CHAPTER 1 PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND INTRODUCTION An organization has plenty of opportunities to use technology to achieve a competitive edge over its competitors. Information technology can give a company ready access to improve product and service quality, reduce costs, increase productivity, aid communication between employees, and even improve company morale. New Information Technology and its innovations are being discovered and implemented every day. We know that money invested in Information Technology responds to competitions and to business problems that yields tremendous returns, often 50% or more. Not only are computers and information technology changing the way we do things. They are changing the functions and purposes of technology-based products and services. The obvious question is, “If information technology is so clear in establishing a competitive
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
CHAPTER 1
PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND
INTRODUCTION
An organization has plenty of opportunities to use technology to achieve a
competitive edge over its competitors. Information technology can give a
company ready access to improve product and service quality, reduce costs,
increase productivity, aid communication between employees, and even improve
company morale.
New Information Technology and its innovations are being discovered and
implemented every day. We know that money invested in Information
Technology responds to competitions and to business problems that yields
tremendous returns, often 50% or more.
Not only are computers and information technology changing the way we
do things. They are changing the functions and purposes of technology-based
products and services. The obvious question is, “If information technology is so
clear in establishing a competitive advantage, why isn’t everybody doing it?”1
There are three primary reasons. First, Information Technology solutions often
are expensive and time consuming. Second, there is usually an element of risk in
the implementation of information technology. Third, the inevitable
implementation of information technology means change.
1Larry Long & Nancy Long. Computers Information Technology in Perspective 11th and International Edition. Copyright 2004The economic environment and intense competition have focused attention on the
computer and information technology resources.
Every day, most of us are directly or indirectly affected by several
information systems. For institution like St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan,
during a typical day, you will probably interact with several information systems,
perhaps with the college online registration system.
St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan is one of the pioneer schools in Region
III in Bulacan, that particularly uses Information Technology in its school
operation. The College Registrar office in particular uses several information
systems such as enrollment system, grading system and transcript of record
system. Although the systems are quite old they are still functional as of the
moment, but the end users are facing several problems.
BACKGROUND OF THE STUDY
“From time to time, organizations need to change their information
systems. The reasons may be the following: (1.) Marketing opportunities, (2.)
Changes in government regulations, (3.) Introduction of new technology, and
(4.) Merger with another company, or other changes”.2
St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan is no exception on this changes.
Although it has an existing system for the college Registrar office, several
complaints have been raised by students against the slow processing of their
2 William, Sawyer, Hutchinson. Using Information Technology. Irwin Mcrow-Hill 2nd. 2000papers. Upon hearing these complaints the researcher as Information Technology
Education Head, decided to make a study in assessing the effectively of the
services being rendered by the Registrar office to its clientele, particularly the
students. During the preliminary investigations, the researcher found the
following problems: On the part of enrollment system, there are redundancies of
fields on the assessment form such as Handbook fee has been printed twice. It
seen in the other fees and miscellaneous fees. In addition, the Library card fee is
not needed since the college library uses the student’s I.D. as their Library Card
which contains bar code. Incorrect computation of number of units, laboratory
fees, miscellaneous fees, and the tuition fees as well. Only one transaction can be
accommodated by the system during enrollment period. On the part of the
grading system, security is the problem, which incidentally was discovered by one
of the on-the-job-trainees in the Registrar office when the OJT student tried to
display his grade. It was the OJT student who called the attention of the Registrar
that security of the system needs improvement. Aside from this the course
description (course title) is not printed on the grading sheet. On the part of the
Transcript of Record system, the program does not generate the intended output.
Due to the different version of FoxPro programming language, Enrollment system
and Transcript of Record system relational database is not working as intended by
the programmer. The enrollment system was written with FoxPro for DOS while
the latter done in Visual Foxpro. Aside from it other information is missing in the
TOR such as admission status, S.O. number and date issued, grading system
description, credit notes, remarks, and registrar certification portion. Because of
this the Registrar decided to adopt MS-Word by manually typing all grades,
subjects, and semester enrolled by the students which takes longer time to finish a
Transcript of Record. Finally, Grade Evaluation system is done manually using
course curriculum form. Since it is manual, chances are longer time is needed to
finish evaluating one student.
In addition, during the Preliminary investigation the researcher found out
that system’s documentation is missing. Every time the system encountered
problems, the Registrar office must wait for the availability of the programmer.
“When the Registrar asked the administrator about the documentation of the
systems, it has no documentation at all. System documentation is not included in
the contract between the administrator and the programmer.”3
In the assessment done with the researcher using questionnaires, the
respondents (the users and the administrations) confirm the initial findings of the
researcher through unstructured interviewed.
The researcher would like to develop an integrated system for the
Registrar office that comprises the Enrollment, Grading System, Grade
Evaluation, and Transcript of Record Systems.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
This study is to assess the effectivity of the existing Registrar’s
Information Systems of St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan that will be used as
input in the development of the enhanced information systems of College
Registrar office. The Researcher’s desire is to enhance all information systems of
the Registrar office and integrate this into one system. The process will start with
the assessment of the current information systems of Registrar office thru
preliminary investigation. The researcher made unstructured interview and
thorough investigation by searching the history of the existing system, looking for
the past study regarding this system and collated the findings. This findings will
be verified thru a survey questionnaires with the direct users of the system, the
Users and Administrators of St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan. From this, the
researcher will identify all the requirements for the proposed information system
that will be used to develop a design the will serve as a prototype model that will
try to solve the findings of the researcher during the investigation. This model
works best in scenarios where not all of the project requirements are known in
detail ahead of trial-and-error process that takes place between the developers and
the users time4. The prototype model will return the design & development stage
repeatedly until the prototype model achieve its goal, a working system with the
good output.
The Testing/Evaluation is the last stage of this study, where the group of
respondents were asked about the operations of Registrar Information Systems.
These groups are the “users” referring to the students, the “Administrators”
referring to the faculty, non-teaching staff and middle administrators, and finally
the “I.T. Experts” referring to the Information Technology people such as
programmers, and I,T. professors and instructors.
4Lantz, Kenneth. The Prototyping Methodology. [http://www. manageknowldege.com/prototype.html]. March 2005
The system will be tested on the effectiveness of the information systems using
the following indicators: accuracy, maintainability, users friendliness and
security.
Conceptual ParadigmSTATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of :
a. Group Category
Existing System
Requirement
Needs Assessment
Prototype
Development
Test/Evaluation
Design
b. Years of Stay at SMCM
2. What is the status of the existing Registrar Information Systems in terms
of : a. Enrolment System
a.1 Assessment and Payment
b. Report Card Generation
c. Transcript of Records System
d. Grade Evaluation System
3. What is the status of the Proposed Registrar Information Systems in terms
of : a. Enrolment System
a.1 Assessment and Payment
b. Report Card Generation
c. Transcript of Records System
d. Grade Evaluation System
4. How effective is the Developed Enhanced Registrar Information Systems
in terms of: a. Accuracy
b. Maintainability
c. User Friendliness
d. Security
5. Is there any significant difference in the assessment Enhanced Registrar
Information Systems of the respondents as to the level of effectiveness
when grouped according to their profile?
