Teacher groups object to enforcement role

Teacher organizations have voiced opposition to the arrangement, saying it effectively shifts responsibility to proctors — the front-line staff who must carry out the checks on test day. They contend that decisions about detection methods and equipment should not rest with individual proctors, who face pressure if disputes arise during the exam.

Concerns over timing and procedure

Critics point to the timing, noting the controversy surfaced shortly before the CSAT, leaving little room to test procedures or address questions from schools and staff. Questions remain unresolved about how checks involving AI glasses would be conducted and what standards would apply if a candidate were flagged.

The dispute reflects a broader tension over who bears responsibility for anti-cheating enforcement: the agencies that design and direct exam security, or the proctors who must apply it in the exam room.

The claim that a controversy over AI glasses checks arose ahead of the CSAT and that teacher groups said responsibility was being shifted to proctors is True.