Australian universities have sparked privacy concerns over plans to use software to monitor students through webcams as they take exams from home during the coronavirus pandemic.

Students, academics and privacy experts have criticised the decision, from multiple universities, to sign up to remote exam monitoring software created by third-party companies.

The Australian National University in Canberra told Guardian Australia it has signed an agreement to use the US-owned Proctorio software, while the University of Queensland and University of Sydney will use ProctorU – also developed by a US-based company.

The University of Canberra told Guardian Australia it was exploring a number of providers including Proctorio.

Both platforms require students to potentially grant access to their computer’s webcam, microphone and keystrokes to prevent cheating.

Both platforms also use artificial intelligence, including machine learning and facial detection technology, to verify students’ identities and spot suspicious activity during exams.

Nearly 3,000 people have signed a petition from ANU students opposing the use of Proctorio, and Dr Monique Mann, the chair of the surveillance committee at the Australian Privacy Foundation, said she was concerned by the platforms’ description of artificial intelligence.

She said all universities should prepare privacy assessments of their software and submit them to their state or territory privacy commissioner before they are used for students.

“I would certainly want to know what information they are collecting about my students, how are they making inferences on the behaviour of my students, how long is it being retained, and what other purposes is it being used for,” she said.

A spokesperson for Proctorio said: “Proctorio allows approved administrators and instructors to set this information with our customisable settings, meaning these individuals are fully aware of the information collected. Proctorio also clearly presents their test-takers with this information before each and every exam.

“Unlike our competitors who collect biometric data, Proctorio never collects anything additional than what the institution has already collected from the student (via single sign-on).



“When an instructor is setting up their exam, they can select from different settings and adjust the severity of each.”

Richard Prangell, a board member at Electronic Frontiers Australia, said students should not be expected to install monitoring software on their own computers for the benefit of their university.

“Keystrokes, screenshots, audio and video can capture all kinds of private, and often unintended information about a student and perhaps even other members of their household.”

At the ANU, students from 13 faculty clubs and societies have written an open letter to the university opposing the software.

Sasha Personeni and Ronan Skyring, two ANU students and reporters for student newspaper Woroni, said students had also raised the concern that the automated system would flag “regular nervous movement” as cheating.

“The software fundamentally works by using AI in real time to analyse the use of a laptop by a student,” Personeni said. “It analyses your movement in comparison to everyone else’s. If you are the only student to look at a clock, and no other student does, you are automatically flagged as suspicious.

“That is not reliable enough, in my opinion, to warrant students being potentially investigated. It’s pretty common for a lot of students, myself included, when we sit exams, to look around the room, take pauses, or fidget, while you consider the question.”

The Proctorio spokesperson said that “subtle movements, such as the one implied, are not likely to be flagged”.

“Our facial detection is used to identify students looking away from the exam frequently and for long intervals of time, to identify if there are multiple people in the testing environment or if the student leaves the testing environment.”

Skyring said that he and other students would prefer if remote exam software was being conducted by the ANU rather than a third party. “If we knew it was being conducted on Wattle, which is an ANU website, then we would know it would only be accessed by ANU staff, who have signed obligations to protect our privacy and more,” he said.

“I would be OK with it if I had full transparency,” Personeni said. “With actual information about where the data is being stored, who can access it, and whether it complies with the actual Australian regulations.”

Proctorio’s spokesperson said its software “complies with the strictest data privacy regulations, including Australian, German and European regulations”.

An ANU spokesman told Guardian Australia that “only a small proportion” of exams would use Proctorio, and the university would test the use of the platform in May and forward findings to students.

The ANU has completed a privacy impact assessment for Proctorio that concluded that “no personal information is sent to or held in the system” and “no third parties will have access to or be provided with the personal information.”

An ANU spokesman said Proctorio does “not record every keystroke or mouse movement” and cannot access the files on a student’s personal computer.

The university said any student could opt out of the system and apply for a deferred exam to be taken when face-to-face exams are allowed, and that students with accessibility arrangements would be supported.

But Mann said that as a teaching academic, she believed universities and academics should redesign assessments to make them harder to cheat in, rather than use “punitive surveillance technology”.

Skyring said deferring exams was not a reasonable way to allow students to opt-out of the software. “There are people who are doing subjects this semester who may not be able to do an exam until next year”, he said. “Having to do an exam six to 12 months after you have studied a subject is unfeasible.”

The University of Queensland’s student union have called on their university to abandon plans to use ProctorU. In a statement, UQ said only “authorised UQ staff” would have access to the data collected by the program.

• This story was amended on 28 April 2020 to make clear that Proctorio does not require students to upload their biometric data, and to add further context to other concerns expressed about its programs.