ORION/ADAPT
Academic Degree Audit Project Team

1. DEGREE AUDIT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE

1. August 28---Provost will appoint the PeopleSoft Academic Degree Audit Project Team (ADAPT)
2. August 29---Provost will briefly discuss project with the Council of Deans and designate the Council of Deans as the Degree Audit project oversight committee.
3. Sept 5---In a subsequent one-hour meeting during the week of Sept 5, the Provost will discuss project details with the Dean’s Council. Also, each Dean will be ask to accept responsibility for assuring that appropriate administrators, staff, and faculty will complete project activities within their college/school in a timely manner.

1. EXPECTATION

B. ASSUMPTIONS

1. It is assumed that the NEW General Education Program courses and requirements can be finalized and delivered to the Academic Degree Audit Project Team by December 1, 2000.
2. It is assumed that DEGREE PROGRAM course requirements and all other degree requirements for each and every undergraduate degree program of study can be delivered to the Academic Degree Audit Project Team by the respective colleges, schools and departments by December 1, 2000.
3. It is assumed that the Transfer Credit issues will be identified and resolved by January 24, 2001 and the Transfer Credit Module will be in production by April 1, 2001.

1. PURPOSE

The purpose of the Academic Degree Audit Project Team (ADAPT) will be to successfully install the Degree Audit System in PeopleSoft that is officially known as the Academic Advisement Module. This purpose includes developing a PLAN, establishing a detailed timeline, and implementing the plan. Since the PLAN is to be successfully implemented in eleven months and by the expected completion date, it is critical that the Project Team monitor weekly the progress throughout the implementation phase.

2. ACADEMIC DEGREE AUDIT PROJECT TEAM (ADAPT) Membership

Since successful completion requires an integration of academic policies and requirements into the Peoplesoft system capabilities, it is necessary to have a small, but representative Project Team, to lead this action-oriented initiative.

Furthermore, the Project Team will need broad participation throughout the year from many small Work Groups and participation of many individuals in information sessions, especially in the colleges and departments.

The ADAPT membership shall be as follows:

1. Chair -- Dr. Julia Dietrich (A&S), Administrator/Curriculum

2. Co-Chair -- Kathy Otto, Student Services/Registrar

3. Member -- Dr. Ron Mann (Speed), Faculty Representative

4. Member -- Meg Rohmann (A&S), Advising Representative

5. Member – Marla Thomas, Information Technology Representative

Ex-officio(non-voting)---Consultant-------------------------Ms Donna Fontanese

Ex-officio(non-voting)---Provost Representative----------Dr. Dave Howarth

Ex-officio(non-voting)---Student Affairs Representative-Dr. Ronnie Sutton

3. COLLEGE/SCHOOL REPRESENTATIVES

F. ANALYSTS

G. RELATIONSHIP TO THE TRANSFER PROJECT TEAM &

3. Additional Considerations

4. Broad Timeline

• August 14 - Project officially begins

• August 28 - Project Team appointed by the Provost (in consultation with Dr. Dave Howarth).

• August 29 – Project introduced to the Deans and Vice Presidents

• August 30 - Initial Project Team meeting arranged by Dr. Howarth.

• September 5 - Project discussed with the Council of Deans in a special one-hour meeting some time this week. Dr. Dave Howarth will arrange the meeting.

• September 8 - Charge given to Project Team by Provost and Dr Howarth at first meeting that will occur before Sept 8.

• Sept 11- 15 – Kathy Otto, co-chair participates in PeopleSoft training for four days in Maryland in an effort to fully understand the product and its capabilities/limitations.

• October 6 – November 1 Plan developed by ADAPT for participation by Colleges and Departments during the next 11 months. The plan must be presented to the Council of Deans and the Provost for endorsement before November 1..

• October 10 – Kick-off meeting conducted to educate the Project Team and all other potential participants as to the requirements and conditions that must be met for the PeopleSoft Academic Advising Module (Degree Audit System) to function effectively at the University of Louisville. Note: This will include faculty, staff, advisors, and administrators from all sectors of the university community.

• October 11 - PeopleSoft Academic Advisement consultant begins preliminary setup of academic requirements (pre-building).

• October 22 – 26 – Kathy Otto, co-chair, attends the PeopleSoft Annual Conference in California.

• October 24 – 27 – Two functional analysts from Registrar’s Office attend PeoplSoft Academic Advisement Training in California.

• November 1 - First draft of the general education course requirements are due to ADAPT from the Provost (University-wide General Education Committee). Dr. Howarth will assure that the provost receives this information in a timely manner for review.

