When it comes to Proctoring Software, instructors should carefully consider the technical, accessibility, privacy, student experience, and pedagogical implications of these tools before adopting them.
Duke University is piloting Respondus LockDown Browser and Respondus Monitor for use with Canvas assessments in Duke Canvas. Learn more about the pilot and request access at Duke OIT Services & Tools: Respondus.
Note: Fuqua School of Business and School of Medicine support and manage LockDown Browser on their separate Canvas instances. If you are an instructor in one of these schools, we recommend you contact the technical support department for your school for more information.
Technical Barriers
Lockdown browsers were originally designed to be used in computer clusters, not on personal laptops or for at-home exams. Not all students have the same devices or operating systems, and troubleshooting can be difficult. If the students aren’t able to install the software correctly, technical difficulties, crashes, or compatibility problems during the exam can cause stress for instructors and students and lead to appeals and retakes. Online testing surveillance tools, like Respondus Monitor, Honorlock or Proctorio, bring more technical difficulties with devices beyond laptops, such as video cameras and microphones also being involved.
Student Perceptions
Online surveillance testing tools often require deep system access (screen monitoring, webcam, keystrokes). Being recorded, monitored, or locked out of your own computer can increase anxiety—especially during already high-pressure exams. The use of exam software can erode student-instructor relationships.
Efficacy
Students who want to cheat can still find workarounds such as secondary devices either online or in the classroom, collaboration with other students, virtual machines, or bringing in paper notes to a test.
Alternatives to Protoctoring Software
There are many approaches to pedagogy, assessments and grading that reduce the need for proctoring software by reducing the temptation or need to cheat. Some examples include a renewed emphasis on academic integrity, the introduction of low-stakes assessments, alternative assessments design and contract grading.
Helpful Resources
- Duke’s Center for Teaching and Learning offers suggestions on how to rethink assessment design instead of surveilling student exams or using AI detection software.
- Consider the reasons students cheat and how to address them (Temple University).
References
1. Sarah N. Shakir, Ashley M. Virabouth & Mallory M. Rice, Biology Students’ Perspectives & Recommendations on Exam-Related Anxiety in Undergraduate Biology Courses, 87(8), 449–457 (October 1, 2025), https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2025.87.8.449
2. K. Lee & M. Fanguy, Online exam proctoring technologies: Educational innovation or deterioration?, 53 British J. Educ. Technol. 475–490 (2022), https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.13182