Graduate Admissions Project

1. Graduate Admissions Project December 9th, 2009

2. Goals of the project • To assess the current application and evaluation process for Graduate Admissions, focusing on: • the student experience • availability of technologies. • improving the information available to the decision makers As a result of our analysis recommend and implement process changes in accordance with and “best practices”. • To move the current “paper-based” Graduate Admissions Process to a model where information is collected and stored electronically, allowing access from various points in the process workflow.

3. Background • McGill receives approximately 10,000 applications to Graduate Programseach year. Approximately 445 of these applications were made to units at Mac Campus for Fall 2009. • The methods of evaluation are varied; the commonality among the processes is that they are highly “paper driven”. • Documents required in support of the application are submitted primarily in paper format. • Of the 10,000 applicants to Graduate Programs, McGill will extend offers to approximately 3,500. Approximately 200 students were extended offers from units at Mac Campus for Fall 2009. • About 60% of the accepted students will register. • In a recent survey of those who did not register, 30% cited the delay in receiving the offer as the reason • Many applicants have accepted offers from other institutions by the time they receive notification of their acceptance to McGill.

4. Strategic Alignment • The need to recruit and enrol more (particularly research-focused) Graduate studentshas been identified as a priority for the University in the Provost’s White Paper. • This project also clearly aligns with the strategic direction of the CIO. In the CIO’s strategic plan we see direction taken from the Strengths and Aspirations document of 2006 where McGill commits to optimize its Information Systems and Technology resources.

5. Purpose • The primary purpose of the project is to streamline the application process to better serve applicants, recruiting units and other stakeholders.

6. Possible Benefits for Recruitment Units • Reduction in the number of CGPA calculations done by units. • Reduction of paper usage. • Faster processing time between application and offer of admission. • Increased accessibility of applicant file. • Reduction of time needed to prepare/create an applicant file (also for students) • More timely admissions information for GPDs for recruitment and funding goals • Pre-screening of applicants.

7. How can we Better Serve the Applicant? • Response time for student receiving decisions: • In Recruiting Units • CGPA Calculations • Electronic Repository • Electronic Work Flow • In GPS • CGPA Calculations • Re-engineered process • Electronic Work Flow 3) During the Application Process • Easier to Assemble and Prepare Supporting Documents

8. Project Structure Executive Sponsors (6 members) Sylvia Franke, CIO Dr. Martin Kreiswirth, Dean, GS (Sponsor) Kathleen Massey, Registrar Andrew Kirk, Associate Dean, Eng. Larry Tansey, Director, PMO Joan Soares, Project Manager, PMO Steering Committee Andrea Emrick, GPS Larry Verkade, Manager, Admissions, GPS Mark Coates Engineering Benjamin Forest, Geography Josephine Nalbantoglu, Neuro-Science Fiona Tam, CCS Evelina Balut, ISR Joan Soares, Project Manager Mark Quinsey, GPS Project Team (9 members) Mark Quinsey, GPS (FT on Project) Vicki Cook ISR Danny Romano CCS Andrew Lutzuk, Analyst(FT on project) Laura Lavergne, Enrolment Services Samantha Ryan, Education Elaine Garnham, Economics Joan Soares (PM) Margaret Page (GPS Communications) Technical Team Vicki Cook, ISR Danny Romano, CCS Shelly Feran, Enterprise Architect InfoSec Rep DBA Rep NCS Rep ICS Rep Consultation/ Feedback Groups Deans GPS Advisory Committee Grad Studies Council Strategic Enrollment Advisory Group Associate Deans PGSS Prospective Students Selected group of Graduate Program Directors (GDPs) 10-12 members Selected group of Graduate Program Coordinators (GPCs) 10 – 12 members We may mix these up

9. Timeline (rough estimate) • October 9, 2009 (Charter Approval) • November 1, 2009 Co-location of Project Team • November 11 & 24: Preliminary meetings (Project Team and Steering Committee) • December 4 (Project Launch) • March 2010 (Process Analysis Complete) • April 2010 (Analysis of Technologies Complete) • MILESTONE (Selection of technology solutions) • June-July 2010 (Implementation Planning) • July-August 2010 Implementation Begins • “GO LIVE” to be determined based on implementation schedule

10. Process Overview CGPA Calculation Completed CGPA Calculation Completed 10,271 Application rec’d for Sept Fall admittance 3547 Applicants Recommended to GPS 3461 Applicants Extended Offers Department completes Evaluation GPS completes Evaluation Average Time from Application to Offer = 84 days

11. Detailed View of Admissions Process Applicant fills out online application on Minerva Applicant sends supporting documents to department Department reviews applicants Recommended? Refusal Letter Sent Missing documents received File reviewed for completeness by AO Paper applicant file sent by department to GPS Graduate Recommendation Form (GRF) completed by department on Banner Contact department for missing documents File Complete? File reviewed by AO for admissions requirements Justification Provided? Meets requirements? Student admitted; GRF and Banner updated; Admissions letter and package sent File given to GPS Admission Committee for final decision File approved by Admissions Committee? Student is refused

12. Next Steps (Phase I) • Completion of Information Sessions • Meetings with recruitment units • Mapping sessions • Data gathering • Data analysis • Selection of technical solution/design

13. Questions?