CampusHub is configured differently depending on who owns the daily work: registrars need registration and certificate workflows, faculty need marks entry and workload, and students need registration, attendance against the requirement, and results. The underlying record is the same.
Most higher-education software is bought by a registrar and used by faculty, which is why so much of it is resented. The three pages below describe what each desk actually opens it for.
Different questions, same data. Getting the first screen wrong is how adoption fails.
| Desk | Opens it to answer | Where it goes wrong elsewhere |
|---|---|---|
| Registrar | Who has not registered, which files are incomplete, what is awaiting signature | A dashboard built for reporting rather than for the day’s queue |
| Faculty | Which marks are due, what my workload is, who is short of attendance | Marks entry that does not match the scheme that will print |
| Student | What can I register for, am I short of attendance, what did I score | Results released informally by departments before the exam cell publishes |
Phrased the way they arrive, answered so each one stands on its own.
No, unless granted. Access is role-based and scoped, so a faculty member sees the courses they teach and the students registered in them, not the whole institution.
Yes, inside credit limits and section capacity, which is what stops the registrar mediating every elective change. Colleges that prefer central registration can do that instead, but lose the capacity enforcement.
Each one answers a single question outright, then shows the working.
Checked by the Implementations desk on 1 September 2026. Corrections go in the page, dated, rather than quietly.
Pricing is on the page, in the open, with the counting rule written next to it. Nobody has to book a call to find out what it costs.
See pricingForty minutes with an implementation engineer — your classes, your fee heads, your grading scheme, entered as we go. No slides, no sample school.