One Year Under Our Belt:Self-Reported Academic RecordSession A4

Gregg Perry, Thomas Skottene & Nancy Walsh

Office of Undergraduate AdmissionsUniversity of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

Agenda

• Introduction• History• Reasons for Moving to SRAR• Technical Aspects• User Experience/Common Errors• 2013 Enhancements• Pros/Cons• Verification Process• Summary• Feedback/Q & A

Introduction

Gregg PerryAssociate Director, Recruitment

Thomas SkotteneAssociate Director, Data Services

Nancy WalshSenior Associate Director, Operations

Historical Perspectives of the SRAR

SRARTM Background

• Self-Reported Academic Record– Used by University of California system,

Georgia Tech, Rutgers, and others– Freshman applicants self report their academic

record– Self-reported data is used to process & review

applications– Once applicants accept their offer, final

transcripts are checked for discrepancies

Why SRAR?

• Staffing issues

• Large administrative savings– 7,000 vs. 30,000+ transcripts, automation possibilities

• Enhanced Customer Service

SRAR Timelime

• Trial Run, 2011– All freshman applicants with international credentials &

applicants from Glenbrook North High School

• All In, 2012– All freshman applicants required to submit SRAR

Technical Perspectives of the SRAR

High Level Technical Considerations

• Easy to use– Our applicants– Internal users

• Integrate with our systems – Banner – our Student Information System (SIS)– eAdmitTM

• Volume/Load– Handle current and expected future volume, including peaks around

deadlines

• Security Concerns• Utilize new possibilities

– Automation– Transparency– Archiving

Ease of Use

• The SRARTM is a web form – Familiar Design

• applicants are used to it

– Flexible • able to make changes quickly

– The Regular Application Form is also a web form, though separate

– Applicants need no special system requirements• Some schools reported very old browsers and could not submit

– Warnings • When applicants do something unexpected such as not filling in all

four years for coursework

– Errors• When applicants make errors such as leaving required fields blank

User Testing Results

• Our initial approach was too process-centric– i.e. what Admissions needed to get our process

done

• Applicants will guess and make (false) assumptions if they are not allowed to choose exactly what they expect/want– Drop downs have more options now

• Even if we internally strictly don’t need it

– Places for information we don’t really need• Applicants will find a way to give it to us anyway

Integration with our Systems

• Banner– Illinois has used Banner as our main university wide data

repository and student information system since 2003 – Banner is a 3rd party tool made by Ellucian (Previously

Sungard, previously SCT, etc…)– Banner is housed and controlled by Central IT – Gives Admissions very limited power over functionality

and look and feel

• eAdmitTM

– eAdmitTM - Internal application processing system– Workflow and data repository for most internal

admissions processes

How It Was Before

Print out relevant materials

Enter decision back when

review was done

Banner(our Student Information

System)

Banner(our Student Information

System)

Online Web Application

Form

Online Web Application

FormTest ScoresTest Scores

Electronic

Paper manila folderPaper manila folder

Other paper forms

Other paper forms TranscriptsTranscripts

Paper

How It Is Now

Banner(our Student

Information System)

Banner(our Student

Information System)

Online Web Application Form

Online Web Application Form Test ScoresTest Scores

eAdmitTMeAdmitTM

Import relevant data

Other electronic forms

Other electronic forms SRARTMSRARTM

Push back data

Electronic

SRARTM Banner (SIS) Integration

• Pulling Data– Identity

• Login & PIN • Pre-logged-in credentials

– Previous Schools information from application

• Push Data– Academic calculations such as GPA– Language Other Than English (LOTE)– Pattern

Screenshot of Banner Status Page

– With open SRAR link

Self-Reported Academic Record

Message box telling applicants items are missing.

Link directly to SRAR form.Pre-logged in.

No need for username or PIN

Two Servers

Passes the Applicant’s Identify Securely

Volume/Load

• A very large portion of applicants procrastinate and submit very, very close to the deadlines• 10,000 applications in one week prior to

November 1

• We received no complaints of slow or non-responsive SRARTMs during the peak times

Unintended Consequences

• The Urbana admissions office releases the decisions twice a year – Mid-December – Mid February

• In the last two years the Central IT’s Status Page crashed during the December decision release

• Admissions Status page stayed up – creating an alternative way for users to see

their decision

Two Interfaces

Security Concerns

• Concerns– Physical damage

• Fire• Tornadoes

– Electronic break-in attempts• None have been successful

• Solutions– Data is backed up daily and in different locations

• Not possible or practical with paper

– Data is stored in a server room with heightened security procedures

• Our paper files were not as safe as we would have liked

Automation

• Identify matched based on application ID– We now know which “John Smith” logged in

• Data as data and not text!– Academic calculations– Pattern analysis

• Aggregate information– Number of As, Bs, Cs, etc.

• Sorting– Subject– Chronological– By grades, requested

Transparency

• Stored in database – not paper• Audit points

– Who did what when?• Users • Tasks• Date stamps

• Reporting– Data as data

• Avg amount of As

Functional Perspectives of the SRAR

User Experience

• User-friendly form; dropdown menus• Very important that applicants read

ALL the instructions• Must have transcript with them when

completing• More work, 60-90 minutes• Can log back in to review submitted

SRAR

Common User Errors

• Ignoring directions• Not entering senior year courses• ‘Creating’ their own grades by averaging

semesters• Did not convert number grades to letters• Entering all grades available (quarter,

semester, year)• Not entering grades at all when present on

transcript• Incomplete SRARs

2013 Enhancements

• Tweaking directions• Designated area for senior year

courses• Edit option in extreme situations• Academic credentials site• Internal view improvements

Advantages

• Easier application process for applicants & counselors

• Applications complete much sooner• Solved some staffing issues• Automation of data

Disadvantages

• Need to get the word out better; received too many high transcripts

• Applicants not following SRAR directions; manual follow-up needed

• Some technical issues on applicants’ end

• Verification/rescind process?

Verification Process

• Official final transcripts needed by July 10th deadline.• If final not available by deadline, 9-11 transcript is

required.• Staff will verify transcripts against SRAR.• Suspected embellishment will be reported to review

chair. Poor senior year performance will also be reported.

• Chair will review information & determine if offer should be rescinded. Student will be notified if offer is rescinded.

• If no documentation is received by deadline, admission offers will be rescinded. Students will be notified by end of July.

Summary

• History – why we moved to SRAR• Technical – how was it created?• Functional – how did it work from

user & Admissions perspective?• Pros/Cons• Verification Process

Feedback/Questions & Answers

Gregg Perrygperry@illinois.edu

Thomas Skottenetskotten@illinois.edu

Nancy Walshnjwalsh@illinois.edu