Proctoring Types: What's Best for Your Institution?

As artificial intelligence and digital learning continue to revolutionise education, academic institutions are facing a new challenge: protecting integrity in online environments.

Proctoring technology has emerged as a key solution in this context. To explore the topic, we are talking with Alex Vea, Chief Strategy Officer at Smowltech, the company behind SMOWL, a proctoring solution gaining traction in the United States as institutions look to protect the credibility of their programs.

'As stated by Gartner, the cost of rebuilding trust after a major academic fraud scandal is twenty times higher than the investment required for effective prevention.' Alex Vea, Chief Strategy Officer at Smowltech

Welcome, Alex. Could you tell us more about how SMOWL supports educational institutions?

Alex Vea: Thank you for having me. At Smowltech, we work closely with institutions that are expanding their digital programs, as well as those that already deliver education fully online, helping them safeguard academic integrity.

As online learning continues to grow, protecting the value of assessments and credentials becomes essential, and that's exactly where proctoring technology plays a key role.

Academic fraud can significantly undermine an institution's reputation, potentially leading to a decline in the perceived value of its qualifications, a decrease in student enrollments, and broader detrimental consequences.

Indeed. Artificial intelligence has taken the world by storm and is rapidly transforming many sectors, including education. What is your view on this?

Alex Vea: Artificial intelligence, particularly generative AI, has opened the door to new opportunities for cheating, which means proctoring is no longer optional for institutions that offer digital programs.

When students can instantly generate responses or solve complex problems with AI tools, traditional assessment models face serious challenges that put institutions' reputation at risk.

In this context, Gartner's research indicates that the cost of rebuilding trust after a major academic fraud scandal is twenty times higher than the investment required for effective prevention.

However, it's important to emphasise that AI is not inherently bad. In fact, it is proving extremely useful in education. AI can help students understand complex concepts, assist instructors with administrative tasks, and even personalise learning paths based on individual needs and progress.

The key is guaranteeing that AI is used responsibly and ethically. While institutions need to protect academic integrity to preserve the reputation of their credentials, they can harness AI's capabilities to improve and personalise learning.

Even so, AI is still widely regarded as a major threat to academic integrity.

Alex Vea: That's true. AI does introduce significant risks, especially when assessments are conducted in a digital format. However, this is precisely where proctoring technology becomes essential. With the right tools in place, institutions can mitigate these risks and continue exploring the benefits of AI in education.

In this context, it's crucial to implement tools that not only monitor assessments but also generate evidence-based reports that safeguard institutions from potential complaints or disputes.

Could you elaborate a bit more on that?

Alex Vea: Of course. Academic decisions, such as failing a student for using AI during an exam, are serious and must be supported by solid evidence. Without clear proof, institutions risk legal challenges or damage to their reputation if a student disputes the outcome.

This is why our proctoring tool is designed to capture objective data and provide detailed reports. Instead of relying on suspicions or assumptions, educators can review concrete evidence and make informed decisions.

It all comes down to evaluating students fairly. Unfounded accusations of AI use can negatively affect student motivation too, making evidence-based decisions the best (and only) way forward.

Yet, while necessary, proctoring may feel intrusive to some students.

Alex Vea: Proctoring is a relatively new solution, and some students require time to adapt. However, monitoring exams isn't about surveillance, but about protecting the evaluation process and ensuring that degrees and certifications truly reflect the knowledge of the students who earn them.

Interestingly, the institutions we collaborate with report that 90% of students choose proctored assessments when given the option between on-campus and online exams. This preference is driven by several factors, including the ability to complete assessments from anywhere and the associated cost savings.

Clearly, exam supervision software has become a critical component for the success of digital programs. But there are different types of proctoring, right?

Alex Vea: Yes. Institutions can choose between several proctoring approaches depending on their needs and budget. The most common ones are live proctoring, automated proctoring, and hybrid proctoring.

Can you explain the differences between them?

