Proctorio: Where Machines Assist, Humans Decide

Proctorio technology enhances proctoring—but it never replaces human decision-making. Our tools empower educators with real-time insights, while keeping final decisions where they belong: in human hands. It provides administrators with data based on their chosen settings, but any decisions about exam integrity are entirely up to them.

A common misconception is that Proctorio determines when test-takers are flagged for suspicious behavior. In reality, it simply follows the rules set by the administrator or institution, recording and detecting specific behaviors without making any judgments.

The human element remains crucial—exam administrators are in full control. They choose the exam settings, select what activities they deem suspicious, and review any flagged behaviors. If there’s a concern about misconduct, it’s up to them—not Proctorio—to investigate and decide how to proceed.

Proctorio’s role is to assist, not replace. It uses AI to automatically monitor and track behavior during the exam, and provide comprehensive data and recordings (if enabled) for administrators to review. It does not make any decisions about whether a test-taker violated exam policies.

One key tool administrators can use is the "suspicion level," which is a mathematical algorithm calculated based upon the severity of the settings chosen by them. By default, it’s set to zero, meaning no one is flagged unless the administrator adjusts it. Even when used, this level is just a data point—it’s up to the administrator to interpret and act on it.

Unlike some other proctoring services, Proctorio doesn’t interfere with test-takers during the exam. If someone moves out of frame or leaves the room, Proctorio won’t remove them unless the administrator has specifically set it up that way. Any such behavior may be logged, but the test-taker can continue without interruption.

Bottom line: Proctorio is a tool that supports proctoring—it doesn’t replace the judgment and decision-making of real people. It gives administrators the data they need to assess exam integrity fairly, but it never makes the call for them.