By Emily Gillo, University of Memphis

For this edition, I want to discuss how to integrate a demonstration of EdTech surveillance into an online, asynchronous course. This semester at the University of Memphis, I’m teaching a class (made up of 12 undergraduate and 5 graduate students) called Web and Online Writing that focuses on public writing platforms and introductory web design skills.  

We started the semester by situating ourselves within the realm of digital literacy and the many genres of online writing, and with that came a discussion on safety, privacy, and security. As a precursor to this Surveillance Demonstration activity, I linked to an article by The Nation titled “Platforms Like Canvas Play Fast and Loose with Students’ Data”.  

Once students read this article, they were directed to a Canvas quiz that asks questions about their LMS activity, with no room for gray areas (much like the automated reports that instructors can see for each student). These questions touch on how much time they’ve spent in the course, if they completed certain activities, how many “participations” they think they have, if they clicked on certain links or viewed specific pages, and if they watched lecture videos.    

Because of the pervasive sense of “surveillance apathy” (or “ambivalence,” as noted by Maria Novotny during DRPC’s Privacy Week) we all feel at times, I was surprised by the level of engagement with this activity, and by how little students knew about the data that can be pulled from the LMS. I believe that the most illuminating part of this activity was that it was modeled after how these automated reports look, which was jarring for some of my students given the implication that this data can be pulled by their instructor as a means of assessment – despite how unreliable these reports are in gauging interaction and engagement.

What I hope students take away from this activity is the ability to push back if they encounter this type of surveillance in other classes in the future, and if they are subjected to this type of surveillance in their future workplace or civic lives.   

The week following this surveillance demonstration activity, I had students conduct an adapted version of Charles Woods’ Privacy Policy Remediation Assignment, where they could choose from a list of commonly used EdTech tools such as Turnitin, Canvas, and Zoom. One of my students noted on her remediation assignment that she was interested in analyzing Canvas’s privacy policy after the surveillance demo from the week prior. What I found most illuminating was her closing statement: “One more thing I wanted to note is that the Acceptable Use Statement highlights that you can stop using this service at any time, and it seems as if that is what one would do if they didn’t agree to the company’s terms. However, we know that it is more complicated than that: if an institution is using a specific learning management system, does a student have much choice but to agree to these terms?”   

This is what is so important for faculty to negotiate. Sometimes, we’re not given the choice to completely avoid EdTech, especially in online, asynchronous courses like this. And I understand that it can seem hypocritical to stand against the surveillance practices of the LMS within the LMS. However, what I think we can do is understand these practices and the consequences that they have for our students and do our best to disengage from that surveillance mentality. We should also inform our students of these practices, encourage them to understand some of the risks and consequences of engaging with these platforms, help them consider ways to use these platforms safely, and equip them with the critical literacy that allows them to question and resist when necessary.  

—– 

Sources: 

Woods, Charles and Wason, Noah. (2021). Privacy Policy Remediation Assignment. The Digital Rhetorical Privacy Collective. drpcollective.com.  

Paris, Britt, et al. “Platforms like Canvas Play Fast and Loose with Students’ Data.” The Nation, 22 Apr. 2021, www.thenation.com/article/society/canvas-surveillance/. 

—– 

Full assignment: 

“Thinking about the reading from The Nation and how the author noted that ‘such monitoring creates an antagonistic environment for students; chills engagement; has disproportionately negative outcomes for women, trans, and nonbinary folks, and people of color; contributes to the entrenchment of unwarranted surveillance technology in education; and contributes little to student learning’, let’s see how much Canvas really knows about its users. This quiz asks you questions about your Canvas activity, with no room for gray areas (much like an automated report). Answer these questions as honestly (or not) as you can.” 

1. How much time have you spent on Canvas in this course since the first day of classes? 
2. Last week, did you read the intro to Because Digital Writing Matters in full? 
3. What percentage of all work submitted in this course has been submitted “on time”? No, I cannot elaborate.  
4. What is your total number of “participations” in this course? Canvas defines participations as “count of total participations for a student within this course” – sorry if that definition is not helpful.  
5. What is the total number of page views in this course? I cannot elaborate on what Canvas categorizes as a “page”.  
6. Did you read the Forbes article last week? 
7. True or False: I have read the Grading Contract, Syllabus, and Weekly Schedule & Due Dates pages. 
8. True or False: I have watched the Week One Lecture video. 
9. How many times did you read posts and responses from your classmates/instructor in the “Introductions” discussion board last week? 
10. True or False: My academic advisor can see my Canvas activity at any time, without contacting the professor or myself.