Dear Teachers,
Greetings.
We are a student research team composed of members from different departments and grades.
Recently, the university has fully launched the Intelligent Supervision System to improve teaching quality. As a core participant in teaching activities, your genuine experience is crucial for us to build a smart education ecosystem that achieves "win-win results for both teachers and students".
This questionnaire aims to understand the impact of the system on your teaching work in actual operation, especially your feelings regarding data privacy, evaluation fairness, and teaching autonomy. The questionnaire is anonymous, and the data will only be used as a reference for submitting the Proposal on Improving the Management System of the Intelligent Supervision System to the university.
Thank you for taking 5 minutes out of your busy schedule to complete it!
Appendix: Introduction to the Supervision System
The Intelligent Supervision System is a result of in-depth cooperation between Huaxi Cloud and Beijing Institute of Technology (BIT) in the field of smart education. Together, the two parties have built an integrated smart teaching space, multi-scenario teaching agents, and an intelligent supervision system, forming a smart education ecosystem covering the entire process of "teaching, learning, and evaluation".
The system verifies faculty and staff identities through facial recognition, records teaching trajectories, speaking speed (via speech recognition), standing duration, and other indicators. Meanwhile, based on AI visual analysis, it identifies abnormal behaviors such as being late, leaving early, and making or answering phone calls at the millisecond level. Early warning information can be pushed to the educational administration platform with one click, facilitating remote intervention by administrators.
1. What type of courses are you mainly in charge of?
Theoretical lecturing (mainly professional courses, large classes) Experimental/practical (professional courses) Seminar/interactive (professional courses, small classes) Art-related (mainly general electives)
2. Are you aware of the existence and functions of the Intelligent Supervision System?
Yes No
3. Do you know exactly what data about you is currently collected by the Intelligent Supervision System? (e.g., teaching trajectory, speaking rate, blackboard writing, even "emotion evaluation")
Very clear, with a detailed list Roughly know, but unclear about the details Not very clear, feel it is a "black box" operation
4. Are you aware of the specific thresholds and judgment standards for "violations" such as "being late/leaving early" and "classroom behaviors" set by the system? (e.g., how many minutes away from the podium counts as abnormal, how many seconds of answering a phone call counts as an incident)
Very clear, informed by explicit documents Roughly know, but do not know the specific algorithm logic Completely unaware, in a "black box" state Only know about the violation when receiving an early warning
5. In your current teaching, do you feel that some data collected by the system (e.g., teaching trajectory, duration of blackboard writing, and even the impact of students' "head-up rate" on your evaluation) exceeds the scope of "necessary teaching evaluation" as you see it?
Yes, a lot of irrelevant data is being collected Occasionally have this feeling No, all collected data is reasonable
6. Which types of data do you think are "unnecessary to collect" and suggest to be canceled or blurred? [Multiple choice]
Status evaluations such as students' "head-up rate" and "front-row seating rate" Faculty facial information Detailed action trajectory during teaching, standing duration, etc. Speaking rate (via speech recognition) Full HD video recording of the entire class
7. Have you received clear notification regarding the "storage period of facial data and other information" and "whether it will be used for non-teaching purposes (such as administrative sanctions other than attendance)"?
No notification received at all, completely unclear about the whereabouts of the data Only oral notification, no written agreement Received a simple explanation, but the terms are not detailed Received a detailed privacy policy and signed an informed consent form
8. Are you worried that "full-time" classroom video surveillance will intrude on your personal privacy (such as private calls during breaks, non-teaching states)?
Very worried Somewhat concerned Not worried at all
9. Regarding data access management, which personnel do you think should be restricted from accessing raw classroom videos and behavioral data? [Multiple choice]
Ordinary administrative staff Supervisors not from your own college Non-technical personnel of technical development partners (such as Huaxi Cloud) Student cadres or work-study students Anyone other than the directly teaching faculty and participating students (if this option is selected, no others can be selected) No restrictions needed, fully public (if this option is selected, no others can be selected)
10. Do you think the current AI evaluation indicators (e.g., head-up rate, front-row seating rate, voice activity) can truly reflect your teaching quality?
Not at all; these indicators are too mechanical to measure in-depth thinking Partially, but the particularity of courses is ignored (e.g., in-depth theoretical courses may have a low head-up rate but good effects) Basically, the data is consistent with my actual teaching situation Very scientific; I fully approve of this quantitative standard
11. Are you worried that the "teaching quality evaluation report" generated by AI will be directly used as the sole basis for your professional title assessment, merit evaluation and commendation?
