Adoption of Invigilation in Australian universities…

Which Australian Universities or institutes use remote proctoring/invigilation services/software? Why did they choose to invigilate?

Following the advent of COVID-19, Australian universities in the higher education sector found themselves unable (in most cases) to conduct face-to-face examinations in their traditional manner. Institutes needed to look for alternative methods and processes to enable critical online assessment. In some cases, institutes quickly sourced and implemented an online proctoring tool, while others struggled to move away from their traditional assessment structures and use online proctoring. As COVID continued to affect institutes in 2021, many realised they did not have the luxury of return to their old ways, they had no alternative but to move forward with utilising an invigilation solution.

The Australia Council of Directors on Open Distance and E-Learning (ACODE) Information Technology Directors (CAUDIT) has a departmental outlook for all organizations to understand how universities in the Australia field have handled this and to further filter out some of the lessons learned from expediting the implementation of their solutions. They conducted a survey and the results are below.

There Were Questions Asking What Solution/s Were Implemented in The Survey and How

The Australian universities and institutes were asked to think about some of the lessons learned from the implementation, to share the services and the technical issues they encountered, and whether they would continue with the solution of their choice or consider other options in the future.

Each public university in Australia and New Zealand responded to the survey one by one. Also an institute from Fiji and a university college (both ACODE member institute). 47 institutions in total.

Overview and General Commentary

It is common for institutes to run more than one software product to offer their invigilated online exams and/or alternative evaluation forms. Most surveyed institutes ran alternative assessment formats for ‘some’ in their exams and chose a variety of solutions to conduct formal exams. In addition, institutes offered online exams using a variety of tools to meet their individual needs, for example, they used specialized meeting solutions such as zoom. Others opted for a more open book approach, or quizzed within the LMS, timed, or timeless and aural exams.

Of the 47 institutes, 24 used a systematic Remote Proctoring solution in conjunction with the online exam, 23chose alternative option, or did not conduct invigilated exams, and choose to offer alternative assessment formats. It became clear that most of the universities conducting the Proctored exam have taken steps to reduce the number of online- exam. It is also worth noting that it was much more labor intensive to quickly switch to online assessment than to conduct a traditional exam. These institutes have also run alternative evaluation products instead of formal exams.

Remote Proctoring Tool Usage and Summary

Figure 4 below shows the distribution of procrastination tools used in all organization, regardless of which learning management system is used (N = 28). This indicates that the Proctor U tool was used in 7(25%) cases, while Zoom 6(21%) was used by institutes.

It is equally essential to note that Zoom is also, not a procrastination tool, it is used with human induction, which is considers equivalent to a formal procrastination tool like Proctor U because it also do the same thing, but from a more local or personalized perspective.

Other Online Assessment Tool Usage Summary

According to a survey, overall unplanned online rating tool utility distribution across all institutions selected to use other tools. Interestingly, 11 (61%) institutes suggested using Turnitin, which is often used as a place to change choices and open book exams of the total 47 institutes. The 23 Australian universities and institutes out of 47 did not specify the use of the Remote Proctoring solution.

Out of these 23 institutes-

  1. 15 do not identify using any remote invigilation tool in addition to their LMS- Learning Management Systems.
  2. 8 were noted the use of at least 1 online assessments tool in addition to the LMS.

Tool name

Institutions using this tool



Collaborate Ultra








 Institution: Chosen solution continuation sort and long-term

Each institute was asked if they could continue to use the solution of their choice, first in the queue-period and then in the end. The results of these two questions are completely different.

Of the 47 institutes, the intention to pursue the same solution package in T/ S2 2020. This can be for a number of reasons-

  • Contracts are usually for at least a year
  • It is difficult and expensive to use two different solutions in a year; should be highlighted again soon, and 3) more time is needed to evaluate the implemented solution.

Many Australian universities and institutions have indicated that they will be reviewing the tools they use in the future Semesters/three months, from dissatisfaction with the product to reasons applicable in a changing environment.


The Problems encountered

Based on the above, some institutes have been reported to encounter a variety of problems, although these are widely defined in two main categories:

  1. Institute related delivery issues and its attempt to deliver online choices with the services provided, and
  2. Technical issues related to the service or site during use.

Institutes should keep in mind that when trying to implement a new service, they are governed by organizing factors including organizational policy, culture and existing solutions. In addition, each institute has unique goals to achieve with the new service, and this will affect success Factors.

Institution Service Delivery Issues

Of the 9-service delivery issues reported, only 1 institute has reported a moderate issue in Zoom. It’s related to the lack of remote invigilation quality using this service. The remaining 8 minor issues are primarily related to the problems of attracting teething while accepting a new service in the short term, including adapting and modifying the content. None of the minor issues prevented the service from being delivered.

Technical Problems

One institute used an in-house custom closing solution called e-Assessment. It still had a ‘must be identified’ 3rd party integrated procrastination service. This procrastination service created major problems and was later dropped.

Exam service and the institute should quickly switch to deliver the remaining exams at home via Zoom Invigilation.

There was a moderate issue with Remote Proctoring regarding their Live + service. When offering exams for an institute, it took more than an hour for procrastinators to be available for scheduled exams.

Bottom Lines

Total 47 Institutes, including each public university in Australia and New Zealand, responded to the COVID-19 exam software study. It was managed by ACODE on behalf of ACODE and ACUDE. Institutional representatives of these groups are provided with full data for internal use only.

With the same perspective, IRIS can be a good choice for the institute if they want to try something extremely advanced for the invigilated online exams. We promise for the better results and the accurate outcomes for the proctored exam online assessments.