OK computers: behind the scenes at the Registrar

By Ewan MacDougall

"The difference between last year and this year is like night and day," Yale College Registrar Barry S. Kane said, referring to the workings of his office. While things have been going smoothly for the first weeks of this term, the Yale College Registrar's Office certainly was not the most loved branch of the Administration last year. Student complaints were dramatized in a forged letter of resignation on behalf of Kane and sarcastic columns such as "In Praise of Barry Kane" in the Yale Daily News.

DAVID GEST/YH The Registrar's office and Director of ITS Daniel Updegrove (below) have struggled with implementing new software at Yale over the past year.

But there were seemingly legitimate complaints behind the personal attacks. Last fall's blue book was rife with errors, and the logistics of classroom assignments were botched enough to raise concerns—and the hairs on many flustered professors' necks. Equally troubling were the delays students faced after fall semester during the rush for transcript releases. All in all, the people at the registrar's office started the year with more eyes focused on them than they would have liked, producing constant pressure to prevent mistakes this time around.

Not quite a banner year

The problems the registrar faced last year stemmed in part from the implementation of new digitized organizing systems, including the SCT Banner computer database, which was designed to unify the various departments and schools of the University. Before the Banner system, "several schools and colleges of the University had disparate administrative systems, so that none was tied to the other or capable of handling Y2K," said Ernst Huff, associate director of Student Financial and Administrative Services. Now, the new software has reduced data redundancy among departments such as admissions, financial aid, academic records, billing, and registration. A student's full records are also easily accessible to anyone in the Administration who needs them. For all its long-term benefits, however, the Banner system has caused a number of short-term problems.

"The new system was a tad more challenging and not as user friendly or as easy [as the previous system]," Kane said. The different requirements and standards for transcripts, records, and awarding credit in each of the different schools made the task especially challenging.

In addition to the Banner system problems, there were issues with the staff in the Registrar's office. "Some self-selecting things are predictable—some staff can't cope and aren't equipped to deal with an implementation at such a large level," Kane said. Difficulties also arose with registration and room assignments. After the Spring 1999 semester, the departure of seasoned Associate Registrar Mark Landryou left a gap that proved difficult to fill. "Scheduling is an art form in the fundamental knowledge of the way things have been that is needed to make it work," Kane explained, a bit cryptically. The arrival of a new deputy registrar, Judith Calvert, required an adjustment period as well.

There was more, though. Compounding existing problems at the beginning of the Fall 1999 term was the office's attempt to computerize scheduling, using Universal Algorithms' software products, Schedule 25 and Resource 25. "The attempt to automate how courses get assigned to instructional space proceeded on too hasty a schedule," Kane said. "And, in a school as complex as Yale, and with a project this difficult, there will be problems. It's the nature of the beast."

Kane believes that last year served as a transitional period from which the office is emerging with the worst behind them. "The process really made us think intentionally about what's important and what's not. It made us think about where we could make changes to meet the common good," he said.

Non-eXposure

While the Registrar struggled with it new software and staff, other departments in the Yale administration were working through their own problems with a plan called Project X.

COURTESY DANIEL UPDEGROVE

Project X, true to its name, is remarkably mysterious. Efforts by the Herald to find out information about the multi-billion dollar project were blocked by evasive responses, long strings of referrals, and, more commonly, changes in a significant portions of the staff involved with Project X's implementation.

What is known is that it started in 1995 as an overhaul of other computer systems that needed streamlining. As Daniel Updegrove, director of Information Techonology Services, explained, the project's purpose was to restructure several university departments, including Purchasing, Accounts Payable, Human Resources, and Payroll, all of which deal with employees rather than students.

Just as in the Banner implementation, it was soon clear that Project X was a larger task than had been anticipated. "We devoted substantial resources to analyzing Yale's business practices and modifying them where appropriate: understanding, customizing, and testing software; upgrading hardware on hundreds of desktops as well as in the data center; creating a new, distributed support organization; and training user across the campus," Updegrove said.

The project ultimately required three years instead of two—and, because much of the work required assistance from consultants, "the costs were indeed higher than anticipated," Updegrove added. How much higher, however, is open to speculation. Gary Sax, budget director of Project X, declined to comment on the specifics of the program's financial status.

Settling into the background

In comparison, the numbers on the Banner program are much more concrete—to be exact, the project has run up a $4.5 million tab to date. The figure is noteworthy because, according to Huff, "there were no cost overruns. We came in on budget and actually did more than we were supposed to with the money allotted."

Despite highly publicized glitches, the Registrar already did much last year to improve. "One lesson we learned is not to bite off more than you can handle," Kane said. After the fall debacle, the scheduling software was laid aside, and scheduling proceeded manually, allowing Calvert to get accustomed and trained. The software is still being considered, but thorough testing and reporting will take place before another attempt is ventured.

As for the transcript problems, Kane said, "the severity of the [January transcript] situation enabled us to confront more directly the staffing problems." A new staff was brought in and fully trained by June, another crunch time for transcripts, "and that period came and went without a hiccup," Kane observed.

Moreover, the majority of the registrar's staff is new this year, and they are unencumbered by habits from the old systems. They also have months of training behind them. And, with the basic foundations fully in place, ways of making faculty and student lives better are already being considered. Among the possibilities is web registration for fall 2001 classes. Other benefits include the new on-line course search engine.

Kane said that after a year of negative exposure, he hopes his office will return to facilitating the routine of college life from behind the scenes. "The registrar's office should be taken for granted. We are looking forward to an uneventful, boring year, a return to the normal state of perfection."

Back to News...