SCOPE AND DELIMITATION OF THE STUDY
This study will cover only the college department of St. Mary’s College of
Meycauayan. This study focuses on assessing the existing College Registrar’s
Information Systems and it gives emphasis on the major areas of the Registrar
Information Systems such as Enrollment Systems, Report Card Generation,
Transcript of Record, and Grade Evaluation Systems that will lead to the
development of the enhanced Information System. On-line Enrollment System is
not covered in this study.
The proposed enhanced system offers a better version of the existing
system where identified problem will be solved The Enrollment system for
instance, resolved the wrong computation on the tuition fees and other fees during
assessment. The enhanced system also offers a full automation for Transcript of
Record and Grade Evaluation. In addition, the college faculty will now encode
the grades of their respective classes and will be verified by the Registrar and
hers staff. Additional feature on Report Card Generation has been added such
computation of Grade Point Average per grading period.
The target respondents for this study are the Users, the Administrators,
and the I.T. Experts.
SIGNIFICANCE OF THE STUDY
This study is beneficial on the part of the direct recipient, organization,
and the researcher itself.
Direct Recipient
This study will benefit the direct recipient of the system such as the
Registrar, Assistant Registrar and Registrar Clerk, students, faculty, non-teaching
personnel, Administration, parents, and St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan
itself. Likewise, it is expected to provide more accurate, efficient, and timely
information, lessen paper works, helps to improve the present information
systems of the Registrar office, eases record management of students’ records,
lessen the work of the staff, and provide security of files. This research will try to
put together the advantages and benefits of the proposed information systems for
SMCM College Registrar office.
Organization
This study will also benefit SMCM as an organization, for the attainment
of the vision, mission, quality objectives, quality policy and goals of the College
Department in providing quality educational services to its clientele. The study
also generates awareness of the need to assess and improve the student services of
the Registrar’s Office. Likewise it is an added service that may attract
prospective students. A service that will boost the school information technology
capability and will attract future students because of the convenience it will bring
to them when enrolling at SMCM.
Researcher
This study will also benefit the researcher in such a way of being aware of
all the services offered by Office of College Registrar. It will also open an
opportunity of adopting the result of the study by the administration.
This study will also serve as a future reading material by the next
researcher who will conduct related study on Information Systems for the
Registrar Office in the near future.
DEFINITION OF TERMS
Accuracy: The measure of the freedom from errors achieved by a system. It
ensure that the system processes only data values that conform to specified
tolerance.
Computer Literate: a person who knows how to operate the computer.
Effectiveness: a system is effective when it is accurate, maintain, user friendly,
and offer security of information.
Design: A system analysis process in which new or revised system are generated.
Development: A system development process in which a system is actually
being built.
Grade Evaluation Systems: It refers to the grades evaluation of the students.
Maintainability: Software must evolve to meet changing needs.
Needs Assessment : A research study to measure the effectivity of the current
systems to justified the recommendation whether to maintain and replace the
system with new one.
Prototype: A mockup or developmental model of a system for test purposes.
Report Card Management System: It refers to the printing of report card of the
student every grading period.
Record Management: One of the major component of Enhanced Registrar
Information Systems that comprises the following subsystems: Report Card
Generation, Transcript of Records, and Grade Evaluation Systems.
Security: Software must be secure from viruses and computer malfunctions.
Transcript of Records System: It refers to the printing of transcript of records
requested by the students and the alumni.
User Friendliness: System must be easy to use and easy to follow the procedures
or instructions.
CHAPTER 2REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE & STUDIES
This chapter aims to provide literature and studies related to the
researcher’s study. Numerous books, magazines, thesis, dissertation and even
world wide web. The researcher tries to find out the relevant issues and
information necessary for the current study.
A. RELATED LITERATURE
Local Literature
The researcher was inspired at the article written by Tumlos regarding
E*Wizard system used by the Trace Computer College in their Enrollment
System. Ms. Sherin Eugion, TRACE’s Marketing and Quality Control Manager
says, “E*Wizard is a comprehensive product which covers all aspects of
enrollment. It will organize and secure all student records. Students will be
assured that all relevant information about them will not be prone to tampering or
any loss since these will be monitored by authorized people in the administration.
The school can also generate these records with much ease, should a student
request for them.”5 Likewise, the researcher of this study would also like to
develop a system the will organize and secure all records SMCM clientele, the
students.
5Tumlos, Dee (2002) Trace College: Living its Advocacy Through The Implementation of An Automated Enrollment System Article [online available: http://sqlwizard.com/main14.html. January 09,2006]
In one of the speaking engagement of Sangalang, “he stressed, that today’s
information technology makes vast amounts of data accessible to higher
educational institutions and their employees. This accessibility provides great
benefits but also creates the potential for misuse of information technology.”6
The researcher believe that the higher educational institutions are concerned about
the ethical behavior of their employees and the security of their information
systems. Therefore, record managers must be interested in whether they can
influence their employees’ decision to act ethically or unethically. One possible
avenue of action to circumvent this possibility is for higher educational
institutions to establish information security policy that covers code of ethics.
In making this study, the researcher is somewhat confused on what format
would be followed. Although a lot of research format is available not only on the
textbook as well on the internet. Upon attending the 3rd Students Assembly for
Information Technology Education, one of the speaker said, “The problem with
the Information Technology Research paper is the availability of the research
format for IT. No specific written research format for the Information
Technology study are available at the market today.”7 Thru the speaker
presentation in Research Methodology in Information Technology, the researcher
was enlightened and get inspired to finish this study.
6 Sangalang, Dennis Ramiro. Records of Management Policy (Do You Have An Existing One?). Conference on Maintaining the Integrity of the School Records in the Digitized Age, Angeles University. January 21, 2005
7Dr. Allan de Belen de Guzman. Role of Research in Nation Building and Research Methodology. “3rd Student Assembly on Information Technology Education”.(Seminar, Bataan, January 28, 2006)
“Many organizations like universities have started to adopt computer-
based system in handling student information. Enrollment system is of the most
widely used computer-based system and had proven to be productive and
effective.”8 The researcher believe that Information Technology can give a
company or organization a lot of opportunities to achieve competitive edge over
its competitors. The researcher also believe that this research study will help St.
Mary’s College of Meycauayan to improve their marketing strategy to attract
more enrollees in the next school year.
An article published by Philippine star stated that De La Salle University
will pioneer an on-line enrollment program in the country as a memorandum of
agreement was signed with Serbisyo Pinoy Solution Incorporation, a leading e-
firm specializing in education software and other applications.9 At the recent list
of Best Performing School in Region 3 which was published by Commission on
Higher Education of National Capital Region, St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan
is belong to top 4 among The Best Performance school in Bulacan. This inspired
the researcher to go on with this study to help school to improved the information
system of the college registrar office.
Universities and Colleges, which are very disciplined and traditional,
cannot remain as they are but must respond to the forces of change. Information
Technology is taking center stage in education because timely information can be
8 Maria Gloria C. Abad. “Applicability of the Developed Computerized Enrollment System for Selected Private Basic Education Schools in Tanza, Cavite”.(Research Project in MIT, Adamson University, Manila, March 2004)
made available and readily accessible to those who need it. This is made possible
with the incorporation of Information Systems.10
Foreign Literature
The following foreign literature give insight and relevant information to
the researcher to adopt the ideas behind the success of information systems that
has been mentioned in the following articles.
