1. 1 SROC Conference JISC Timetabling Study - Presentation of findings 7 th April 2009 Zeb Nash

2. 2 Background JISC sponsored study Objectives: –Summarise the processes –Identify supporting technology use –Identify major shared challenges –Consider foundations for success –Identify links between curriculum development and timetabling

3. 3 Consultation Consultative interviews with nominees from sector bodies: –ARC –AOC –AUA –AUDE –SROC Interviews with system suppliers: –Scientia –CELCAT 8 regional workshops: –Across UK –59 institutions – 95 individuals

4. 4 Drivers Student experience –‘student focus’ – changing demographic –recruitment and retention Efficiency Complexity of the curriculum Historical culture Locus of control – strategic ownership Physical layout Use of estate for income generation

5. 5 Approaches 3 main activities: –Requirements identification –Scheduling –Location allocation Can be managed centrally / distributed 4 model approaches

6. 6 Approach (2)

7. 7 Drivers - Approaches Centralised –Space used for multiple subjects –Needs managed through more formal process / working relationships –Efficiency may be significant –Shared modules Distributed –Departmental buildings – ‘local ownership’ –Needs managed through local knowledge – closeness –Variation

8. 8 Links with other processes

9. 9 Use of technology Almost all represented institutions using a timetabling information system Available functionality is rich and extensive: –Collation of information –Modelling curriculum structure –Allocation of students to groups –Interface to other information systems –Construction of the timetable Constraint identification Auto-scheduling –Publication – paper / online –Management information Dependent on extensive accurate information Specific potential developments

10. 10 Main challenges Policy –Conflicting priorities result in challenges to quality Process –Heavily dependent on information produced by other processes – subject to change –Surplus location requests Technology –May be challenging to implement all functionality People –Achieving change

11. 11 Building blocks of successful practice Not necessarily linked to central / distributed model Strong policy –Timetabling priorities –Recognition of timetabling links to other processes Process coordination –Where possible, information availability is coordinated Appropriate use of technology –Best use of existing resources; need information – links with MIS People related –Senior ‘champion’ –Cross sector forum

12. 12 Curriculum Development Process –Suggested that few institutions fully manage impact of changes –Use of timetabling MI / staff expertise could be developed Design –Student commitments increasingly complex –Advance publication –Balance – week and day – start / end times –Distance learning is truly flexible...

13. 13 In addition the report... Has much more detail on everything covered, plus Process model Examples of variation High level ‘to be’ process scenarios

14. 14 Thank you

15. 15