Is Online Test-Monitoring Here to Stay?against five proctoring companies, arguing that they illegally collect studentsâ€™ personal data. On December 3rd, six U.S. More recently, several students in Illinois have sued their institutions for using the software, alleging that it violates their rights under a state law that protects the privacy of residentsâ€™ biometric data. senators sent letters to Proctorio, ProctorU, and ExamSoft, requesting information about “the steps that your company has taken to protect the civil rights of students,” and proof that their programs securely guard the data they collect, “such as images of [a studentâ€™s] home, photos of their identification, and personal information regarding their disabilities.” (Proctorio wrote a long letter in response, defending its practices.) On December 9th, the nonprofit Electronic Privacy Information Center submitted a complaint to the attorney general of D.C.
Fully algorithmic test-monitoringâ€”which is less expensive, and available from companies including Proctorio, ExamSoft, and Respondus Monitorâ€”has expanded even faster. These include ProctorU, which said, in December, that it had administered roughly four million exams in 2020 (up from 1.5 million in 2019), and Examity, which told Inside Higher Ed that its growth last spring exceeded pre-pandemic expectations by thirty-five per cent. When college campuses shut down in March, 2020, remote-proctoring companies such as Proctorio, ProctorU, Examity, and ExamSoft benefitted immediately.
(In a survey of college instructors conducted early in the pandemic, ninety-three per cent expressed concern that students would be more likely to cheat on online exams.) Some of these companies offer live proctoring underwritten by artificial intelligence. Proctorioâ€™s list of clients grew more than five hundred per cent, from four hundred in 2019 to twenty-five hundred in 2021, according to the company, and its software administered an estimated twenty-one million exams in 2020, compared with four million in 2019.
Last spring, during a Zoom meeting with a professor, Yemi-Ese learned that the software had flagged him for moving too much. “I feel like I canâ€™t take a test in my natural state anymore, because theyâ€™re watching for all these movements, and what I think is natural theyâ€™re going to flag,” he told me. “I had to try to calm down,” he said. So I donâ€™t know if itâ€™s seeing things that arenâ€™t there because of the pigment of my skin.” (Proctorio says that its software does not expel users from exams for noise.) By the time his professor let him back into the test, he had lost a half hour and his heart was racing.
His dread of the software only increased after he was kicked out of an exam when a roommate dropped a pot in the kitchen, making a clang that rang through their apartment. He feared that, if he showed physical signs of anxiety, Proctorio was “going to send the video to the professor and say that suspicious activity is going on.” The software, he said, “is just not accurate. When we first spoke, last November, he told me that, in seven exams heâ€™d taken using Proctorio, he had never once been let into a test on his first attempt.
Like many test-takers of color, Yemi-Ese, who is Black, has spent the past three semesters using software that reliably struggles to locate his face.