Marketing is the process of putting the right product before the right
audience at the right price (the four P’s; Place, Product, Price, Promotion). In
education, the product is the curriculum. Research shows that most students
leave school during their first year so it is important to “front load” enrollment
system11. With newly revised curriculum for the College department together
with the proposed enhanced system for St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan, the
school is on the right track in putting the right product before the right audience at
the right price.
Enrollment management requires the intersection and cooperation between
different offices and services of the school. An effective enrollment system plan
can only succeed with support from school administrators.12 Furthermore, for an
enrollment system to be successful there must be commitment to developing,
implementing and evaluating enrollment management strategies.
10 Ofelia M. Carague. “Reinventing Education Through Information Technology”. The Emergence of Schools of the People: Implications for Educational Policy and Research with Information and Communication Technology in the Philippine Education. (Manila, Katha Publishing Co. Inc., 2000)
11 John Jantzen. “Enrollment Management: The Model, The Managers, and The Message”. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education 1991. 3(2), 129-139
12 Vincent Tinto. “Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition”.Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. 1993
“The implementation of the successful enrollment management program requires
cooperation, coordination and teamwork among various campus constituencies.”13
Indeed whatever good information system the school has, it is useless
unless it is properly coordinated among the school officials during its
implementation..
Enrollment system is a comprehensive process designed to help achieve
and maintain optimum enrollment (recruitment, retention, and graduation rates).
It is an institution wide process that permeates virtually every aspect of the
school’s function and culture.14 Every school during the enrollment period
always expects high turnover of enrollees, this will not happen if the enrollment
system of a particular school cannot cope up with the expectation of their
clientele, the students. Chances, next semester unsatisfied students will the leave
the school.
Without a comprehensive strategy to manage enrollment, a school finds it
difficult to increase productivity, service, quality, and competitiveness.15
13 Matthew Townsley. “A Strategic Model for Enrollment Driven Private School”. Journal for Higher Education Management (Winter/Spring, 1993). S(2), pp. 57-66
14 Daniel John Hossler. “Creating Effective Enrollment Management System”. New York: College Entrance Examination board, 1986
15 Bernard Konsynski. “Globalization of Information Management Strategies”.Journal of Management of Information System 7. (Spring 1991),7.
B. REVIEW OF RELATED STUDY
Local StudiesAnalyn Alan, et.al16., in their undergraduate feasibility study entitled A
Proposed Computerized Enrolment System for the College Department of St.
Mary’s College of Meycauayan (2001) designed a system that would make the
enrolment system of the said department of the school faster, organized and
accurate. They proposed a paradigm that would show how the registration,
transaction, master files and utilities of the Registrar’s Office more effective and
efficient.
Unfortunately the study does not materialize, the are some problems that
never unleashed like no documentation is available on the existing system. Every
time that system encountered problems the registrar always waiting for the
availability of the programmer to fixed the problem.
Similar study was done by Reyes17, The study was designed for St.
Mary’s College of Meycauayan to find out the strengths and weaknesses of the
current enrollment system. This will serve as basis of the researcher to develop a
new system using Standard Systems, after it has been evaluated. The evaluation
will determine whether the new system is better than the existing system with
regard to its effectiveness, timeliness and over-all quality. The author identified
the following problems during data gathering. The problem started on the
schedule and acceptance of the payment. During the enrollment if the officer-in-
16 Analyn Alan, et.al. “A Proposed Computerized Enrolment System for the College Department of Saint Mary’s College of Meycauayan”(Project Paper, St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan, Bulacan, 2001)
17 Joseph Bernard Reyes. “Analysis & Design of a Computer-Based Enrollment Information System for St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan”. (Project Paper, De La Salle University.(pp2-3), Manila, 2002)charge does not accurately keep track of the number of students enrolling in a
specific subject, chances are that the students will have a hard time finding the
right combination of subjects to enroll. If the class will not reach the specified
number of students per class, eventually it will be dissolved and merge with the
same class description and chances are the student will either drop or take the
new schedule of the subject and the students are advised to make a reassessment.
The following are the recommendations of the researcher: First, complete revamp
is not necessary but immediate enhancements for better service and efficiency is
encouraged. Second, the administration should form an Information Technology
(IT) Team to develop an enhanced design for computer-based enrollment
information system and an integrated information system to optimize the use of
the resources. Finally, the new system will enhance the enrollment and system of
payment.
Unfortunately, the study remains a study. It doesn’t have any application
at all. Nevertheless, Reyes study is a great help for this research. The researcher
verifies the findings of the author.
In the study conducted by Abad 18, the computerized enrollment system
was developed in response to the problems encountered in the existing system.
The researcher went through a detailed and thorough investigation that consists
of observing the existing system. In addition, the researcher states that numerous
interviews were conducted not only with the potential users but also with other
18 Maria Gloria C. Abad. “Applicability of the Developed Computerized Enrollment System for Selected Private Basic Education Schools in Tanza, Cavite”.(Research Project in MIT, Adamson University, Manila, March 2004)schools registrar and accounting clerk to collect different enrollment practices and
to come up with current applicable computerized enrollment system that are
suitable for the users.
The researcher went through the same process. A lot of interviews have
been conducted, a lot of books and references have been read, and a lot of surveys
have been conducted in order to get the feedback from the respondents.
In the study conducted by Rollan 19, the researcher assessed the existing
Student Information system for the Graduate School of Education, Arts & Science
(GSEAS) of De La Salle University – Dasmariñas in terms of software capability,
accuracy and user-interface development and the result lead to the development of
new system with the following recommendations from the respondents: On-line
viewing of student records, class schedules, and tuition fees balances, on-line
registration and enrollment, on-line forms (e.g. Request for Student Evaluation,
Certification of Grades, Adding/Dropping forms etc.), use of optical scanner for
the grades of students, adaptation of the database from the Registrar Office for
modeling the official Transcript of Record and incorporation of the developed
system to researcher MY-DLSU Portal.
Among the related study conducted by the researcher, it was found out, the
study of Rollan is the closest to this research. Student Information System is the
integral parts of the this study and like Rollan research the current system was
assessed in terms of software capability, accuracy and user-interface
19 Azenith Mojica Rollan. “Student Information System For The Graduate School of Education, Arts and Science, De La Salle University for Dasmariñas”. (Project Paper, Adamson University, Manila). March 2004development and the result lead to the development of new system.
In the study of Tan20, he focused on how the administration used the
enrollment system in making decisions. Dr. Tan assessed the enrollment system
of a private school particularly on subject scheduling system, admission system,
payment system, encoding system, and its report generation system.
The researcher is also making a similar study regarding the enrollment
system that SMCM administration can also used to make a better decision
whether to adopt it or reject the proposed system.
Foreign Studies
In the study of Lucas and Spitler21, the researcher explores the relevance of
research in implementation and user acceptance given the pervasiveness of
technology in modern organization. Their study applied an extended model of
technology acceptance to the use of broker workstations. They argue that
implementation success is important in obtaining a return from the firm’s
investment in technology. Data were collected at two points in time to assess user
acceptance of the workstations. The results provide some support for the models
and the unanticipated findings that perceptions of the system quality and system
ease of use decrease over time.
