appendix e f0259054 - whatdotheyknow...from: rolly gilmour to: sandy macdonald subject: re: slp...

69
From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics for july 2012.docx Attached Rolly -- Rolly Gilmour Computing Service University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ Tel: 0141 330 4848 e-mail: [email protected] The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401 -----Original Message----- From: Sandy Macdonald Sent: 24 July 2012 17:04 To: Rolly Gilmour Subject: SLP performance Hi Rolly Any chance of running the performance report for SLP as per previous months - seeking to distribute to Board members on Friday. Thanks Sandy Sandy Macdonald Director of IT Services University of Glasgow Tel: +44(0)141 330 4860 The University of Glasgow, charity number SC004401 Appendix E F0259054 1

Upload: others

Post on 14-Jul-2020

0 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Rolly GilmourTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE SLP performance - JulyDate 25 July 2012 082836Attachments SLP Monitored statistics for july 2012docx

Attached

Rolly

--Rolly GilmourComputing ServiceUniversity of GlasgowGlasgow G12 8QQTel 0141 330 4848e-mail rowlandgilmourglasgowacukThe University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Sandy MacdonaldSent 24 July 2012 1704To Rolly GilmourSubject SLP performance

Hi Rolly

Any chance of running the performance report for SLP as per previous months - seeking todistribute to Board members on Friday

ThanksSandy

Sandy MacdonaldDirector of IT ServicesUniversity of GlasgowTel +44(0)141 330 4860

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

1

SLP Monitored statistics for July 2012

image1emf

image2emf

image3emf

SLP Monitored statistics for July 2012

Appendix E F0259054

2

Appendix E F0259054

3

Appendix E F0259054

4

From Michael ArthurTo David NewallCc Christine Lowther Janice McLellan Sandy Macdonald Diane GillespieSubject Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 25 July 2012 091320Attachments College Checklist v6doc

US Checklist v7doc

Hi David

We had an update meeting with Sandy Christine Barb and Janiceand I on Friday to review readiness for registration and enrolmentand main risks from the teams perspective On the whole we areconfident but that does depend on completion of tasks on thechecklists for Colleges and University Services The main areasof concern are class scheduling activity application offinancial aiddiscounts in both Colleges and RIO (including newRest of UK scholarships) and clarification of enrolmentarrangements for ErasmusVisiting students We are following upwith Schools on class scheduling and with RIO on their tasks andin general with Colleges through the weekly meetings that Janicehas with HoASAs

We think that we should also ask each Dean (or College Secretaryif they are away) and Dorothy to submit a written update onreadiness in advance of the Board - this can be done by updatingthe checklist we issued or their own version of it

If you agree then would suggest request goes from you Janice candraft something and I have attached the most recent versions ofchecklists to send out

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

5

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 2: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLP Monitored statistics for July 2012

Appendix E F0259054

2

Appendix E F0259054

3

Appendix E F0259054

4

From Michael ArthurTo David NewallCc Christine Lowther Janice McLellan Sandy Macdonald Diane GillespieSubject Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 25 July 2012 091320Attachments College Checklist v6doc

US Checklist v7doc

Hi David

We had an update meeting with Sandy Christine Barb and Janiceand I on Friday to review readiness for registration and enrolmentand main risks from the teams perspective On the whole we areconfident but that does depend on completion of tasks on thechecklists for Colleges and University Services The main areasof concern are class scheduling activity application offinancial aiddiscounts in both Colleges and RIO (including newRest of UK scholarships) and clarification of enrolmentarrangements for ErasmusVisiting students We are following upwith Schools on class scheduling and with RIO on their tasks andin general with Colleges through the weekly meetings that Janicehas with HoASAs

We think that we should also ask each Dean (or College Secretaryif they are away) and Dorothy to submit a written update onreadiness in advance of the Board - this can be done by updatingthe checklist we issued or their own version of it

If you agree then would suggest request goes from you Janice candraft something and I have attached the most recent versions ofchecklists to send out

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

5

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 3: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Appendix E F0259054

3

Appendix E F0259054

4

From Michael ArthurTo David NewallCc Christine Lowther Janice McLellan Sandy Macdonald Diane GillespieSubject Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 25 July 2012 091320Attachments College Checklist v6doc

