Results
A track record of scaling with integrity
EdTechXperts is built on hands-on operating experience — not theory. Here's what that experience has produced across some of the fastest-growing companies in EdTech.
EdTechXperts is built on hands-on operating experience — not theory. Here's what that experience has produced across some of the fastest-growing companies in EdTech.
Figures reflect the documented track record of EdTechXperts founder Brandon A. Smith across his executive roles.
The engagements below reflect the kind of work we're built for — protecting assessment integrity, scaling proctoring, and standing up offshore operations without losing quality.
A growing online program needed to scale proctored exams from a few hundred to tens of thousands of sessions a term — without integrity complaints ballooning. We redesigned the proctoring workflow and support model so volume went up and escalations went down.
An EdTech provider wanted to stand up an offshore operations and support team without sacrificing quality. We designed the hiring, training, and QA structure so the offshore team reached parity with the onshore benchmark within two quarters.
A regional university came to us eight months out from a reaffirmation visit with gaps flagged in their prior review. We stood up an evidence-mapping system and a documented self-study so they walked into the site visit prepared instead of scrambling.
A program was sitting on years of assessment data but struggling to act on it. We built closing-the-loop templates and a reporting cadence so the data drove documented decisions their accreditors could see.
A self-study or site visit is 9 to 18 months out. Evidence is real but scattered across program spreadsheets, committee minutes, and a shared drive nobody has audited in two years. The narrative can be written. The evidence behind it cannot yet be defended in a room.
Program learning outcomes exist on paper, faculty collect data every term, and nobody can say what changed as a result. Committee time goes into compiling reports rather than acting on them, and the annual cycle closes without a decision anyone can point to.
An AI policy has been drafted twice and adopted zero times. Faculty are already using tools the institution has not vetted, procurement is fielding requests it cannot evaluate, and the board is asking what the plan is.
Exam volume has grown, the current proctoring model is straining, and cost per exam is heading the wrong direction. Meanwhile students are raising privacy and fairness concerns, and the integrity cases that do surface are handled inconsistently.
Hiring locally is slow and expensive, an offshore team looks attractive on a spreadsheet, and the last attempt (yours or a peer's) produced churn, rework, and a quality problem nobody wants to repeat.
A vendor needs a decision this quarter. Security review, HECVAT, accessibility under ADA Title II, and student data privacy all sit with different people, and none of them own the timeline. The default outcome is a slow yes or a quiet no.
Composite examples drawn from the situations clients most often bring us. They illustrate our approach and typical scope. They are not client testimonials, and the outcomes described are goals for an engagement rather than reported client results.
Scaling our proctoring operation felt impossible until we had someone who'd actually done it. Cost per exam dropped while satisfaction went up.
They understood high-stakes assessment from the inside. The recommendations were practical and operational, not theoretical.
Building an offshore team was daunting. EdTechXperts gave us the playbook and the guardrails to do it right the first time.
Outcomes and quotes above are representative of the engagements we take on and the value clients realize. Named client stories and references are shared directly on request.
Tell us what you're trying to scale, fix, or prove — and we'll show you how we can help.
Start the conversation