The Proctortrack software that Queen’s Law students are required to download and use to write exams functions remotely by collecting biometric data as well as audio and visual recordings of students and their homes. This data mining software scans students' faces and knuckles, utilizes facial recognition to compare students to their ID, and tracks facial and eye-movements while the student is writing the exam.

There is a significant amount of information collected which, through the process of exam writing, students will be required to hand over to Proctortrack (a private, U.S.-based company) as well as Queen’s.

This change to exam writing assumes Queen's Law students are untrustworthy and will repudiate agreements to conduct exams with academic integrity. Requiring that students use this software for exams denies them an opportunity to provide valid consent. The selected biometric software impinges on the privacy of Queen's Law students. Employing this software creates a heavy burden on Queen's Law students to ensure their writing environments meet Proctortrack standards without accounting for varying learning and working environments that students currently find themselves in. 

There are two legal issues:

(1) It is unreasonable to require us to hand over that information (s.5(3) of PIPEDA - https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/collecting-personal-information/consent/gd_53_201805/ and; 

(2) Queen's Law students cannot consent to it because it's a) coerced and b) not informed (s.6.1 of PIPEDA - https://www.priv.gc.ca/en/privacy-topics/collecting-personal-information/consent/gl_omc_201805/#fn8

Most concerning is that this entire situation and the lack of transparency in decision-making has created additional stress on Queen's Law students who have had a year unlike any other defined by stress, change, uncertainty and isolation.