1 / 20

Atlas Status

Atlas Status. Fall 2006 Mark Endsley Oregon University System. In response to SB 342. OREGON. L. A. T. S. A. ( A RTICULATION T RANSFER L INKED A UDIT S YSTEM). ATLAS is a powerful Internet tool. that ….

breck
Download Presentation

Atlas Status

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. Atlas Status Fall 2006 Mark Endsley Oregon University System

  2. In response to SB 342 OREGON L A T S A (ARTICULATION TRANSFER LINKED AUDIT SYSTEM)

  3. ATLAS is a powerful Internet tool that… • allows students to find equivalent courses anywhere in Oregon via the web • shows students the best match between their own course work and degree/major program in Oregon

  4. Where are Linked Degree AuditSystems Used? CAS:18 institutions3 state-wide systems

  5. PSU ATLAS Insert PSU screenshot here

  6. How does it work? Two Components • 1. Campus-based degree audit systems such as DARS(Degree Audit Reporting System) • - or - • CAPP (Curriculum Advising and Program Planning) + • 2. Internet linkage of degree audit systems such as • CAS(Course Applicability System)

  7. Where are we now? • ATLAS requires an automated degree audit system • OUS Degree Audit Systems: • OSU (CAPP) • PSU (DARS) • UO (DARS) • WOU (CAPP) • SOU (CAPP) • OIT (CAPP – working on installing now) • EOU (CAPP – not up and running yet) • Contracts in place with vendors for needed software

  8. CAPP/TA Modules in BANNER: Will they work with ATLAS? • Yes! (but) • Limitations to automation vary depending on campus practices • Automation is possible with careful coordination and some modifications to practices • Limitations can be described on campus ATLAS pages to inform students about non-automated decisions

  9. Implementation in Oregon: 2 phases • Current Phase 1: • OUS schools • 2-3 community colleges • Some funding provided by OUS Chancellor • Who will benefit? • Students transferring among OUS schools • Students transferring from community colleges to OUS schools • OUS campuses will improve internal efficiency and potentially improve transfer recruitment • Community colleges will have access to current course and degree information to support student transfer to OUS

  10. Implementation in Oregon: 2 phases • Future Phase: All community colleges • Funded by legislature (?) • Who will benefit? • Students attempting to complete certification programs or degrees at a community college • Students transferring among community colleges • Students transferring to community colleges

  11. Degree Audit Concerns • Good communication among departments is important to ensure: • Effective coordination of coding articulation and degree audits (especially with CAPP and TA from BANNER) to prevent false CAS reporting • Efficient campus articulation practices, course structures, and course “packaging” to simplify decision trees whenever possible • Prevention of course misidentification by the system which requires manual correction

  12. Without Manual Intervention

  13. With Manual Intervention

  14. What are the consequences? Without intervention, CAPP did not recognize group articulations and counted HST 251 equivalency twice: Community College AOUS School A • ENG 104,105,106 = ENG LDT,LDT,LDT • PSY 201,202 = PSY LDT,LDT (2nd LDT counted in "All Other") • HST 202 = HST 251 • HST 203 = HST 251 With intervention, this student received "group articulation" credit for ENG & PSY as defined in the TA database. HST 251 articulated once (as it should), rather than twice: Community College AOUS School A • ENG 104,105,106 = ENG 104,105,LDT • PSY 201,202 = PSY 201,202 • HST 202 = HST 251 • HST 203 = HST LDT

  15. What’s the solution? • Common coding between articulation and degree audits has to be implemented • Cooperation and commitment from academic departments is needed to simplify decisions • “Best practices” are to be established and shared across campuses over time

  16. Questions for academic administrators to consider: • Are we organizing review of articulation/equivalency (along with prerequisite checking) for accuracy? • Have we prioritized our feeder school articulations? • Have we prioritized our degree audit automation? • Are we automating Transfer Articulation and Degree Audit processes in ways that best serve students? • Are academic departments, admissions, and registrars working as a team to best serve students? • Are we supporting this effort appropriately (staff and funds)?

  17. What are the costs? • One-time staff-related project costs are primarily associated with initial automation of Transfer Articulation and Degree Audit processes • One-time technology-related costs are defrayed by the Chancellor, as long as campus options are exercised by July 2007 • Staff-related recurring costs are: • primarily associated with maintaining Transfer Articulation and Degree Audit Automation • partially offset by savings in labor associated with accomplishing these manually • Technology-related recurring charges are: • based on headcount • relatively small when compared to staff-related recurring costs

  18. Implications – Campus Practices and Needs As increasingly careful consumers, students may: • consider a university based in part on the helpfulness of its ATLAS information about the availability of programs and courses • “shop around” using ATLAS to ensure the best “offer” for transfer between campuses • Maintaining accuracy of the system is clearly important • Course equivalencies should be logical and consistent • Staff should use ATLAS with students and provide feedback when limitations or discrepancies are uncovered

  19. Conclusion • Campuses need to get faculty buy-in to support cooperation, effective decision making, ATLAS promotion, and system use • Increased cooperation among academic departments and admissions/registrar must be sustained over time • The major work of ATLAS is in automating transfer articulation and degree audits. This has benefits beyond ATLAS: • streamlining course equivalency determinations • improving efficiency of degree audits • Changes in practices will occur with or without planning; thoughtful collaboration that anticipates change will help avoid unintended consequences. • Partial implementation of ATLAS with priority, high-volume programs is still a success in Phase I.

  20. atlas.ous.edu

More Related