20 Ronaldo A. Tan. “An Assessment of the Enrollment System of a Private University”. (Dissertation, Adamson University, Manila, 2001)
21 Henry C. Lucan & Valerie Spitler.”Implementation in a World of Workstation and Networks”. A Research Paper in Information Technology, USA.may 2000
In the case study conducted in Australia,22 the new developed enrolment
university system centralizes all relevant information about courses, units and
student grades. It is the responsibility of the faculties to provide the system with
information (course code and unit code) about the courses and units they offer.
For each course, the name of the course coordinator must be communicated. The
enrolment system in turn keeps the faculties informed of the numbers and names
of students enrolled in the units. At the end of each semester the faculties will also
communicate the students' final grades; it is the system's responsability to send to
students the end-semester notification giving the final grades.
In the study of Roberts,23 The University of Derby has benefited greatly
from the introduction of an Electronic Enrolment system and much has been
learned on the way. The Institution has come to expect the provision of
information on enrolments in real time, its planning cycle and operation rely on it.
Students expect the systems provided to be slick, available longer and to have no
queues associated with them. While new systems will provide institutions with
exciting new opportunities , the first and biggest step has already been taken with
the handing over of the data and input to the student. The operation of the
Electronic Enrolment system has paved the way for the implementation of Web
based systems at Derby that will provide a better service to students.
22 “Case Study 1: The University enrollment Information Systems”. [http://www.cs.ntu.edu.au/ homepage/paule/sit_101/reportnode139.html]. January 2006
23 Russell Roberts. “Student Self enrollment – A System in Practice”.(A JISC Funded Case Study, University of Derby, United Kingdom).[http://www.jisc.ac.uk/cis_focus/]. January 2006
The accessibility of the Internet makes it an obvious method for delivering a
range of services but any institution considering this approach will need to
review its business practice in detail if it is to make it a success.
The enrolment management system is a central register of student
enrolments being developed by the Ministry for intermediate and secondary
schools to use vie the web. The project aims to reduce the administrative burden
for schools and improve the overall enrolment management process.24 The
Ministry of Education has funded a new electronic enrolment management system
for intermediate and secondary schools that will replace the current, paper-based
student enrolment forms with a web application and online registry.
Schools and the Ministry have been frustrated by time consuming,
inefficient enrolment processes that often result in inaccurate information about
non-enrolled students (those absent from school more than 20 consecutive days)
being sent to the Ministry. A focus group of representatives from primary,
intermediate and secondary schools provided input into the design of the new
system, which authorized intermediate and secondary school personnel will use
via the web to enroll students. The electronic system will: (1.)facilitate immediate
access to enrolment information and establish a consistent and accurate enrolment
process; (2.) reduce the paperwork and monitoring effort for schools; (3.)
automate a number of activities, e.g. monitoring the 20 days from leaving one
24 “Enrollment Management System Project - Ministry of Education”. New Zealand Government. [HTTP://www.minedu.govt.nz/goto/enroll]. January 2006
The theories presented by the local and foreign authors give insight on the
importance of an excellent information system in an organization such as St.
Mary’s College of Meycauayan. It is helpful on the part of the researcher to study
the phenomena of Information Technology and its role in an organization. In
addition, it hastens acquisition of information, knowledge and skill plus the
convenience and security of maintaining the important records and files of the
school or an organization. The local and foreign studies focus on Information
System used in school or university setting. They also include the benefit of
having cognizance of excellent enrollment system if the school wants to maintain
their competitive edge. Finally, The Local and foreign authors give moral
support to the researcher to go on with this study.
CHAPTER 3
METHODS AND PROCEDURE
This chapter presents the methods of research used, the respondents of the
study, data gathering procedure, research instrument and techniques used, and
statistical treatment used with this study.
Method of Research
The method of research that was adopted in this study is descriptive and
developmental method. It involves obtaining facts about the existing condition of
the current Registrar Information Systems in the College department of St. Mary’s
College of Meycauayan. It describes and interprets the prevailing conditions,
practices, beliefs, processes, points of view and trends of the current system and
eventually developed an enhanced Registrar Information Systems that will solve
the problems generated by the existing system. The researcher also used
developmental research to investigate patterns and sequence of growth and/or
change as a function of time.
Respondents of the Study
The researcher of this study conducted two separate survey. The first one
was conducted to assess the status of the existing Registrar Information Systems
for the college department. It has two types of respondents, the Users which is
referring to the college students and Administrators which composed of College
Middle Administrators, College Faculty and College Non-teaching staff. The
second one was conducted to assess the Proposed Enhanced Registrar Information
System. This time it has three types of respondents; the Users, the Administrators
and the IT Experts referring to programmers and I.T. professors and instructors.
Sample and Sampling Technique
Purposive Sampling was used in the study using the following criteria:
1. For “Users” Respondents
a. College Student of St. Mary’s College
b. At least 2nd Year level under ITE Program
2. For the “Administrators” Respondents
a. College Faculty, Non-Teaching Staff, and Members of
Administration
b. Familiar with Registrar Information System
c. Computer Literate
3. For “IT Experts” Respondents
a. Programmer
b. IT/CS Professor or Instructor
Research Instrument and Techniques
1. Questionnaire
The main instrument used in gathering data was the questionnaire. It was
designed such that multiple choices were presented in order for the respondents
to complete the process in a short time.
The questionnaire contained questions regarding the status of the current
Registrar Information Systems as regards to enrollment system and Report Card
Management Systems.
2. Unstructured Interview
Unstructured or informal interview were also conducted whenever
possible in order to confirm the responses to the questionnaire. These
were flexible and less structured than the questionnaire. These will be
conducted upon retrieval of the questionnaire. The intention was to
reinforce the responses that were gathered and determine the various
conclusions that will be made by the respondents.
3. Document Analysis
Related enrollment research and other pertinent documents from the
Registrar office were gathered and analyzed to support the findings derived from
this study.
4. Library Research
This technique has been adopted to gather information needed in
accomplishing the proposed study. Related topics, articles, and related
study were examined for a better understanding of the topic under study.
5. Internet Research
The researcher used World Wide Web to gathered information necessary
for this study. For related literature and related study, Internet is the most up-to-
date sources of information that is available for a research study. If makes a
research interesting and delightful on the part of the researcher.
Statistical Treatment of Data
To interpret result of the Existing and Proposed Registrar Information
Systems evaluation, the Percentage, Weighted Means and ANOVA are the
statistical tools or techniques will be used.
The data gathered in this study were collated, tallied and presented in
tabular form then analyzed using statistical tools mentioned above.