US Checklist v7doc

Hi David

We had an update meeting with Sandy Christine Barb and Janiceand I on Friday to review readiness for registration and enrolmentand main risks from the teams perspective On the whole we areconfident but that does depend on completion of tasks on thechecklists for Colleges and University Services The main areasof concern are class scheduling activity application offinancial aiddiscounts in both Colleges and RIO (including newRest of UK scholarships) and clarification of enrolmentarrangements for ErasmusVisiting students We are following upwith Schools on class scheduling and with RIO on their tasks andin general with Colleges through the weekly meetings that Janicehas with HoASAs

We think that we should also ask each Dean (or College Secretaryif they are away) and Dorothy to submit a written update onreadiness in advance of the Board - this can be done by updatingthe checklist we issued or their own version of it

If you agree then would suggest request goes from you Janice candraft something and I have attached the most recent versions ofchecklists to send out

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

5

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 4: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Appendix E F0259054

4

From Michael ArthurTo David NewallCc Christine Lowther Janice McLellan Sandy Macdonald Diane GillespieSubject Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 25 July 2012 091320Attachments College Checklist v6doc

US Checklist v7doc

Hi David

We had an update meeting with Sandy Christine Barb and Janiceand I on Friday to review readiness for registration and enrolmentand main risks from the teams perspective On the whole we areconfident but that does depend on completion of tasks on thechecklists for Colleges and University Services The main areasof concern are class scheduling activity application offinancial aiddiscounts in both Colleges and RIO (including newRest of UK scholarships) and clarification of enrolmentarrangements for ErasmusVisiting students We are following upwith Schools on class scheduling and with RIO on their tasks andin general with Colleges through the weekly meetings that Janicehas with HoASAs

We think that we should also ask each Dean (or College Secretaryif they are away) and Dorothy to submit a written update onreadiness in advance of the Board - this can be done by updatingthe checklist we issued or their own version of it

If you agree then would suggest request goes from you Janice candraft something and I have attached the most recent versions ofchecklists to send out

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

5

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 5: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Michael ArthurTo David NewallCc Christine Lowther Janice McLellan Sandy Macdonald Diane GillespieSubject Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 25 July 2012 091320Attachments College Checklist v6doc

US Checklist v7doc

Hi David

We had an update meeting with Sandy Christine Barb and Janiceand I on Friday to review readiness for registration and enrolmentand main risks from the teams perspective On the whole we areconfident but that does depend on completion of tasks on thechecklists for Colleges and University Services The main areasof concern are class scheduling activity application offinancial aiddiscounts in both Colleges and RIO (including newRest of UK scholarships) and clarification of enrolmentarrangements for ErasmusVisiting students We are following upwith Schools on class scheduling and with RIO on their tasks andin general with Colleges through the weekly meetings that Janicehas with HoASAs

We think that we should also ask each Dean (or College Secretaryif they are away) and Dorothy to submit a written update onreadiness in advance of the Board - this can be done by updatingthe checklist we issued or their own version of it

If you agree then would suggest request goes from you Janice candraft something and I have attached the most recent versions ofchecklists to send out

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

5

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 6: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

6

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

7

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

8

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 University Services Preparation Checklist v7

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

RIO

Direct Admissions go live 4912 NA

Identify resources required for transfer of docs from

DAS to MyCampus inc location of staff

22612 20712

Manage withdrawals amp deferrals between systems 21512

9712

28912 Based on

planned

start of

matric

Produce amp publish materials for new students 14512 1612 Yes Date

materials

due for

printing

Issue materials to new students (Welcome Packs) 2712 14912

Issue email re updating email addresses 7512 19512 Yes Included in

offer letter

Attach students to lsquostudent groupsrsquo 4612 31712

Apply admissions discounts amp Fin Aid (new students) 11612

9712

31712

Provide details of incoming visiting students

bull To Colleges re course choices

bull To AR re sponsorship

bull To SLSD finance re non-automated fee variations

25612 6712

tbc

Assign dummy courses for outgoing students 6812 24812

Update mode of study for outgoing students 6812 24812

Appendix E F0259054

9

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Add placement data for outgoing students 6812 24812

