy cameras in the classroom raises severe ethical issues. On one hand, academic integrity is at the heart of the value of education, and institutions often have strict policies on attempting to prevent cheating. On the other hand, it is a delicate balancing act between the enforcement of rules and respect for the rights of students.
The opponents to the use of hidden cameras would go to the extent of recommending that they be used, if at all, only as a last resort, and only after students have been informed of the possibility of monitoring. Such an approach would preserve transparency and prevent issues with privacy while still underlining integrity in education.
This is not the first time professors use surveillance techniques to catch cheaters. Previously, professors have only shown evidence of cheating behavior on a projected screen or a remote proctoring system that watches students in real-time during online exams. Plagiarism detection software and remote proctoring programs that trace eye movements or unusual activities on a student’s screen have received press in online learning settings.
While these technologies have been mostly successful, they too raise concerns of privacy. Students, in particular, in this remote and hybrid learning era, sometimes feel their privacy compromised as universities increasingly turn to surveillance tools as a means of ensuring honest, fair testing environments. This has given rise to a broader debate within academia: hidden cameras and other surreptitious forms of surveillance-the future or an invasion of students’ rights? Strong measures, say proponents, are the only way to ensure academic testing integrity, as cheating methods have become more sophisticated with improvements in technology. The opponents, on the contrary, believe that education badly needs the culture of trust and openness, and such an extreme measure would only breed distrust between the students and faculty.