1. Percentage
This is a ration of a part to a whole. This was used to present the profile
of the respondents. The formula is
P( % ) = (n / N ) * 100 %
Where: P ( % ) = Percentage
n = Frequency scores on a particular response category
N = Total number of respondents
2. Weighted Mean
The Weighted Mean is a measure of central tendency. This was used to
determine the effectiveness of the Proposed Registrar Information System. The
weighted mean gives the point of composite rating of the groups. The formula is:
WM = Σfx N
Where:
WM = Weighted Mean
Σ = Symbol of Summation
f = Frequency of Responses
x = Scale Value
The mean values obtained were interpreted using a Likert Scale. The
descriptive interpretation was based on the following:
Mean Range Weight Interpretation
4.51 – 5.00 5 Very Highly Effective
3.51 – 4.50 4 Highly Effective
2.51 – 3.50 3 Moderate/Average Effective
1.51 – 2.50 2 Least Effective
1.00 – 1.50 1 Not Effective
3. ANOVA
ANOVA – or Analysis of Variance comes from the fact that the technique
compares two variances: The variance among the means of the different
categories (also called groups or treatments) and the variance among the
individual values in the group. It is also advisable to use if you have three groups
of respondents. The researcher will used the case 2 of the ANOVA, the unequal
number of respondents
ANOVA TABLE
Sources of Variation
Sum of Square
Degrees of Freedom
Mean Square Computed F - Ratio
Treatments SSC k - 1S1
2 = SSC k - 1
F = S12
S22
Error SSE k(n-1)S2
2 = SSE k(n-1)
The Formula are:
SST = grand X2 – C
SSB = ( X 1)2 + ( X 2)2 + ( X 3)2 - C N1 N2 N3
Total nk -1SST
CHAPTER 4
PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA
This chapter covers the presentation, analysis and interpretation of data.
I. Profile of the Respondents
The respondents of this study are “Users” referring to the SMCM college
students, “Administrators” referring to SMCM college faculty, non-teaching staff,
and middle administrators and the “IT Experts” the IT professionals such as
Programmer and IT Professors or Instructors.
Shown in the following Tables are the findings on the profile of the
respondents. Based on the retrieved data, sixty (60) users, twenty six (26)
administrators and twenty (20) IT experts participated in the study for a total of
one hundred six (106) respondents.
Table 1 shows that among the group of respondents sixty (60) are users
representing 56.60 % of the total respondents, twenty six (26) are administrations
representing 24.53 % and twenty (20) are IT experts representing 18.87 % of the
total respondents respectively.
Table 1Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Group
GroupTotal
f %Users 60 56.60
Administrations 26 24.53IT Experts 20 18.87
Total 106 100 %
As to years of stay in SMCM, Table 2 shows that among users group of
respondents ten (10) representing 16.67 % are within 1-2 years of stay bracket and
fifty (50) representing 83.33 % are within 3-4 years of stay bracket. No users
group of respondents belong to the 5 years and above bracket.
For the administrations group of respondents, the same table (Table 2)
shows that seven (7) representing 26.92 % are within the 1-2 years of stay
bracket, nine (9) representing 34.62 % are within the 3-4 years of stay bracket and
ten (10) representing 38.46 % are within the 5 year and above bracket. The IT
Expert group of respondents is not included in this table since they are considered
are guest respondents.
Table 2Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Years of Stay in SMCM
YearsUsers Administrations Total
F % F % f %1–2 years 10 16.67 7 26.92 17 19.773-4 years 50 83.33 9 34.62 59 68.605 & above 0 0 % 10 38.46 10 11.63
Total 60 100 26 100 86 100
II. Status of the Existing Registrar Information Systems
The assessment of the three (3) groups of respondents on the existing or
current Registrar Information Systems involved four (4) areas namely enrollement
system, report card generation system, transcript of record system, and grade
evaluation system.
A. Enrollment System
Table 3 shows that the status of the existing system or current enrollment
system in terms of assessment and payment. As to the “Date assessment and
enrollment”, the users, administrators, and I.T. experts respondents assessed it as
“Always” based on the calculated mean of 4.95, 5.00 and 4.93 respectively. As to
the “Accurate subject schedules” the three group of respondents assessed it as
“Always” based on the calculated mean of 4.77, 4.69, and 4.77 respectively. As
to the “Accurate room assignment”, the users and the IT experts group of
respondents assessed it as “Always” based on the computed mean of 4.82 and
4.75 respectively while the administrators group of respondents assessed it as
“Often” with a calculated mean of 4.31.
Table 3Status of the Existing Registrar Information System inTerms of Assessment & Payment of Enrollment System
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Date Assessment & Enrollment
2. Accurate Subject Schedules
3. Accurate Room Assignment
4. Class Size Control
5. Accurate number of units per subject
6. Accurate computation for tuition fee
7. Accurate computation for other fees
8. Accurate
4.95
4.77
4.82
4.904.91
4.92
4.92
4.92
5.00
A
A
A
AA
A
A
A
A
4.77
4.69
4.31
4.424.77
4.58
4.69
4.58
5.00
A
A
O
OA
A
A
A
A
5.00
4.85
4.75
4.754.90
4.65
4.65
4.65
5.00
A
A
A
AA
A
A
A
A
4.93
4.77
4.72
4.804.88
4.82
4.84
4.82
5.00
A
A
A
AA
A
A
A
A
computation for miscellaneous fees
9. Different types of payment scheme
10. Student account for transaction
11. Actual transaction date is noted
12. Possible discount for each student
13. Students records are accurately updated after every transaction.
14. Collection program is convenient and easy to use.
4.85
4.88
4.29
4.57
5.00
A
A
O
A
A
4.08
5.00
4.19
4.08
4.12
O
A
O
O
O
4.65
4.75
4.80
4.85
4.90
A
A
A
A
A
4.69
4.88
4.34
4.52
4.84
A
A
O
A
A
Composite Mean 4.83 4.52 4.80 4.78Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 4Status of the Existing Registrar Information System in
Terms of Report Card Generation
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Presence of Student number.
2. Accurate Student course
3. Accurate Student name
4. Accurate number of subjects enrolled
5. Accurate grades per grading period
6. Computation of
1.00
4.95
4.95
4.85
4.25
1.00
N
A
A
A
O
N
1.00
5.00
4.92
4.69
4.88
1.00
N
A
A
A
A
N
1.00
5.00
5.00
4.90
4.90
1.00
N
A
A
A
A
N
1.00
4.97
4.95
4.83
4.44
1.00
N
A
A
A
A
N
GPA per grading period
7. Security of records 3.70 O 4.38 O 4.00 O 3.86 OComposite Mean 3.53 3.70 3.69 3.58Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 5Status of the Existing Registrar Information System in
Terms of Transcript of Records
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Accurate student personal record.