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 OS task

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Accounts Receivable

Process advancedirect payments amp update accounts 11612

9712

28912

Enrol continuing students in 3rd

party contracts 2712

9712

31712

Check amp enrol new students in 3rd

party contracts 1812 28912

Convert enrolment deposits amp update accounts

(updating accounts in MyCampus with deposit info for

DAS applicants)

2412 19512 To be

discussed

MACRL

Check amp update fees where pound0 showing 18612

9712

29612

31712

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Yes

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Student Services Enquiry Team

Produce amp publish materials for new students 23412 19512 check

Produce amp publish materials for continuing students 14512 1612 check

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 check

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Registry

Transition account access email tasks 2712 6712 Yes

Produce account access emails 1812 28912 ongoing

Appendix E F0259054

10

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Deal with lsquobounce checkrsquo Account Access notifications 1812 28912

Produce ID cards 3912 51012

Issue ID cards 10912 51012

Conduct Visa checks 10912

3912

51012

Clarify process for PGT SAAS funding amp impact 22612 29612 Check DB

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Staff

identified

amp asked to

book

course

Deliver 2nd

line student support 1812 28912

1st

Line Support team

Appoint manager 7512 11512 Yes

Recruit team 14512 16612 Yes

Train team 2712

9712

27712

Deliver 1st

line support 30712 28912

Deliver face to face support 10912

3912

28912

SLSD

Upload and test tuition fees 7512 15612

22612

Yes Complete

28612

Issue spreadsheet tuition fees by plan to Colleges

(highlighting where things appeared incorrect)

22612

29612

Appendix E F0259054

11

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Create amp update student groups (GIC amp Visiting) 16412 1612

29612

Manage data migration from DAS 26312 31812

Define process for managing withdrawals amp deferrals

(Admissions SUG to agree responsibility once process

defined)

22612

6712 Check

dates JB

Commence matriculation 18612

9712

Commence Term Activation 25612

9712

Develop Fin Reg enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

19312 25512

29612

Yes UAT

complete

57

Deploy new Fin Reg process 28512

16712

Develop Finance Summary Screen 19312 24312 Yes

Deploy finance summary screen 26312 Yes

Develop enrolment enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

2412 1612

19612

Yes UAT

complete

20 amp 28

June

Deploy new enrolment process 4612

9712

Develop student summary screen 26312 13412 Yes

Deploy student summary screen 16412 Yes

Update student comms toolkit 2412 19412

15612

Yes

Appendix E F0259054

12

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 7: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

7

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

8

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 University Services Preparation Checklist v7

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

RIO

Direct Admissions go live 4912 NA

Identify resources required for transfer of docs from

DAS to MyCampus inc location of staff

22612 20712

Manage withdrawals amp deferrals between systems 21512

9712

28912 Based on

planned

start of

matric

Produce amp publish materials for new students 14512 1612 Yes Date

materials

due for

printing

Issue materials to new students (Welcome Packs) 2712 14912

Issue email re updating email addresses 7512 19512 Yes Included in

offer letter

Attach students to lsquostudent groupsrsquo 4612 31712

Apply admissions discounts amp Fin Aid (new students) 11612

9712

31712

Provide details of incoming visiting students

bull To Colleges re course choices

bull To AR re sponsorship

bull To SLSD finance re non-automated fee variations

25612 6712

tbc

Assign dummy courses for outgoing students 6812 24812

Update mode of study for outgoing students 6812 24812

Appendix E F0259054

9

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Add placement data for outgoing students 6812 24812

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 OS task

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Accounts Receivable

Process advancedirect payments amp update accounts 11612

9712

28912

Enrol continuing students in 3rd

party contracts 2712

9712

31712

Check amp enrol new students in 3rd

party contracts 1812 28912

Convert enrolment deposits amp update accounts

(updating accounts in MyCampus with deposit info for

DAS applicants)

2412 19512 To be

discussed

MACRL

Check amp update fees where pound0 showing 18612

9712

29612

31712

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Yes

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Student Services Enquiry Team

