Proctoring and Assessment Integrity
Proctoring that detects desktop AI assistants and invisible overlays.
An exam can look orderly in the browser while an AI assistant runs beside it. ScreenComply adds device-level proctoring that records the presence of desktop assistants and overlays as timestamped evidence, so your instructor or integrity office can review what happened rather than rely on an automated verdict.
Timestamped observations support a fair review.
Your institution applies its own policy and considers context.
Evidence informs a decision. A person makes it.
Why does a lockdown browser never see the assistant?
A lockdown browser is built to control the assessment tab and restrict activity within that environment. Desktop AI assistants run as separate applications, and overlays can be built to hide from screen capture. The browser and webcam may have nothing to show even when assistance is active beside the exam.
That gap does not make browser controls worthless. They still support the exam environment they were designed to manage. The question for a university is whether that view is enough for the assessment being given, and whether a reviewer will have meaningful evidence when a result is challenged.
What does ScreenComply record?
The report records that an AI assistant or overlay was running beside the exam, when it started and stopped, and when focus moved to it. These are timestamped entries an instructor can place in the context of the assessment. They describe activity, not a conclusion about the student's intentions.
ScreenComply does not read what the student typed into the assistant or collect the contents of that conversation. A report should help a reviewer distinguish a relevant observation from an assumption. The institution applies its own permitted-tool policy and considers the student's explanation before making a decision.
Should an exam use Prevent or Detect?
Prevent mode closes a restricted tool before it is used. Detect mode lets the exam proceed and records the activity for a person to review afterward. The institution chooses the approach that fits the stakes, the permitted applications and the accommodations agreed for that assessment.
Detect mode can support a focused pilot in which faculty learn how evidence fits their review process before introducing prevention. A flag should not become an automatic failure. In either mode, the academic integrity decision remains with the institution, not with a software label or an isolated event.
What does the student see?
Before the exam, students receive a plain notice explaining what is checked and what is not collected. Device-level proctoring runs for the exam window, not as background monitoring of the student's personal life. Clear notice lets students prepare their device and raise questions about approved applications before the assessment begins.
During the exam, the student continues in the assessment workflow they know. Nothing appears unless Prevent mode needs to warn about a restricted tool. Faculty should communicate the permitted-tool policy in advance and provide an accessible way to resolve a setup issue without turning it into a misconduct accusation.
How does this support universities and assessment platforms?
For universities, the value is an evidence record that an instructor and integrity office can use under their existing process. Keep the exam and the lockdown browser you already use, agree the review policy, and decide how long evidence should be retained for an academic review or appeal.
Assessment platforms can return the same review-ready evidence within their own customer workflow. The platform and its clients retain their decisions and policies rather than outsourcing a verdict. Review branding, candidate notice and data handling together so the integrity layer fits the assessment experience rather than becoming a separate process.
Frequently Asked Questions
Can it detect ChatGPT running in another window?
ScreenComply records the activity of a desktop AI assistant running beside the exam as evidence for review. The report helps an instructor assess that activity against the permitted-tool policy; it is not a guarantee that every form of assistance will be observed.
Does it detect Cluely and similar overlay tools?
Desktop assistants and invisible overlays are within the scope of this proctoring layer. Findings appear as timestamped observations for human review, not as an automatic cheating verdict or a claim of complete detection.
Does it read what the student typed into the assistant?
No. It records that the tool was active, not its contents. Reviewers should use the activity record and the student's explanation under the institution's policy rather than assume what was asked or answered.
Does it work on Mac and Windows?
ScreenComply supports exam sessions on Mac and Windows. Confirm the student's setup and accessibility requirements before the exam so the institution can approve a suitable assessment environment.
What if the student has a legitimate reason to run another app?
The institution defines permitted applications and accommodations before the assessment. A legitimate app should be reviewed in that context, and a flag should prompt a human review rather than an automatic penalty.
Evidence. Context. Human Review.
Bring your next exam to the conversation.
Review the assessment workflow, the evidence your team receives and the policy that guides a human decision.