Very worried; algorithms cannot replace comprehensive judgment Relatively worried; afraid of being "vetoed by a single vote" by data Not worried; I think data can be used as one of the references In favor of fully data-driven evaluation
12. What do you think the degree of transparency of the system's evaluation rules (such as algorithm logic, indicator weights) should be?
Fully public, including all algorithm details Moderately public; only publish core indicator weights and judgment standards Only need to inform that evaluation exists; no need to publicize specific rules No need to publicize; this is the school's management confidential
13. Has the real-time monitoring of the system affected your teaching behavior? (e.g., do you deliberately reduce movement, control your speaking rate, or avoid certain topics because you are worried about being misjudged?)
Great impact; I always feel "watched" and have to perform teaching Some impact; I will unconsciously pay attention to my body language Little impact; I have gotten used to the presence of cameras No impact at all; I still maintain my original style
14. Will you receive a report from the Intelligent Supervision System and adjust your classroom teaching methods based on the report content?
Will receive and adjust teaching methods according to students' situations Will receive, but do not care Will not receive; the supervision system does not provide feedback to teachers
15. In which aspects do you think the current "Intelligent Supervision" system most needs improvement? [Multiple choice]
The scope of data collection is too wide, involving too much privacy Lack of clear data collection notification and privacy agreement Evaluation rules are not transparent; points are deducted without knowledge Lack of effective appeal channels and manual review mechanisms Unclear data security protection measures; worried about personal information leakage The system collects too many and too detailed indicators, with a high misjudgment rate, affecting normal teaching order
16. Through which channels do you hope the school will inform you of the data processing rules of the "Intelligent Supervision" system? [Multiple choice]
Announcement on the school's official website/educational administration system homepage Mandatory pop-up reading and confirmation when logging into the system Signing of a special paper or electronic "Privacy Notice" Notification in class groups/work groups Campus bulletin boards/posters/official media
17. If the system uses facial recognition for identity verification or behavioral analysis, which processing method do you prefer?
Facial recognition must be used for the highest efficiency Facial recognition can be used, but an informed consent form must be signed in advance, and alternative methods such as campus card/account login shall be provided, with the right to withdraw consent at any time Do not wish to use facial recognition; only accept non-biometric verification methods It doesn't matter, as long as it does not affect classes
18. If an appeal mechanism is established, which functional links do you hope it includes? [Multiple choice]
One-click submission of appeal applications Upload of supporting materials (such as photos, explanatory documents) Real-time viewing of appeal processing progress Manual review and issuance of written conclusions Automatic correction of evaluation records and elimination of impacts after successful appeal Pursuit and public notification of the system responsible party for malicious misjudgment
19. What specific measures do you think the school should take in data security to enhance the confidence of teachers and students? [Multiple choice]
Local storage of sensitive information such as facial data, no uploading to the cloud Encryption and de-identification (blurring) processing of all data Restriction of data export functions to prevent batch leakage Establishment and publication of a data leakage emergency response plan Introduction of third-party institutions for security certification
20. For which scenarios do you hope the evaluation results of the "Intelligent Supervision" system will be mainly used? [Multiple choice]
Teachers' teaching reflection and self-improvement School's macroscopic teaching quality analysis and decision-making Targeted teaching support and training Reference for curriculum construction and reform Teachers' annual performance appraisal Students' daily grade assessment Basis for merit evaluation and commendation Basis for disciplinary sanctions
21. What principles do you think the school should uphold most in the process of promoting "Intelligent Supervision"? (Select up to 3 items)
Technology first, pursuit of maximum management efficiency People-oriented, fully respecting the privacy and rights of teachers and students Open and transparent, all rules and data operating in the sunshine Gradual progress, pilot first before promotion Rule of law-led, strictly abiding by laws and regulations Cost controllable, minimizing financial investment
22. What other concerns do you have about the future development of the "Intelligent Supervision" system? [Multiple choice]
Misjudgment caused by technical failure without correction Data leakage to third parties Formation of a "panopticon effect" suppressing academic freedom Simplification of evaluation standards stifling teaching diversity Increased additional burden on teachers and students (such as frequent explanations, appeals) No concerns, fully support (if this option is selected, no others can be selected) Others：
23. Thank you for your support! Is there anything else you would like to say about the "Intelligent Supervision" system? Your opinions and suggestions for our research group can also be written here (๑˃̵ᴗ˂̵)و