Produce amp publish materials for new students 23412 19512 check

Produce amp publish materials for continuing students 14512 1612 check

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 check

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Registry

Transition account access email tasks 2712 6712 Yes

Produce account access emails 1812 28912 ongoing

Appendix E F0259054

10

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Deal with lsquobounce checkrsquo Account Access notifications 1812 28912

Produce ID cards 3912 51012

Issue ID cards 10912 51012

Conduct Visa checks 10912

3912

51012

Clarify process for PGT SAAS funding amp impact 22612 29612 Check DB

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Staff

identified

amp asked to

book

course

Deliver 2nd

line student support 1812 28912

1st

Line Support team

Appoint manager 7512 11512 Yes

Recruit team 14512 16612 Yes

Train team 2712

9712

27712

Deliver 1st

line support 30712 28912

Deliver face to face support 10912

3912

28912

SLSD

Upload and test tuition fees 7512 15612

22612

Yes Complete

28612

Issue spreadsheet tuition fees by plan to Colleges

(highlighting where things appeared incorrect)

22612

29612

Appendix E F0259054

11

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Create amp update student groups (GIC amp Visiting) 16412 1612

29612

Manage data migration from DAS 26312 31812

Define process for managing withdrawals amp deferrals

(Admissions SUG to agree responsibility once process

defined)

22612

6712 Check

dates JB

Commence matriculation 18612

9712

Commence Term Activation 25612

9712

Develop Fin Reg enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

19312 25512

29612

Yes UAT

complete

57

Deploy new Fin Reg process 28512

16712

Develop Finance Summary Screen 19312 24312 Yes

Deploy finance summary screen 26312 Yes

Develop enrolment enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

2412 1612

19612

Yes UAT

complete

20 amp 28

June

Deploy new enrolment process 4612

9712

Develop student summary screen 26312 13412 Yes

Deploy student summary screen 16412 Yes

Update student comms toolkit 2412 19412

15612

Yes

Appendix E F0259054

12

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 8: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

8

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 University Services Preparation Checklist v7

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

RIO

Direct Admissions go live 4912 NA

Identify resources required for transfer of docs from

DAS to MyCampus inc location of staff

22612 20712

Manage withdrawals amp deferrals between systems 21512

9712

28912 Based on

planned

start of

matric

Produce amp publish materials for new students 14512 1612 Yes Date

materials

due for

printing

Issue materials to new students (Welcome Packs) 2712 14912

Issue email re updating email addresses 7512 19512 Yes Included in

offer letter

Attach students to lsquostudent groupsrsquo 4612 31712

Apply admissions discounts amp Fin Aid (new students) 11612

9712

31712

Provide details of incoming visiting students

bull To Colleges re course choices

bull To AR re sponsorship

bull To SLSD finance re non-automated fee variations

25612 6712

tbc

Assign dummy courses for outgoing students 6812 24812

Update mode of study for outgoing students 6812 24812

Appendix E F0259054

9

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Add placement data for outgoing students 6812 24812

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 OS task

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Accounts Receivable

Process advancedirect payments amp update accounts 11612

9712

28912

Enrol continuing students in 3rd

party contracts 2712

9712

31712

Check amp enrol new students in 3rd

party contracts 1812 28912

Convert enrolment deposits amp update accounts

(updating accounts in MyCampus with deposit info for

DAS applicants)

2412 19512 To be

discussed

MACRL

Check amp update fees where pound0 showing 18612

9712

29612

31712

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Yes

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Student Services Enquiry Team

Produce amp publish materials for new students 23412 19512 check

Produce amp publish materials for continuing students 14512 1612 check

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 check

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Registry

Transition account access email tasks 2712 6712 Yes

Produce account access emails 1812 28912 ongoing

Appendix E F0259054

10

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Deal with lsquobounce checkrsquo Account Access notifications 1812 28912

Produce ID cards 3912 51012

Issue ID cards 10912 51012

Conduct Visa checks 10912

3912

51012

Clarify process for PGT SAAS funding amp impact 22612 29612 Check DB

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Staff

identified

amp asked to

book

course

Deliver 2nd

line student support 1812 28912

1st

Line Support team

Appoint manager 7512 11512 Yes

Recruit team 14512 16612 Yes

Train team 2712

9712

27712

Deliver 1st

line support 30712 28912

Deliver face to face support 10912

3912

28912

SLSD

Upload and test tuition fees 7512 15612

22612

Yes Complete

28612

Issue spreadsheet tuition fees by plan to Colleges

(highlighting where things appeared incorrect)