2. Student education history
3. Course Title/Degree4. Graduation Date5. S.O. Number6. S.O. Date Issued7. Accurate course
number & course descriptive title
8. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester
9. Accurate grades and course units
10. Student subjects & grades history for transferee
11. Available space for TOR remarks
4.90
4.85
4.944.934.924.924.85
4.75
4.80
4.78
4.94
A
A
AAAAA
A
A
A
A
4.23
4.92
5.005.005.005.004.92
4.88
4.81
4.77
5.00
O
A
AAAAA
A
A
A
A
4.15
4.10
4.954.905.005.004.10
4.15
4.20
4.25
5.00
O
O
AAAAO
O
O
O
A
4.68
4.76
4.954.944.954.954.76
4.70
4.72
4.71
4.96
A
A
AAAAA
A
A
A
A
Composite Mean 4.87 4.87 4.53 4.83Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 6Status of the Existing Registrar Information System in
Terms of Grades Evaluation
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Accurate student name & number
2. Course Title/Degree3. Accurate course
number & course descriptive title
4. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester
5. Accurate grades and course units
6. Student subjects & grades history for transferee
1.58
1.584.71
1.25
2.75
2.18
SD
SDA
N
ST
SD
1.77
1.004.31
2.77
2.69
2.65
SD
NO
ST
ST
ST
1.00
1.005.00
1.00
1.00
1.00
N
NA
N
N
N
1.53
1.404.68
1.47
2.51
2.11
SD
NA
N
ST
SD
Composite Mean 2.34 2.53 1.67 2.28Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 7Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System inTerms of Assessment & Payment of Enrollment System
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Date Assessment & Enrollment
2. Accurate Subject Schedules
3. Accurate Room Assignment
4. Class Size Control5. Accurate number
of units per subject
6. Accurate computation for tuition fee
7. Accurate computation for other fees
4.95
4.93
4.97
4.954.98
4.95
4.95
A
A
A
AA
A
A
4.92
4.88
4.92
4.965.00
4.92
4.88
A
A
A
AA
A
A
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.954.95
4.90
4.90
A
A
A
AA
A
A
4.95
4.93
4.97
4.954.98
4.94
4.93
A
A
A
AA
A
A
8. Accurate computation for miscellaneous fees
9. Different types of payment scheme
10. Student account for transaction
11. Actual transaction date is noted
12. Possible discount for each student
13. Students records are accurately updated after every transaction.
14. Collection program is convenient and easy to use.
4.95
5.00
4.71
4.85
4.75
4.71
4.75
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
4.85
5.00
4.96
4.92
4.92
5.00
5.00
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
4.90
5.00
4.85
5.00
4.95
4.95
4.95
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
4.93
5.00
4.77
4.88
4.81
4.79
4.82
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
Composite Mean 4.89 4.94 4.95 4.90Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 8Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in
Terms of Report Card Generation
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Presence of Student number2. Accurate Student course3. Accurate Student name4. Accurate number of subjects enrolled5. Accurate grades per grading period6. Computation of
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.93
4.95
5.00
A
A
A
A
A
A
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.92
4.92
5.00
A
A
A
A
A
A
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.95
4.95
5.00
A
A
A
A
A
A
5.00
5.00
5.00
4.93
4.95
5.00
A
A
A
A
A
A
GPA per grading Period7. Security of records
4.16 O 4.92 A 4.25 O 4.30 O
Composite Mean 4.86 4.97 4.88 4.88Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 9Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in
Terms of Transcript of Records
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Accurate student personal record.2. Student education history3. Course Title / Degree4. Graduation Date5. S.O. Number6. S.O. Date Issued7. Accurate course number & course descriptive title8. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester9. Accurate grades and course units10.Student subjects & grades history for transferee11.Available space for TOR remarks
4.93
4.70
4.80
4.714.904.904.75
4.65
4.87
4.83
5.00
A
A
A
AAAA
A
A
A
A
4.92
4.96
5.00
4.964.924.924.96
5.00
5.00
5.00
5.00
A
A
A
AAAA
A
A
A
A
4.95
4.90
4.95
5.005.005.004.95
4.85
4.85
4.85
5.00
A
A
A
AAAA
A
A
A
A
4.93
4.77
4.86
4.794.914.914.82
4.74
4.89
4.86
5.00
A
A
A
AAAA
A
A
A
A
Composite Mean 4.82 4.97 4.94 4.86Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 10Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in
Terms of Grades Evaluation
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Accurate student name & number
2. Course Title / Degree
3. Accurate course number & course descriptive title
4. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester
5. Accurate grades and course units
6. Student subjects & grades history for transferee
4.95
4.95
4.94
4.93
4.93
4.85
A
A
A
A
A
A
5.00
5.00
4.81
4.88
4.96
4.92
A
A
A
A
A
A
4.95
4.95
4.90
4.90
4.95
4.90
A
A
A
A
A
A
4.96
4.96
4.91
4.92
4.94
4.87
A
A
A
A
A
A
Composite Mean 4.93 4.93 4.93 4.93Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD), 1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 11Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of Accuracy
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Date Assessment & Enrollment
2. Accurate Subject Schedules
3. Accurate Room Assignment
4. Class Size Control5. Number of Units
per subject6. Computation for
tuition fee7. Computation for
other fees8. Computation for
4.70
4.01
3.96
4.114.29
4.85
4.85
4.85
E
E
E
EE
VE
VE
VE
5.00
4.08
4.38
4.255.00
4.92
4.88
4.88
VE
E
E
EVE
VE
VE
VE
4.50
4.15
4.10
4.104.20
4.15
4.15
4.15
E
E
E
EE
E
E
E
4.72
4.04
4.05
4.134.40
4.77
4.76
4.76
VE
E
E
EE
VE
VE
VE
miscellaneous fees
9. Different types of Payment scheme
10. Student account for transaction
11. Actual transaction date is noted
12. Possible discounts for each student
13. Student records are actually updated after every transaction
14. Collection program is convenient and easy to use.
5.00
4.15
4.04
3.99
4.04
4.20
VE
E
E
E
E
E
5.00
4.77
5.00
5.00
4.69
4.77
VE
VE
VE
VE
VE
VE
4.90
4.10
4.85
4.05
3.95
4.10
VE
E
VE
E
E
E
4.99
4.25
4.31
4.17
4.14
4.28
VE
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 4.36 4.76 4.25 4.41Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 12Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of Maintainability
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Database for enrollment
2. Database for assessment
3. Database for subject available
4. Database for course code
5. Database for tuition fee
6. Database for payment
7. Database for master file
4.12
4.08
4.03
4.18
4.27
4.12
4.25
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
4.19
4.77
4.73
4.69
4.81
4.88
4.92
E
VE
VE
VE
VE
VE
VE
4.00
3.95
4.05
3.95
4.00
3.95
4.10
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
4.12
4.18
4.15
4.24
4.33
4.23
4.35
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 4.15 4.71 4.00 4.23Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 13Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of User Friendliness
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Ease of use2. Navigating the
system3. Instructions for
users4. Graphics interface5. Trouble shooting
3.963.96
3.96
4.124.10
EE
E
EE
4.624.50
4.62
4.654.33
VEE
VE
VEE
3.954.05
4.00
3.953.90
EE
E
EE
4.074.07
4.08
4.194.10
EE
E
EE
Composite Mean 4.02 4.52 3.97 4.10Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 14Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of Security
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Security level for Registrar
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar
3. Security level for Treasurer
4. Security level for Asst. Treasurer
5. Backup copy of student data
6. Security from malicious mischief
7. Security from viruses
4.20
4.25
4.15
4.25
4.01
3.99
3.96
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
4.23
4.31
4.19
4.15
3.73
4.00
3.81
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
4.10
4.05
4.05
4.05
4.00
4.00
4.05
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
4.17
4.20
4.17
4.17
4.03
4.13
4.41
E
E
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 4.11 4.06 4.01 4.09Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 15Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of Accuracy
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Semester & school year
2. Student Number3. Course4. Student Name5. Number of
