The main point in this polemic against digital proctoring is that "we need counter-narratives.... we also need stories that aren't defined solely in opposition to... online proctoring CEOs." Fair enough. But Charles Logan also argues that "pedagogies of policing and punishment are the soil sustaining online proctoring," which he tries to blunt by saying online proctoring is invasive in ways in-person proctoring is not. "An in-person proctor is not an unflinching gaze trained to interpret students' behavior through the singular lens of suspicion." Really? That seems to me to be exactly what it is. I don't agree with most of what he says, but contra Logan I maintain that online proctoring is and extension of education's existing beliefs and practices.
Today: 0 Total: 1127 [Direct link] [Share]