22612

29612

Appendix E F0259054

11

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Create amp update student groups (GIC amp Visiting) 16412 1612

29612

Manage data migration from DAS 26312 31812

Define process for managing withdrawals amp deferrals

(Admissions SUG to agree responsibility once process

defined)

22612

6712 Check

dates JB

Commence matriculation 18612

9712

Commence Term Activation 25612

9712

Develop Fin Reg enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

19312 25512

29612

Yes UAT

complete

57

Deploy new Fin Reg process 28512

16712

Develop Finance Summary Screen 19312 24312 Yes

Deploy finance summary screen 26312 Yes

Develop enrolment enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

2412 1612

19612

Yes UAT

complete

20 amp 28

June

Deploy new enrolment process 4612

9712

Develop student summary screen 26312 13412 Yes

Deploy student summary screen 16412 Yes

Update student comms toolkit 2412 19412

15612

Yes

Appendix E F0259054

12

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 9: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 University Services Preparation Checklist v7

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

RIO

Direct Admissions go live 4912 NA

Identify resources required for transfer of docs from

DAS to MyCampus inc location of staff

22612 20712

Manage withdrawals amp deferrals between systems 21512

9712

28912 Based on

planned

start of

matric

Produce amp publish materials for new students 14512 1612 Yes Date

materials

due for

printing

Issue materials to new students (Welcome Packs) 2712 14912

Issue email re updating email addresses 7512 19512 Yes Included in

offer letter

Attach students to lsquostudent groupsrsquo 4612 31712

Apply admissions discounts amp Fin Aid (new students) 11612

9712

31712

Provide details of incoming visiting students

bull To Colleges re course choices

bull To AR re sponsorship

bull To SLSD finance re non-automated fee variations

25612 6712

tbc

Assign dummy courses for outgoing students 6812 24812

Update mode of study for outgoing students 6812 24812

Appendix E F0259054

9

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Add placement data for outgoing students 6812 24812

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 OS task

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Accounts Receivable

Process advancedirect payments amp update accounts 11612

9712

28912

Enrol continuing students in 3rd

party contracts 2712

9712

31712

Check amp enrol new students in 3rd

party contracts 1812 28912

Convert enrolment deposits amp update accounts

(updating accounts in MyCampus with deposit info for

DAS applicants)

2412 19512 To be

discussed

MACRL

Check amp update fees where pound0 showing 18612

9712

29612

31712

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Yes

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Student Services Enquiry Team

Produce amp publish materials for new students 23412 19512 check

Produce amp publish materials for continuing students 14512 1612 check

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 check

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Registry

Transition account access email tasks 2712 6712 Yes

Produce account access emails 1812 28912 ongoing

Appendix E F0259054

10

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Deal with lsquobounce checkrsquo Account Access notifications 1812 28912

Produce ID cards 3912 51012

Issue ID cards 10912 51012

Conduct Visa checks 10912

3912

51012

Clarify process for PGT SAAS funding amp impact 22612 29612 Check DB

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Staff

identified

amp asked to

book

course

Deliver 2nd

line student support 1812 28912

1st

Line Support team

Appoint manager 7512 11512 Yes

Recruit team 14512 16612 Yes

Train team 2712

9712

27712

Deliver 1st

line support 30712 28912

Deliver face to face support 10912

3912

28912

SLSD

Upload and test tuition fees 7512 15612

22612

Yes Complete

28612

Issue spreadsheet tuition fees by plan to Colleges

(highlighting where things appeared incorrect)

22612

29612

Appendix E F0259054

11

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Create amp update student groups (GIC amp Visiting) 16412 1612

29612

Manage data migration from DAS 26312 31812

Define process for managing withdrawals amp deferrals

(Admissions SUG to agree responsibility once process

defined)