Alex Vea: Of course. Live proctoring refers to real-time monitoring, where a human proctor supervises the exam session as it happens. Automated proctoring, on the other hand, relies on artificial intelligence to review the session and detect incidents automatically.

Lastly, hybrid proctoring combines automated monitoring with human supervision.

Right. And which option do you think is best?

Alex Vea: It really depends on the institution's needs, available resources, and the type of assessment being conducted.

Live proctoring is typically ideal for high-stakes or critical exams, such as final course exams, professional certification tests, or university entrance assessments.

Often associated with significant costs, live proctoring allows proctors to supervise the exam in real time and intervene immediately if something unusual occurs. This means that potential issues can be addressed as they arise, rather than waiting until the exam ends.

At Smowltech, we believe that integrity should never be a luxury. That's why we are committed to making live proctoring more affordable, and scalable too.

Our model is flexible: institutions can supervise exams with SMOWL using their own proctors or make use of our proctoring service, which helps reduce operational workload while maintaining high standards of academic integrity.

Let's now talk about automated proctoring.

Alex Vea: In general terms, automated proctoring works by capturing the exam session and analysing it with artificial intelligence. This model is often well suited for lower-stakes or less critical exams. Because the process is automated, it is also more cost-effective.

Automated proctoring is the most widely used form of proctoring, not only for its affordability, but also because it supports both synchronous and asynchronous evaluation and can easily scale to accommodate large exam volumes and concurrent students.

This is how we do it at Smowltech: our system gathers information on the device in use, while AI detects prohibited actions through the webcam, producing comprehensive reports with supporting evidence.

One important aspect to highlight is that our solution does not make academic decisions. Our technology simply collects data and identifies potential incidents based on the rules established by each institution.

The final decision always belongs to the educators, who review the reports and evidence before reaching a conclusion.

Finally, how would you describe hybrid proctoring?

Alex Vea: Hybrid proctoring adds an additional layer of human judgment to the process.

In our case, the system flags incidents related to the device used, while a qualified Smowltech team manually reviews the camera input to determine whether prohibited behavior occurred. A detailed report with the relevant evidence is then generated, allowing institutions to make the final decision.

While hybrid proctoring is slightly more expensive than fully automated solutions, it offers a strong balance between efficiency and human supervision.

Thank you for the clarification. One last question: where do you think proctoring is headed, Alex?

Alex Vea: AI is here to stay, and the same can be said about proctoring. As more universities, schools, and training institutions move toward digital learning environments, ensuring academic integrity will remain a top priority.

Today, institutions seek tools that ensure completely AI-free environments to accurately assess students' knowledge and critical thinking. Over time, however, human and AI capabilities will need to coexist, and the focus will shift toward understanding how humans and AI interact to evaluate competencies.

While proctoring has proven essential, not all solutions provide the same level of security. As a result, the education sector will continue to demand advanced proctoring tools capable of detecting forms of fraud such as impersonation.

Currently, many providers do not authenticate users, leaving the responsibility to the institution. Simply capturing a user's image and ID is ineffective if the authentication process is not conducted, whether manually or automatically.

For this reason, it is essential for institutions to ask critical questions, such as how the provider ensures that the examinee is indeed the correct individual.

Building on this trend, the proctoring market is merging with the digital identity market. SMOWL is not only an assessment monitoring tool, but the infrastructure that ensures human talent remains authentic in an AI-dominated world.

Final Thoughts

As digital education continues to grow, protecting academic integrity has never been more critical, especially in an age where AI introduces new challenges.

Proctoring has proven to be an essential part of any digital program, and the question is no longer whether to implement it, but which approach (live, automated, or hybrid) best aligns with each institution's needs.

Conversations like this help clarify the role that technologies such as proctoring can play in building trustworthy digital learning environments and safeguarding institutional reputation.

'Proctoring isn't about surveillance, but about protecting institutions' reputation and ensuring that degrees and certifications truly reflect the knowledge of the students who earn them.' Alex Vea, Chief Strategy Officer at Smowltech