subjects enrolled6. Number of units
per subject7. Computation for
general average8. Computation for
GPA per grading period
4.18
4.043.993.994.04
4.01
4.36
4.42
E
EEEE
E
E
E
4.19
5.005.005.004.04
4.77
4.92
4.88
E
VEVEVEE
VE
VE
VE
4.10
4.054.054.054.00
4.00
4.05
4.10
E
EEEE
E
E
E
4.17
4.204.174.174.03
4.13
4.41
4.46
E
EEEE
E
E
E
Composite Mean 4.13 4.73 4.04 4.22Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 16Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of Maintainability
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Database for student master file
2. Database for grading sheet
3.97
3.99
E
E
4.08
4.15
E
E
4.05
4.10
E
E
4.00
4.03
E
E
Composite Mean 3.98 4.12 4.08 4.02Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 17Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of User Friendliness
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Ease of Use2. Navigating the
system3. Instructions for
the users4. Graphics interface5. Trouble shooting
4.054.03
4.02
4.084.07
EE
E
EE
3.813.92
4.04
3.623.65
EE
E
EE
4.104.00
4.00
3.953.90
EE
E
EE
4.014.01
4.02
3.983.97
EE
E
EE
Composite Mean 4.05 3.81 3.99 4.00Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 18Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of Security
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Security level for Registrar
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar
3. Security level for college faculty
4. Security from malicious mischief
5. Security from viruses
4.01
3.92
3.99
3.98
3.92
E
E
E
E
E
4.12
4.08
4.23
4.08
4.00
E
E
E
E
E
4.10
4.00
3.95
4.00
3.95
E
E
E
E
E
4.04
3.96
4.03
4.00
3.94
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 3.97 4.10 4.00 3.99Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 19Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of Accuracy
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Student Personal 4.11 E 3.96 E 4.10 E 4.09 E
record2. Student education
history3. Course Title /
Degree4. Graduation date5. S.O. Number6. S.O. Date issued7. Course Number &
course descriptive title
8. Subjects enrolled per semester
9. Grades & course units
10. Students subjects & grades history for transferee
11. Available space for TOR remarks
3.96
4.08
4.124.114.094.21
4.16
4.29
4.32
5.00
E
E
EEEE
E
E
E
VE
3.92
4.08
4.004.004.004.19
4.12
4.19
3.92
5.00
E
E
EEEE
E
E
E
E
3.80
4.15
4.104.104.103.95
4.05
4.00
4.05
5.00
E
E
EEEE
E
E
E
VE
3.93
4.09
4.104.094.084.17
4.14
4.24
4.22
5.00
E
E
EEEE
E
E
E
VE
Composite Mean 4.22 4.13 4.13 4.19Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 20Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of Maintainability
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Database for student master file
2. Database for courses
3. Database for grading sheet
4. Database for prospectus
5. Database for QueryTOR
4.12
4.14
4.07
4.12
4.08
E
E
E
E
E
3.96
4.08
4.12
4.19
4.00
E
E
E
E
E
4.00
3.95
4.10
3.90
3.95
E
E
E
E
E
4.08
4.11
4.08
4.11
4.05
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 4.11 4.07 3.98 4.08Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 21Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of User Friendliness
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Ease of Use2. Navigating the
system3. Instructions for
the users4. Graphics interface5. Trouble shooting
4.074.21
4.08
3.963.93
EE
E
EE
4.003.96
3.81
3.924.00
EE
E
EE
4.003.90
3.90
4.003.95
EE
E
EE
4.054.13
4.01
3.963.95
EE
E
EE
Composite Mean 4.05 3.94 3.95 4.02Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 22Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of Security
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Security level for Registrar
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar
3. Backup copy of student data
4. Security from malicious mischief
5. Security from viruses
4.02
4.11
3.98
4.01
3.83
E
E
E
E
E
4.27
4.27
4.00
3.96
3.96
E
E
E
E
E
4.05
3.95
3.90
3.95
4.00
E
E
E
E
E
4.07
4.12
3.97
3.99
3.88
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 3.99 4.09 3.97 4.01Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 23Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of Accuracy
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Student name & number
2. Course title or degree
3. Course number & course descriptive title
4. Subjects enrolled per semester
5. Grades & course units
6. Student subjects & grades for transferee
3.91
4.00
3.92
3.86
4.00
3.92
E
E
E
E
E
E
4.12
4.04
3.81
4.12
4.08
4.12
E
E
E
E
E
E
3.95
4.05
4.00
3.95
3.90
4.00
E
E
E
E
E
E
3.95
4.01
3.91
3.91
4.00
3.97
E
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 3.93 4.04 3.98 3.96Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 24Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of Maintainability
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Database for student master file
2. Database for grading sheet
4.02
3.94
E
E
4.00
4.08
E
E
3.90
3.95
E
E
4.00
3.97
E
E
Composite Mean 3.98 4.04 3.93 3.98Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 25Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of User Friendliness
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Ease of use2. Navigating the
system3. Instructions for
the users4. Graphics interface5. Trouble shooting
4.023.97
3.83
4.043.95
EE
E
EE
3.964.08
3.96
4.003.88
EE
E
EE
3.954.00
3.95
4.003.90
EE
E
EE
4.003.99
3.87
4.033.93
EE
E
EE
Composite Mean 3.96 3.98 3.96 3.96Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 26Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of Security
Items
Users Adminis-trations
IT Experts Average
XInterpreta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
XInter-preta-tion
1. Security level for Registrar
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar
3. Backup copy of student data
4. Security from malicious mischief
5. Security from viruses
3.91
4.03
3.91
4.00
4.01
E
E
E
E
E
4.23
4.23
4.04
4.38
4.04
E
E
E
E
E
3.95
3.95
4.10
3.90
3.95
E
E
E
E
E
3.97
4.05
3.95
4.05
4.01
E
E
E
E
E
Composite Mean 3.97 4.18 3.97 4.01Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. William, Sawyer, Hutchinson. Using Information Technology. Irwin
Mcrow-Hill 2nd. 2000
2. Silver, Gerald A. & Silver, Myrna L. Systems Analysis and Design.
Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. copyright 2000
3. Long, Larry & Long Nancy. Computers Information Technology in
Perspective. Pearson Prentice Hall. 11th & International Edition. .
Copyright 2004.
THESES AND DISERTATION
1. Rapsing, Rizaldy R. “The Application of Relational and Object
Databases in an Information System : A Comparative Study” Theses,
Adamson University, Manila May 2002
2. Rollan, Azenith Mojica. “Student Information Systems for Graduate
School of Education, Arts and Sciences, De La Salle University –
Dasmarinas” Theses, Adamson University, March 2004
3. Rodenas, Emmylou F. “Developed Online Purchasing of De La Salle
University Systems” Theses, Adamson University, Manila, March 2004
4. Policarpio, Corazon. “Comparative Study of the Effectiveness of
computer-Based and Traditional Methods of Instruction” These,
Adamson University, Manila, 1995
5. Geroda, Ranato. “The Effects of Information Technology in Our Lady of
Fatima College: An Assessment” Theses, Adamson Univerisity,
Manila, 1999
BROCHURES, SEMINARS MATERIALS
1. ARHEI-III GAZETTE, Published by the Association of the Registrars
of Higher Education Institutions-Region III, Newsletter, Vol.1 No. 1,
January 2005
2. Student Handbook, 2004 Revised Edition. St. Mary’s College of
Meycauayan
3. ISO Registrar Procedure Manual, St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan,
2004
4. Dennis Ramiro M. Sangalang, MSIT, Dean, College of Computer
Studies,. “Conference on Maintaining the Integrity of the School
Records in the Digitized Age” Seminar, Angeles University, Angeles
Pampanga, January 21, 2005
INTERNET
1. University Information Registration system
[http://bearlink.berkeley.edu/sis/uris.html]
2. Trace College: Living Its Advocacy Through The Implementation Of
The purpose of this questionnaire is to assess the present Registrar Information Systems of St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan specifically along the following areas: Enrollment System and Report Card Management System. Kindly answer the following question truthfully and rest assured that all information gathered would be kept confidential.
