The best online proctoring software for your organisation is the solution that fits your assessment rules, participant devices, data requirements and review capacity. Compare providers using the same sample exam and acceptance criteria. A feature count, search position or claim of “AI-powered” monitoring cannot establish that fit.
This checklist is for institutions, certification bodies and employers evaluating a new provider or replacing an existing proctoring service. It focuses on evidence you can obtain in a demonstration and a pilot.
1. Define the exam before comparing vendors
Write a one-page brief: assessment purpose, question types, session length, expected volume and peak concurrency, participant countries, languages, permitted resources and required adjustments. Identify who grades answers and who decides integrity concerns. These inputs make proposals comparable and expose assumptions early.
Distinguish software from operational service. Ask who supplies live reviewers, handles technical support, reviews recordings and manages appeals. Confirm hours and responsibilities explicitly.
2. Test the participant journey
Ask each provider to demonstrate invitation, access, setup checks, the exam itself and submission on a representative device. Include a managed computer and a technical interruption. Check whether a participant can understand what to do without staff explaining each screen.
Agree how approved adjustments and permitted applications interact with restrictions. Count setup failures and support requests in your pilot rather than judging usability from the organiser dashboard alone.
3. Inspect the reviewer’s evidence
Take one sample session from event to conclusion. Can a reviewer find the relevant moment, understand surrounding events and record a reasoned finding? What happens if a recording is incomplete? Can reviewers distinguish technical interruptions from possible rule violations?
Evaluate automated flags using agreed scenarios. Include false alarms and missed events, not only successful demonstrations. Compare reviewer workload and consistency. A risk score is not the answer grade, and neither automatically determines whether a credential should be awarded.
4. Verify integration and migration
If you keep an LMS, test launch, participant identifiers, session handoff and result exchange. Confirm supported versions and which data the receiving system will actually obtain. If you move exams, trial a representative question import and compare scoring before migrating the full bank.
TrustExam supports exam preparation and delivery as well as proctoring. Its built-in IDE supports writing, compiling and running code within the assessment workflow. For any implementation, confirm required languages, runtime settings, question formats and integration scope against your own tasks.
5. Agree data handling and regional needs
Record where exam data and backups will be stored, who can access recordings, retention periods, deletion and any transfers. TrustExam can arrange hosting in its target markets, including Canada, the US, Kazakhstan, Russia, the UAE and Saudi Arabia; the exact deployment and data scope should be agreed before launch. A country name is not a compliance certificate.
Separate exam-interface languages from translated question content and support. TrustExam supports French, Kazakh and Arabic in the exam interface alongside English and Russian. Test the full journey in the languages your participants will use.
6. Compare total cost and decide from the pilot
Request pricing against the same volume, session length and peak-load assumptions.
Include integration, deployment, support, live supervision and post-exam review responsibilities.
Agree what happens for interrupted attempts, retakes and volume changes.
Define pilot acceptance criteria and the people who will approve each requirement.
Document unresolved gaps before agreeing the rollout.
A pilot should answer a purchase question: can this setup deliver your assessment reliably with acceptable participant effort and reviewer workload? It should not merely prove that a demonstration account opens successfully.
Frequently asked questions
Should we select the provider with the most detections?
Compare useful evidence and review outcomes, including false alarms and missed situations. More event types do not automatically mean a better process.
Is an alternative to our current provider a direct replacement?
Not necessarily. Compare the specific workflow, supported devices, integrations, data terms and reviewer responsibilities. Test migration before changing a live programme.
Is there one price for online proctoring?
Providers may price different scopes. Request a proposal for your exam volume and delivery model, with inclusions and assumptions stated clearly.
What should we bring to a TrustExam demo?
A sample exam, participant profile, required controls, current systems, hosting and language needs, expected volume and proposed pilot criteria.
Explore online proctoring, see the Canadian Dunk & Associates case, prepare your pricing brief, or book a demonstration.