22612

6712 Check

dates JB

Commence matriculation 18612

9712

Commence Term Activation 25612

9712

Develop Fin Reg enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

19312 25512

29612

Yes UAT

complete

57

Deploy new Fin Reg process 28512

16712

Develop Finance Summary Screen 19312 24312 Yes

Deploy finance summary screen 26312 Yes

Develop enrolment enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

2412 1612

19612

Yes UAT

complete

20 amp 28

June

Deploy new enrolment process 4612

9712

Develop student summary screen 26312 13412 Yes

Deploy student summary screen 16412 Yes

Update student comms toolkit 2412 19412

15612

Yes

Appendix E F0259054

12

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 10: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Add placement data for outgoing students 6812 24812

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 OS task

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Accounts Receivable

Process advancedirect payments amp update accounts 11612

9712

28912

Enrol continuing students in 3rd

party contracts 2712

9712

31712

Check amp enrol new students in 3rd

party contracts 1812 28912

Convert enrolment deposits amp update accounts

(updating accounts in MyCampus with deposit info for

DAS applicants)

2412 19512 To be

discussed

MACRL

Check amp update fees where pound0 showing 18612

9712

29612

31712

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Yes

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Student Services Enquiry Team

Produce amp publish materials for new students 23412 19512 check

Produce amp publish materials for continuing students 14512 1612 check

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 check

Deliver 2nd

line support 1812 28912

Registry

Transition account access email tasks 2712 6712 Yes

Produce account access emails 1812 28912 ongoing

Appendix E F0259054

10

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Deal with lsquobounce checkrsquo Account Access notifications 1812 28912

Produce ID cards 3912 51012

Issue ID cards 10912 51012

Conduct Visa checks 10912

3912

51012

Clarify process for PGT SAAS funding amp impact 22612 29612 Check DB

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Staff

identified

amp asked to

book

course

Deliver 2nd

line student support 1812 28912

1st

Line Support team

Appoint manager 7512 11512 Yes

Recruit team 14512 16612 Yes

Train team 2712

9712

27712

Deliver 1st

line support 30712 28912

Deliver face to face support 10912

3912

28912

SLSD

Upload and test tuition fees 7512 15612

22612

Yes Complete

28612

Issue spreadsheet tuition fees by plan to Colleges

(highlighting where things appeared incorrect)

22612

29612

Appendix E F0259054

11

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Create amp update student groups (GIC amp Visiting) 16412 1612

29612

Manage data migration from DAS 26312 31812

Define process for managing withdrawals amp deferrals

(Admissions SUG to agree responsibility once process

defined)

22612

6712 Check

dates JB

Commence matriculation 18612

9712

Commence Term Activation 25612

9712

Develop Fin Reg enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

19312 25512

29612

Yes UAT

complete

57

Deploy new Fin Reg process 28512

16712

Develop Finance Summary Screen 19312 24312 Yes

Deploy finance summary screen 26312 Yes

Develop enrolment enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

2412 1612

19612

Yes UAT

complete

20 amp 28

June

Deploy new enrolment process 4612

9712

Develop student summary screen 26312 13412 Yes

Deploy student summary screen 16412 Yes

Update student comms toolkit 2412 19412

15612

Yes

Appendix E F0259054

12

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 11: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Deal with lsquobounce checkrsquo Account Access notifications 1812 28912

Produce ID cards 3912 51012

Issue ID cards 10912 51012

Conduct Visa checks 10912

3912

51012

Clarify process for PGT SAAS funding amp impact 22612 29612 Check DB

Identify staff to be trained on Supportworks 22612 29612 Staff

identified

amp asked to

book

course

Deliver 2nd

line student support 1812 28912

1st

Line Support team

Appoint manager 7512 11512 Yes

Recruit team 14512 16612 Yes

Train team 2712

9712

27712

Deliver 1st

line support 30712 28912

Deliver face to face support 10912

3912

28912

SLSD

Upload and test tuition fees 7512 15612

22612

Yes Complete

28612

Issue spreadsheet tuition fees by plan to Colleges

(highlighting where things appeared incorrect)

22612

29612

Appendix E F0259054

11

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Create amp update student groups (GIC amp Visiting) 16412 1612

29612

Manage data migration from DAS 26312 31812

Define process for managing withdrawals amp deferrals

(Admissions SUG to agree responsibility once process

defined)