Part I. Profile of the Respondents
Direction: Put a check mark ( ✓ ) on the space provided beside the item that best describe your response.
2. Years of stay in St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan1 – 2 Years [ ] 3 – 4 Years [ ] 5 Years & above [ ]
Part II. Status of Registrar Information SystemsDirection: Kindly check ( ✓ ) the appropriate box that corresponds to your assessment using the following: Weight Interpretation Label
5 Always A4 Often O3 Sometimes ST2 Seldom SD1 Never N
A. Status of Existing Registrar Information System 1 2 3 4 5
A.1 Enrollment System (Assessment & Payment) N SD ST O A1. Date Assessment & Enrollment [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Accurate Subject Schedules [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Accurate Room Assignment [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Class size control [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Accurate number of units per subject [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. Accurate computation for tuition fee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]7. Accurate computation for other fees [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]8. Accurate computation for miscellaneous fees [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]9. Different Types of Payment Scheme [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]10. Student account for transaction [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]11. Actual transaction date is noted [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
1 2 3 4 5 N SD ST O A
12. Possible discounts for each student [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]13. Students records are accurately updated after every
Transaction [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]14. Collection program is convenient and easy to use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
1 2 3 4 5A.2 Report Card Generation N SD ST O A
1. Presence of student number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
2. Accurate student course[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
3. Accurate student name[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
4. Accurate number of subjects enrolled[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
5. Accurate grades per grading period [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
6. Computation of GPA per grading period [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
7. Security of records [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
A.3 Transcript of Records1. Accurate Student Personal Record [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Student education History [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Course Title or Degree [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Graduation Date [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. S.O. Number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. S.O. Date Issued [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]7. Accurate Course Number & Course Descriptive Title [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]8. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]9. Accurate grades and course units [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]10. Student subjects & grades history for transferee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]11. Available space for TOR remarks [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
A.4 Grades Evaluation 1. Accurate student name and number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Course Title or Degree [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Accurate Course Number & Course Descriptive Title [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Accurate grades and course units [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. Student subjects & grades history for transferee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
B. Status of Enhanced Registrar Information System
1 2 3 4 5B.1 Enrollment System (Assessment & Payment)
1. Date Assessment & Enrollment [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Accurate Subject Schedules [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Accurate Room Assignment [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Class size control [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Accurate number of units per subject [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
1 2 3 4 5 N SD ST O A
6. Accurate computation for tuition fee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]7. Accurate computation for other fees [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]8. Accurate computation for miscellaneous fees [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]9. Different Types of Payment Scheme [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]10. Student account for transaction [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]11. Actual transaction date is noted [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]12. Possible discounts for each student [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]13. Students records are accurately updated after
every transaction [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]14. Collection program is convenient and easy to use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
B.2 Report Card Generation1. Presence of student number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Accurate student course [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Accurate student name [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Accurate number of subjects enrolled [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Accurate grades per grading period [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. Computation of GPA per grading period [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]7. Security of records [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
1 2 3 4 5B.3 Transcript of Records N SD ST O A
1. Accurate Student Personal Record [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Student education History [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Course Title or Degree [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Graduation Date [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. S.O. Number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. S.O. Date Issued [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]7. Accurate Course Number & Course Descriptive Title [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]8. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]9. Accurate grades and course units [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]10. Student subjects & grades history for transferee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]11. Available space for TOR remarks [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
B.4 Grades Evaluation 1. Accurate student name and number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Course Title or Degree [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
3. Accurate Course Number & Course Descriptive Title [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Accurate grades and course units [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. Student subjects & grades history for transferee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
Part III. Level of Effectivity of the Enhanced Registrar Information SystemDirection: Kindly check ( ✓ ) the appropriate box that corresponds to your assessment using the following: Weight Interpretation Label
5 Very Effective VE4 Effective E3 Moderate Effective ME2 Slightly Effective SE1 Not Effective NE
A. Enrollment System (Assessment and Payment)1 2 3
4 5A.1 Accuracy NE SE ME E VE
1. Date Assessment & Enrollment [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Subject Schedules [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Room Assignment [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Class size control [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Number of units per subject [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. Computation for tuition fee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]7. Computation for other fees [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]8. Computation for miscellaneous fees [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]9. Different Types of Payment Scheme [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]10. Student account for transaction [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]11. Actual transaction date is noted [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]12. Possible discounts for each student [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]13. Student records are accurately updated after
every transaction [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]14. Collection program is convenient and easy to use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
C.3 User Friendliness1. Ease of use [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Navigating the System [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Instructions for the users [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Graphics Interface [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Trouble Shooting [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
C.4 Security NE SE ME E VE1. Security level for Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Security level for Asst. Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Backup copy of student data [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]4. Security from malicious mischief [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Security from viruses [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
D. Grade Evaluation System 1 2 3 4 5
D.1 Accuracy NE SE ME E VE1. Student name and number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]2. Course Title or Degree [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]3. Course Number & Course Descriptive Title [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
4. Subjects enrolled per semester [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]5. Grades and course units [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]6. Student subjects & grades history for transferee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ]
The following are the summary of the survey questionnaires:
On the part of the Enrollment system:
The Computation for the tuition fees and computation of other fees got
Least Effective rating from both group of respondents on the part of accuracy
indicator. In terms of maintainability, database when changing subject schedule
3 Dionisia Arabejo. College Registrar. St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan,Bulacan. 2005 and computation for tuition fees when dropping the a subject got Least Effective
rating on the part of the users respondent while Least effective and even not
effective ratings was given by the admin group of respondents. In terms of user
friendliness indicators, Troubles shooting item got Not Effective rating and
graphics interface item got Least Effective rating from the users group of
respondents. Same items got Not Effective rating from the Admin group of
respondents. In terms of security indicator, the existing system need
improvements for the reason that Moderate Effective rating the highest scores it
get and the lowest is Not Effective rating from both group of respondents.
On the part of Report Card Generator
In terms of accuracy indicator, only Computation for Grade Point Average
or GPA per grading period got the lowest rating of Not Effective from both group
of respondents. In terms of maintainability, Database for Computation of GPA
per grading period got the lowest rating of Not Effective from both group of
respondents. For User Friendliness indicator, Graphics interface item got most
number of Moderate Effective and Trouble Shooting got the lowest rating of Not
Effective from the Users group of respondents. On the other hand Graphics
Interface and Trouble Shooting Items got the most number of Not Effective rating
from the Admin group of respondents. For Security indicator, got the most
number of Least Effective rating from both group of respondents.
On the part of Transcript of Records and Grade Evaluation Systems
The indicators are not applicable in the sense that both system are
manually process by the Registrar office.
Combining the work of the Registrar and information systems will
generate good services not only for the students but to other offices requesting for
a report documents from Registrar office such as Administration, Program Head,