HOME | CONTACT | WRITE TO THE EDITOR | WORK AT C-VILLE
cville.acac.com
 
Issue #21.38 :: 09/22/2009 - 09/28/2009
New student course enrollment software draws criticism

UVA faculty calls it an inconvenience, a disaster

BY JOEY PICKERT

Some UVA faculty members are mad over the implementation of the Student Information System (SIS), a new course enrollment and data management system that many feel is convoluted and attempts to force a corporate framework onto the academy.

“It may very well be an excellent system in other contexts,” says Allan Megill, a UVA history professor. “But it’s very clear that no thought has been given to how this might be adapted to the educational goals of the faculty of Arts and Sciences.”

Designed by PeopleSoft, SIS was approved by UVA for implementation in 1999 as part of its Integrated System Project, on a budget of $58.9 million. Originally a corporate resource management system, SIS classifies students as “employees” and is more difficult to navigate than its predecessor, ISIS Online. Since SIS went live for student enrollment this semester, faculty members in various departments have catalogued numerous bugs in the system.

“I don’t think you can overstate the amount of dismay and inconvenience this is causing faculty as it stands,” says one professor, speaking anonymously. “It may get better. But the system we have now is a disaster.”

In principle, SIS allows students to enroll in classes, set up meetings with their advisors and access financial information and grade reports. For faculty, it allows them to access the class roster, create online waitlists and control enrollment in their courses.

But all of these are easier said than done. With SIS, according to UVA Physics Professor Lou Bloomfield, “to find classes now, you have to work your way in and out of many pages on SIS. You can’t use the Back button, you can’t bookmark pages, and Google can’t index it. It’s so hard to browse for courses on SIS that you almost have to know that a class exists in order to find it,” he said in an e-mail.

UVA Computer Science Professor Mark Sherriff says that “whenever a new system of this magnitude is launched at a large institution, there are bound to be issues.” While Sherriff also has reservations about the system, he says that large software transitions rarely go smoothly. “[The] greatest cost of software development is the maintenance of the system afterwards—almost 67 percent of the overall total cost,” he said in an e-mail. “That’s because even when systems are ‘done’ and the 1.0 version has been shipped, there’s always improvements that need to be done to truly meet the needs of the customers.” Sherriff says he is “confident that the system will improve over the next few semesters.”

Yet other universities have noted problems in their implementations of PeopleSoft products, and in some cases, litigation has resulted. Cleveland State University adopted the PeopleSoft program suite in 1997 to track student records. Seven years later, they sued the company for $510 million, citing breach of contract, fraud, negligent misrepresentation and four other counts, and won a $4.25 million settlement.

Susan Barr, director of UVA’s Student System Project (SSP), acknowledges that there have been issues with SIS handling of course enrollment, but says that the majority of undergraduates have been able to register for classes without incident. According to Barr, department faculty representatives are currently meeting with administrators to discuss SIS, and others who encounter issues can request changes through the SSP website. “My hope is that people will exercise that process,” says Barr. “We’ve tried to be very responsive throughout the whole implementation.” Aspects of SIS have been rolled out in phases since March 2008, although this is the first semester the software has been used broadly for enrollment purposes, as a replacement for ISIS.

“It is a change,” Barr says.

So far, however, faculty members consider it an inconvenience. Caroline Flournoy, a seventh-year Ph.D. student in biology, says that the system’s near-constant cycle of defects and repairs has interfered with her work as a teaching assistant. “Even though according to the Registrar, I am an instructor of record for the classes that I teach, SIS doesn’t recognize that I am,” says Flournoy.

“For a while I didn’t have access to the class roster, and I cannot create an official class website,” she says.

Flournoy still cannot see her students’ e-mail addresses, and links to images of their faces are broken.

“It has really been an impediment to my efficacy as an instructor,” Flournoy says.

C-VILLE welcomes news tips from readers. Send them to news@c-ville.com.

 
Comments
Your reporting misses the true story here. Nearly $60m were spent for software that is clearly a barely-repackaged system that PeopleSoft had on the shelf. Considers these two facts: (1) students are labeled "employees" in the software; and (2) the University had to change from a longstanding 3-digit classification of courses (eg.: Psychology 101) to a 4-digit one (eg.: Psychology 1010) in order to fit the University's information to the software. Given these and many other facts like these, one can only wonder whether ANYTHING was done to adapt this software to UVa's needs. This software is not a mere "inconvenience," as your article suggests, but a negligent waste of a tremendous amount of money that borders on fraud.
John NemecSeptember 23rd, 2009 09:51pm
Unfortunately this type of activity is par for the course in the world of enterprise software. Although the staggering cost of the software rivals the most egregious examples I am aware of. Prof. Sherriff's blasé remarks are surprising. While his assertion that large software transitions rarely go smoothly is correct, the implication that such situations are a fait-a-compli reveals part of the problem. Hopefully the lesson our UVA computer science students are learning is not that aggressive sales of sub-par software will make up for a lack of technical acumen. Note also Prof. Sherriff's statement regarding maintenance being 67% of software's overall cost. This means that maintenance of the software is twice as costly as the original implementation so what we are really looking at here is potentially a $180m fiasco! Unfortunately, hacked up systems like the one installed by Peoplesoft have even greater ongoing maintenance costs. What we typically observe is that organizations having shelled out so much money upfront will continue to throw good money after bad - a cash cow for Peoplesoft. Eventually however, after flushing millions down the drain, the software will end up being replaced once again, most likely in conjunction with the replacement of IT purchasing decision makers at the buying organization. UVA should force the issue and make efforts to get it's money back. It should bite the bullet and begin the search for more appropriate (better) software, probably reverting to the old software in the meantime.
Terry ThorsenOctober 9th, 2009 12:34pm
Have your say
*
*
*
Your comment will be displayed after it has been reviewed by our editors. Please refer to our comments policy if you have any questions, or email editor@c-ville.com.
Comments (2)

C-VILLE site search by Charlottesville's Best News and Entertainment
www.facebook.com/pages/Charlottesville-VA/jean-theory/1274017519
c-ville.com/index.php?cat=1990602080504511
doubletree1.hilton.com
capitolsheds.com
www.nestrealtygroup.com/
www.eagleslandingva.com
jeffersontheater.com
Circulation VerifiedCopyright © 2010, Portico Publications
Copyright Info | Portico Corporate
Powered by PLANet w3 CMS Content Management System
PLANet Systems Group 2010