Timetabling Service needs to consolidate the existing service via small enhancements. At the time of planning the priority would be
What would happen if the project did not take place?
Additional Information:
2015/16, Duration (No. of Years work will span): 1 year
1. Unaligned system versions (RDB): at the moment, manual reports are produced every day by the TTU team, they are then posted on the WIKI and time is spent chasing the schools secretaries. This is estimated at 1.5h/day for the 2 semesters (22 weeks). Total: 24 days/year for the TTU team. Going forward, the reports would be run on BI, for schools to access directly. This would enable to improve class lists which are becoming compliant.
2. Compromised student and end-user experience through not keeping pace with developments of:
· Learn:
The TTU team currently handles double keying of data in Timetable and Learn, for the following tasks. At the start of semester 1, the cost is estimated at 6 to 10 days for the TTU team just to support the LLC School, which has many combined UP/PG courses. The risk of not doing it would stop more schools to join Learn. This is not sustainable and affects the reputation of the software.
The tasks requiring double keying in Learn are:
- Deletion of students when they leave a group. There is also a risk to delete all student’s work (essays, group works) held in Learn.
- moving students between groups & students joining new groups. Not doing it would mean the student is in an incorrect group. There is also often up to one day delay with the feed update from TT to Learn, unless someone in Learn manually triggers the feed.
- change name of groups’ activities. This is currently being done by the TTU team in both TT and Learn to ensure consistency.
· Web Room Booking.
The upgrade would bring expected new features (not known at this stage), and better stability to expected increased usage. Usage in 13/14: 45,000 room bookings made from 15,000 users (staff and students), expected to be higher this year
There is a known increased load with risk of failure during exam periods (December and May), when students rely heavily on WRB to book rooms. The risk of failure is increased during out of hours/ week-end when there is fewer support.
-Key dates- flexibility in delivering but dependencies on compliance projects (Roll Forward and Upgrade)
Students and staff: admin and academic
· Overall benefit of small enhancements: consolidation/tuning of the Timetabling Service
· RDB: keep the version aligned; saving of 24d / year per year after implementation, i.e. 72d over 3 years
· Learn: schools remained engaged with Timetabling feed, more schools may start using the Timetable feed in Learn; saving of 6-10d for LLC, expected to be additional saving as additional Schools join, i.e. 24d+ over 3 years
· WRB: improved functionality – including concurrent user cap to enhance stability
Overall the saving is 100d over 3 years
Fit with University Strategy:
For WRB: enables to keep us in line with the supplier’s development and new features
Learn: will eliminate keying, improvement to service within schools
RDB: better reporting, will support operations, improve class lists which are becoming compliant
Programme Priority: 2
Overall Priority: 3
Programme Scoring:
1.Alignment with University Strategic Plan/Business Objectives: 6
2.Risk of not doing the project: 4
3.Benefits relative to cost: 4
4.Time to deliver tangible benefit: 3
TOTAL SCORE: 17