• November 8, 9 – Comprehensive plan submitted to and approved by the ORION Advisory Committee and approved by the ORION Steering Committee.

• November 15 – First draft of the report due to the ADAPT from the Transfer Credit Project Team before November 15.

• December 1 - All course curriculum changes, additions, and deletions effective fall 2001 are due to the Provost’s Office. Dr. Howarth will assure that the Provost receives this information in a timely manner for review.

• December 1 - Course and degree requirements, including final University General Education course requirements, are due from each college and school to the ADAPT for consideration in Degree Audit rule writing. Reference is to the course and degree requirements for each degree program available within the college or school.

• January 22 – Consultant begins meeting with college/school representatives to present degree audits, provide preliminary training, and begin review and testing phases.

• January 24 – Final report due before January 24 to ADAPT from the Transfer Project Team.

• April 30 – Broad-based functional training begins.

• June 21 – Degree Audit tables moved to production.

• June 30, 2001 – Successful completion of the Degree Audit project.

• July 1 – Academic Advising Module available for use by transfer students admitted for 2001 fall semester.

• Sept 3 – System available for use by continuing students enrolled in the 2001 fall semester, advisors, staff, and faculty (using fall 2001 requirements). Reference is to students with no previous transfer courses.

• Sept 3 – System may be available for continuing students enrolled in fall 2001, but who have previously submitted courses for transfer. However, this group may be delayed until Spring 2002 due to the time required to bring forward their transfer courses into the Peoplesoft System.

Appendix: DEGREE AUDIT ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

Assumptions:

• Degree audits will be developed to reflect complete academic programs and associated degree requirements in effect for the entering class of Fall, 2001.
• Every undergraduate school will participate in the implementation.

Prerequisites to Degree Audit Implementation:

• Decision on how existing transfer work and transfer equivalencies will be accommodated.
• Development of an efficient process for making timely equivalency decisions for individual students with defined roles for the admissions office, academic advising staff and faculty in departments. Timely decisions (1-2 days turnaround) are crucial in the 60 days preceding the first day of classes for each semester and summer term for degree seeking students.
• Establishment of University general education requirements, and updating of degree programs to reflect any changes to degree programs six months prior to expected use.

Keys to a Successful Implementation:

Based on previous experiences with degree audit systems, these are critical steps to a successful implementation.

• Ownership should reside with Academic Affairs.
• A core group of academic leaders should oversee the project.
• Functional staff from the academic units familiar with degree requirements and able to be released from other assignments will need to work with the registrar’s office staff as an implementation team (Academic Degree Audit Project Team – ADAPT.)
• Academic implementation team members must have authority to make decisions or have quick access to the appropriate decision makers when needed. Any decisions that cannot be quickly made need to be escalated immediately to the academic leaders for resolution. Inability to obtain timely decisions will seriously jeopardize the success of the project.
• Additions or changes to curriculum and degree requirements should be approved by December 1 for implementation the following Fall semester. Fall should be the only effective semester for new programs and changes. The deadline will provide sufficient time to modify or create new degree requirements within the degree audit module, and provide sufficient time for curriculum changes to be implemented for the one-year schedule of classes.
• Frequent renaming of subjects causes confusion for students and additional maintenance for the degree audit programs. Guidelines should be established that would ensure that there are valid academic reasons to make these changes that warrant the additional workload.
• To make degree audit a viable on-going product, we need to use the product as designed without modifications. The academic community needs to be willing to make changes to processes, practices, or requirements that would enable the best use of the degree audit system.
• Frequently, correct degree audit results may be attained from multiple rule writing approaches. The approach taken should be the one requiring the least effort to implement and maintain.
• While generic transfer equivalencies, such as a course meets a 300-level humanities requirement, are valid and may work for the degree audit process in some cases, this approach cannot be used as a shortcut to making specific course equivalencies.
• The process for maintaining catalog years for career, school and major requirements needs to be established with roles defined for the admissions office, registrar’s office, and academic units.
• A process must be developed for academic advisors to maintain exceptions to degree requirements.
• There should not be an expectation that the degree audit system will be able to track 100% of the requirements for all degree programs. In those cases, the degree audits should be recognized as an important aid to advising, or the unit should investigate ways to adjust the requirements for a 100% solution. If a unit will only authorize degree audits to be used if they track all of the requirements, we need to realize that many programs may never be part of the degree audit system.
• Students should use the WEB as their source for reviewing degree audits. To mail audits to students on a semester or yearly basis would require additional budget for printing and mailing.

Prepared by:

Kathy Otto, Registrar

Dr. Ronnie Sutton, Assistant Vice President for Student Services