Pearson vue Exams

We moved from Ladybird without having to be ADA compliant. What is different now?

When was the move from Ladybird? I donā€™t think people were aware of the laws but again I am not an attorney. I donā€™t want to get into ADA in this topic. Let me refer you to
https://talk.dallasmakerspace.org/t/discussion-ada-compliance-goals-at-dallas-makerspace/34880/21

1 Like

You were the one who brought ADA back here. I was just restoring some points Erik was making about doing exams.

I was just addressing some of the points that you brought back including the many of the ADA concerns but perhaps I shouldnā€™t have commented on them here. But no worries, we will figure it all out.

1 Like

I donā€™t see it furthering the educational mission of DMS.

The security+ courses does draw in a lot of members, Iā€™ve personally signed up four new members over the winter season because of the classes.

On top of it the earlier certification courses that where held by an ex-member where bringing in at lease 40-65 new individuals a month. Given that we where to actually preform the exams on site then thatā€™s easily upwards of 65 new members or more with Pearson Vue sending individuals to our space.

Or simply put thatā€™s 39k more a year on the low end.

Their benifits are listed on their website: https://home.pearsonvue.com/For-test-centers/Benefits.aspx

And break down like this:

  • Pearson vue has a large network of content providers, students, and educators

  • Pearson vue provides training software, standardized education material and flexible scheduling system

  • Pearson vueā€™s exams are a reseller based model. Thus, we operate as normal, are able to set exam costs with-in reason to Pearson Vueā€™s voucher system and our operational overhead and which exams that we wish to offer.

    • This part is where the board and committee chairs would be involved and at present this part is still being looked at as a value add to the membership under the expectation of the participating student has preformed the requisite number of honorarium classes that cover the coast of the exam.

The furthering of the educational mission of DMS is as stated purely to offer exams onsite in addition to the current certificate prep courses within STEM (ie network engineering, software engineering, adobe, and light industry)

They also work with us to develop our own training exams something that keeps getting tossed around at each board meeting that we need done by committee chairs for thier tools and classes.

2 Likes

Math is not working here. The step where you go from ā€œindividualsā€ to new members.

I think your estimates are overly optimistic.

And I still think the costs will be much higher than anticipated. And this is NOT a good time for that.

1 Like

That would be 100% to 150% of all new members for a month. I find that a suspect claim.

3 Likes

Yes, I do think something is off. Individuals do not equate to New Members

We would get much more exposure from it.

As far as new members, Iā€™m not certain.

However, Pearson VUE will pay us for each test that is delivered.

1 Like

Do not disagree with it is good exposure. But want to how many hoops need to be jumped through to ā€œmake it work.ā€

I not particularly excited about meeting a bunch of requirements for someone that wants to use our facilities as part of a profit making endeavor. If what we have can meet their needs then no problem. If it exposes us to more scrutiny and potential livability need I more inclined to say ā€œThanks, but no thanks.ā€

Regarding ADA issues, I like going through the check list a seeing which ones we can reasonably accommodate - thatā€™s just a good practice.

2 Likes

I think for a testing center it is about making profit for themselves. If it wasnā€™t profitable they wouldnā€™t do it. We want to teach prep-courses for certification, it may make sense at some point to have certifications in-house if it is profitable for the space. (I use profitable in a non-profit way in terms of income vs expenses)

As far as the ADA, that is a whole other issue unto itself.

As in many endeavours, I think paying for exposure is a bad bad idea. Almost as bad as working for exposure.

And if itā€™s going to cost us a lot to set up, we ARE paying for it.

There are lots of places to take tests around. Still not seeing why we would want to commit any of our volunteer resources to being another one. I can see this as being another thing that starts with enthusiasm on the parts of a few, then dwindles to little interest and requests for help from those who were not interested in the first place.

1 Like

Many people do it with marketing.

This may also be very true. IF it is not causing an on-going expense in terms of money and it is being utilized in a way that benefits the educational makery aspects without wasting resources, then I donā€™t see an issue. However, if it becomes something that isnā€™t profitable in whatever way and it drops. We still have the classroom like we always had. In other words, we shouldnā€™t make this an extra effort thing. If it fits into our plans and mission easily, it might be a good fit and if it drops then we shouldnā€™t be out alot of money and resources.

Many fall for the idea. Few profit. What are you willing to do just for exposure ?

And why is it we thing we need more exposure anyway. We have excellent word of mouth, and have already throttled back our recruiting. Iā€™m betting we can turn the recruiting back up at far lower cost and far less effort than this testing center plan.

I see a distinct lack of enthusiasm here. Two of you seem really gung ho about it. The rest that have spoken up - not so much. Perhaps this should be a hint. Can two of you carry the load of this project - during business hours and by yourselves ? I kinda doubt that myself. We have significant expenses coming up that Iā€™d much rather see us spend the money on rather than conducting this experiment.

First of all, exposure of the space is just one aspect of it. It is not just for exposure.

  • We can use the format and software for our own exams. https://home.pearsonvue.com/Test-Owner/Develop-your-program.aspx
  • We are an educational based non-profit. Courses and Exams fit within that ideal.
  • We can potentially fund our prep-courses with it.
  • Offering internationally recognized certifications gives us more credibility when working with other schools (STEMS) and organizations.
  • It may give incentive to members to complete exams and make DMS as a whole more qualified.

There is no way just two people can do this. This is where the instructor pool comes in. We are wanting to bring in people that can and want to become members and teach courses. These are educators not just members. This will need to be built up over time. But it takes a few gung ho to get things moving. We intend to expand our current class structure to include reaching out to the public more and by utilizing more qualified certified instructors. This is a long term process. It starts with the idea and a hand full of people and grows. So, to answer your question. Credibility.

Cost benefit ratio is still not there in my mind. Not hearing anything at all to change that.

Good. What numbers are you using to judge this?

Potentially 20% of our build out expense, vs very very little.

[Moved topic to ADA thread]

https://talk.dallasmakerspace.org/t/discussion-ada-compliance-goals-at-dallas-makerspace/34880/54

I just noticed that once again weā€™re having this discussion in th epublic side of the forums.

I also wonder what the board thinks about this.

1 Like

ā€¦ use our facilities as part of a profit making endeavor. ā€¦ If it exposes us to more scrutiny and potential livability

My concerns as well. Personally ā€œprofit making endeavorā€ is the last thing Iā€™m proposing or even seeking. Everything Iā€™ve posted has been in regards to offering the prep and exams to the community as requested by a previous board when the idea was initially approach last year.

But want to how many hoops need to be jumped through to ā€œmake it work.ā€

Agreed. thatā€™s part of why this and the ADA threads exist plus is one of those things that we would need to reach out to Pearson Vue to discover.

At this point and to my knowledge, no representative of dallas makerspace has contacted them and have only referenced the material from their web site. So this poses the question of; Does this require the board agenda item to reach out to Pearson Vue for further discovery or would a committee chair be viable to contact them on behalf of dallas makerspace?