Growing concerns are prompting demands for greater openness from three prominent exam proctoring businesses, as students continuing to take exams remotely due to the pandemic increasingly report instances of unfairness.

Remote proctoring technology enables students to complete tests from their homes while being monitored. Typically, students are required to install software selected by their educational institution, granting exam supervisors extensive access to their computers – including cameras and microphones – to oversee their actions and detect possible academic dishonesty.

However, companies such as Proctorio, ExamSoft, and ProctorU have been subject to significant criticism from students who allege that their proctoring technologies contain inherent flaws, including potential biases, which could negatively affect their exam scores.

A primary source of these complaints centers on the software’s difficulty in accurately identifying faces with deeper complexions or individuals wearing religious coverings. Concerns have also been raised regarding discrimination against students with disabilities and those from economically disadvantaged backgrounds who may lack the necessary internet connectivity to satisfy the technology’s requirements.

In December, a group of U.S. Democratic senators addressed letters to Proctorio, ExamSoft, and ProctorU, requesting detailed explanations of their technologies and operational procedures. The companies, in responses reviewed by TechCrunch, denied allegations of discriminatory practices, asserting that the ultimate determination of academic misconduct rests with instructors, not the proctoring companies themselves.

Nevertheless, legislators maintain that these companies lack sufficient transparency, expressing apprehension that educators might base judgments about student behavior primarily on the information provided by the technology.

“Proctorio, ExamSoft, and ProctorU assert they are free from bias, but troubling accounts from students suggest otherwise,” stated Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) to TechCrunch. “The companies’ replies represent an initial step toward understanding their operations, but significantly more transparency is crucial regarding systems capable of accusing students of cheating. I am committed to pursuing all necessary solutions to safeguard students’ rights.”

Throughout the U.S., students have already petitioned their schools to discontinue the use of proctoring software, citing potential privacy and security vulnerabilities.

We reached out to the companies with a series of inquiries. ProctorU’s CEO, Scott McFarland, declined to provide a statement due to the holiday period. Proctorio and ExamSoft did not offer a response.