Cited by 28Online Learning and AnalyticsDigital Education and SocietyEducational Technology and Pedagogy

Reframing classroom sensing: promise and peril

Open access
Ogan, Amy·2019·Interactions

Abstract

Should we put cameras in every classroom?At first glance, this may sound like a dystopian nightmare set in a surveillance state.And yet, with careful deployment and strong regulations in place for data use, I argue that such an approach could help us avoid a future where students constantly have their heads buried in a device.At the same time, it could enable teachers to get the feedback they currently lack to make continuous improvements to their teaching and to the classroom environment-and even to do their own action research.Researchers and practitioners in learning science, privacy, and ICT must come together to build frameworks that will protect students and teachers, and shape this positive future.In this article, I discuss why this approach is needed, who benefits from it, and how we're building systems that improve education. WHAT TECHNOLOGY CAN DO FOR EDUCATIONHerb Simon, the godfather of artificial intelligence and a multi-award-winning teacher, observed the following truth about the teaching and learning process: "A teacher can advance learning only by influencing what the student does to learn."Influencing what the student does is, at heart, a cycle of detection and intervention-observing and interpreting before acting.To be able to provide the right intervention that guides the next steps in the learner's development, an instructor must know quite a lot about what is happening in any given learning situation.This detection process is hard.In the Insights → Classroom sensing has great potential as a tool for teacher professional development.→ We must develop appropriate frameworks to address privacy and data use concerns.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1145/3358902

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Crucial AI ethics considerations are equally underexamined in AIEd.

    “Crucial AI ethics considerations are equally underexamined in AIEd [60, 103].”

    From AI Sensing and Intervention in Higher Education: Student Perceptions of Learning Impacts, Affective Responses, and Ethical Priorities (2026) · cites this paper as [103]

    In ETHICS AND FAIRNESS, Ogan says serious ethics and fairness questions about classroom sensing still need close examination, including who can access and benefit from the data. CAUTIONARY TALES also describes a lack of frameworks to guide its use. These passages support the concern for classroom sensing, but do not establish that AI ethics considerations are underexamined across AIEd generally. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 8

  1. D'Mello, S. and Graesser, A. Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction 22, 2 (2012), 145-157.
  2. Graesser, A.C., McDaniel, B., Chipman, P., Witherspoon, A., D'Mello, S.,and Gholson, B. Detection of emotions during learning with AutoTutor. Proc. of the 28th Annual Meetings of the Cognitive Science Society. 2006, 285-290.
  3. Raca, M. and Dillenbourg, P. System for assessing classroom attention. Proc. of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Analytics and Knowledge. ACM, New York, 2013, 265-269.
  4. Ahuja, K., Kim, D., Xhakaj, F., Varga, V., Xie, A., Zhang, S., Townsend, J.E., Harrison, C., Ogan, A., and Agarwal, Y. EduSense: Practical classroom sensing at Scale. Proc. of the ACM on Interactive, Mobile, Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies 3, 3 (2019), 71.
  5. Sherin, B. and Star, J.R. Reflections on the study of teacher noticing. In Mathematics Teacher Noticing: Seeing through Teachers' Eyes. Routledge, 2011, 96-108.
  6. Schack, E.O., Fisher, M.H., and Wilhelm, J.A., eds. Teacher Noticing: Bridging and Broadening Perspectives, Contexts, and Frameworks. Springer, 2017.
  7. Benedict-Chambers, A. Using tools to promote novice teacher noticing of science teaching practices in post-rehearsal discussions. Teaching and Teacher Education 59 (2016), 28-44.
  8. Lewin, K. Action research and minority problems. Journal of Social Issues 2, 4 (1946), 34-46.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ogan, A.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Corresponding author
Ogan, Amy
Venue
Interactions
Published
2019-10-30
Volume
26
Issue
6
Pages
26-32
ISSN
  • 1072-5520 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-3449
OpenAlex
W2986331430
Cited by
28
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4
FWCI
4.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
interactions (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1928955)
  • James S. McDonnell Foundation
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Online Learning and Analytics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Digital Education and Society
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Educational Technology and Pedagogy
Keywords
educational technology, teacher feedback, teacher professional development, student privacy, school surveillance, learning analytics, teacher action research

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review