Skip to Content


Vice President’s Staff Meeting Minutes
May 3, 2012


Dr. Hicks, Dr. Lemons, Dr. Mickles, Judy Graves, Will Sandidge, Linda Rodriguez, Mike Danos, Amy McIvor, Dr. Fronheiser, Susan Beasley, Mary Evans and Mike Fein

Agenda Items:

Susan Beasley: ProctorU Demonstration. 

Susan set up a phone call/webinar with ProctorU for a demonstration. ProctorU was originally created at Andrew Jackson University, which is a completely online university. Jarrod, the demonstrator from ProctorU, said that an issue came about back in 2008 when there was a student who needed to take a test and had to go somewhere to get the test proctored. The student was a mom taking online classes and had a problem getting to a place to have her test proctored. She went to the administration and said that she was considering dropping out because of this issue. What the administration decided to do was figure out a way that they could proctor over the internet. They first had to establish the three concepts of proctoring a test in person: you have to see the student, you have to know who they are, and you have to be able to see what they are doing.

Next, Jarrod led the group in an online demonstration. He said that all of the colleges that they work with have their own portal where students go to log in. Everyone watched the demonstration that Jarrod showed them.
Dr. Hicks asked Jarrod how many students a proctor is proctoring at one time. Jarrod said that the average is one proctor for 4-6 students at a time. He said that the maximum is 10, but they do not usually let it get that high. He said that the other thing to consider too is that they have other people in the background such as technical support, watchers, and managers. They also have a quality control team that anonymously audits the proctors.

Dr. Hicks also asked Jarrod if they have passed SACS in terms of the issue of test monitoring to ensure academic integrity. Jarrod said absolutely.

Dr. Hicks’ next question was what the cost is. Jarrod said that because they do not have to integrate into CVCC’s learning management system, there are no set-up costs or contract fees for the school. The only thing that ProctorU charges for are the individual proctoring sessions. They only charge on the number of exams they proctor. Their costs are based on the time limit of the exam and are charged per completed exam. He said that if a student starts to take an exam, it crashes halfway through and they have to start over, ProctorU does not charge for that false start, just for the completed exam. The costs are $17.50 for a one-hour exam, $25.00 for two hours, or even as low as $8.75 for a thirty minute quiz. Jarrod said that they can bill the school on a monthly basis based on the previous month’s usage or they can actually have the students pay for it themselves. He said that ProctorU can be an option for students who would rather take their exams at home and the students are generally happy with that option and those who want to use it are usually ok with paying the fee.

Judy had a question for Jarrod regarding our students with disabilities. She was wondering if the costs for a student with disabilities would go up because they are allowed a longer time to take exams. Jarrod said no, that they base the cost for the normal time that it would take for that exam and do not charge extra for students who are allowed extra time. Jarrod said that the process for taking care of those situations would be just to email them with the details.

Dr. Lemons said that he thinks that it would be a good idea to get the student to pay the fee. Dr. Hicks said that he agrees and that would be his recommendation. He said that it would be an option for students and they would pay to use that option. Dr. Hicks said that this topic should go to the Faculty Association next. He asked Susan to contact David McGee to get this topic on the next meeting or get a group of faculty together to see this same demonstration.

Judy Graves: College Applications. 

Judy said that the printed version of the college application has not changed in a while, with the exception of the back that has the programs listed which changes all the time. She said that the application is online and is downloadable and printable. The online application online has the programs listed as well but they are kept up-to-date. Judy estimates that about 95% of students apply online. Everyone agrees that doing away with the printed applications is a good idea.

Dr. Fronheiser: Annual Planning. 

He said that this item is taken care of.

Dr. Fronheiser: Teach-out plan. 

He said that he has received the teach-out plan from Dr. Laub and will be working with the academic deans on this. He said that we have to inform SACS about the teach-out plan for the programs that were closed last summer.

Dr. Fronheiser: Program Viability Study. 

He said that he is offering a Program Viability Study of our existing programs. He said that this is related to closing programs. He said that he knows that Dr. Laub has some programs to take before the board in July for close-out. He said that before we even get approval from the board, we are supposed to get approval of closings from SACS including teach-out plans. Dr. Fronheiser said that he would be working with the academic deans and Dr. Hicks to get this information to SACS.

Dr. Hicks asked if there were any other items to discuss and since there were none, he dismissed the meeting.
The handout from this meeting can be found at the following link: (defunct link)
Back to top