1 / 15

Transitioning to a Paperless Class Scheduling System: A Case Study from Portland State University

Join Katherine Rousseau, Assistant Director of Scheduling Systems at Portland State University, as she shares insights from the 2007 Sungard Summit on transforming academic scheduling processes. This case study highlights the challenges of traditional paper-based methods and the innovative steps taken to develop a paperless system. By enhancing team communication and implementing electronic processes, PSU successfully improved efficiency, reduced errors, and promoted sustainability. Discover the tools and strategies used and the positive feedback from academic staff.

meg
Télécharger la présentation

Transitioning to a Paperless Class Scheduling System: A Case Study from Portland State University

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Paperless Class Scheduling on a Budget Presenter: Katherine Rousseau Assistant Director of Scheduling Systems Portland State University

  2. Inspiration • Sungard Summit 2007 • Ronald Silco, Systems and Data Specialist, St. John Fisher College

  3. Staffing 2 Full-time Academic Schedulers 55 Primary Departmental Schedulers 50+ Secondary Contacts and Program Coordinators Resources 115 General Pool Classrooms Statistics 27, 279 Headcount ~ 7,000 CRNs offered ~ 4,500 CRNs rolled ~ 4,200 CRNs edited/added prior to registration ~ 3,000 CRNs edited/added after registration begins PSU Academic Scheduling

  4. Historical Process • Term Drafts • Generate legal size report from the Data Warehouse • Print all draft materials on paper • Assemble draft materials • Hand deliver across campus • Departments made hand edits • Paper drafts returned in one drop off location • Repeat process (two-draft cycle) • Course Section Maintenance Forms (CSMs) • Filing System • E-mail Setup

  5. Why Change? • Enhance team communication • Easy access to files • Clear distinction between draft changes and changes submitted after registration begins • Legible drafts • Improved customer service • Realistic process flow given deadlines • Sustainability “I cannot say whether things will get better if we change; what I can say is they must change if they are to get better.” -Georq Christoph Lichtenberq

  6. New Process Goals • Develop a process that would improve our existing process flow until we are ready to implement distributed scheduling • Implement process improvements with minimal IT support • Eliminate the need for a second draft • Develop one communication hub for requests and correspondence • Eliminate the use of paper drafts and paper CSMs • Establish a filing system that is easy to access and maintain • Reduce draft processing error rate due to illegible drafts and duplicate requests • Use staff time efficiently

  7. Process Tools • Joint e-mail account • Scheduling distribution list • Adobe Acrobat licenses • Standard – Departments • Professional – Academic Schedulers • Space on network drive • Paperless drafts • Data Warehouse • Microsoft Excel • Macros • Dual Monitors

  8. Paperless Process Steps • Prepare course data in Banner • Pull course data from the Data Warehouse • Import course data into Microsoft Excel and run formatting/distribution macros • Compile electronic draft materials • Deliver drafts via e-mail • Edits are made by each department and sent back via e-mail • Process drafts electronically using dual monitors • Proof processed drafts using Microsoft Excel • Publish the online Class Schedule • Additional edits/additions/cancellations are submitted via electronic CSMs

  9. Demo

  10. Oops…Learning Opportunities • Varying levels of general computer knowledge • Varying levels of Microsoft Excel experience • Adobe Acrobat licenses • E-mail file size limitations • Resistance to going paperless • Microsoft Excel functional limitations • Communication between departments • Unique ways to use technology • Electronic format can make deadlines & policies confusing

  11. Positive FeedbackDepartmental Schedulers • Paperless drafts & CSMs • Greater ease in making edits • Course additions are added directly to the excel spreadsheet • Can receive and return draft when they are away from the office • Paper CSM forms are not lost in Campus mail • Joint Scheduling e-mail account • Quicker response times • Comfort in knowing that their request will be processed no matter who is on vacation

  12. Positive FeedbackAcademic Schedulers • Paperless drafts & CSMs • Ability to quickly look up filed forms when there is a question or trouble-shooting is required • Benefit of electronic date and time stamp • Ease of accessing various archives • Encourages each department to look at the materials they sent first before questioning a change • No paper cuts or dry hands from filing paper forms • Sustainability • Joint Scheduling e-mail account • Can track the workflow for any pending request • Ability to juggle workload between two people

  13. Plans for the Future • Distributed Scheduling • Campus-wide Scheduling Software • Document Imaging • Automated Workflow

  14. Questions?

  15. Katherine Rousseau rousseauk@pdx.edu 503.725.5526

More Related