22612

6712 Check

dates JB

Commence matriculation 18612

9712

Commence Term Activation 25612

9712

Develop Fin Reg enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

19312 25512

29612

Yes UAT

complete

57

Deploy new Fin Reg process 28512

16712

Develop Finance Summary Screen 19312 24312 Yes

Deploy finance summary screen 26312 Yes

Develop enrolment enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

2412 1612

19612

Yes UAT

complete

20 amp 28

June

Deploy new enrolment process 4612

9712

Develop student summary screen 26312 13412 Yes

Deploy student summary screen 16412 Yes

Update student comms toolkit 2412 19412

15612

Yes

Appendix E F0259054

12

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 12: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Create amp update student groups (GIC amp Visiting) 16412 1612

29612

Manage data migration from DAS 26312 31812

Define process for managing withdrawals amp deferrals

(Admissions SUG to agree responsibility once process

defined)

22612

6712 Check

dates JB

Commence matriculation 18612

9712

Commence Term Activation 25612

9712

Develop Fin Reg enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

19312 25512

29612

Yes UAT

complete

57

Deploy new Fin Reg process 28512

16712

Develop Finance Summary Screen 19312 24312 Yes

Deploy finance summary screen 26312 Yes

Develop enrolment enhancements

(x-ref SUG documentation for details of changes)

2412 1612

19612

Yes UAT

complete

20 amp 28

June

Deploy new enrolment process 4612

9712

Develop student summary screen 26312 13412 Yes

Deploy student summary screen 16412 Yes

Update student comms toolkit 2412 19412

15612

Yes

Appendix E F0259054

12

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 13: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Complete Notes

Development of student guidancetraining materials 19612 13712

Testing of student guidancetraining materials 2712 23712

Create new session for 201213 30412 11512

rev

Yes Check BM

Run progression in lsquotestrsquo 18612

28612

29612

Yes

Issue progression reports to Colleges for checking 2712 6712 Yes

Run progression in lsquoliversquo 8712 new

Make dormantunused plans inactive 20612 29612

Create new Fin Aid years 16412 27412

18612

Yes

Update fees for incoming students 9712 20712

Confirm content for Account Access email 30412 4512

22612

Yes

Configure amp test Account Access email 7512 19512 Trans to

Registry

Transition Account Access email production to Registry 2712 6712 Yes

Run adviser allocation 25612 10912

Deliver 3rd

line support 1812 28912

Run progression after resits 3912

5912

Prepare and deliver training 19312 28912

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

13

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 14: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy MacdonaldSubject meetingDate 25 July 2012 121000

Hi Sandy

I tried to give you a call a couple of times Irsquom out of the meeting now ndash not sure if youwant to come over just now ndash spoke with Barb and she doesnrsquot really have anythingshe needs to cover and same with me

Cheers

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

14

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 15: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Michael ArthurTo Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Contract issuesDate 25 July 2012 173405

For info

Also I spoke with Cheryl today and unfortunately She did say she was more than happy to

provide us with email assistance as and when required

Mike

-----Original Message-----From Bill WelchSent 25 July 2012 1656To Michael ArthurSubject Contract issues

Hi

As August 12th only a couple of weeks away I would really like an update as soon as possible

You can call me at

Do not worry about the time difference (I am awake anyway) thanks Bill

Appendix E F0259054

15

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 16: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Janice McLellanTo Michael Arthur Barbara Mueller Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldCc Diane Gillespie Karen LeeSubject Project Board - Lessons Learned ReportDate 26 July 2012 094852Attachments 20120725 Lessons Learned Recommendations updatedoc

Hi All

I have updated the Lessons Learned Report - looking good Only 3 SLSD items left in progress solooking good I think Of the 3 left they are also very close to completion

Let me know if you have any commentschanges

Janice

Mrs Janice McLellanSupport ManagerStudent Lifecycle Support amp Development Team

Tel 0141 330 1679E-mail jmclellanadminglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

16

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this item

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Ref

Recommendation

Decision Responsibility

Current Position

1

The University should allow students (especially international students) to enrol before completing financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear process and students should still be encouraged to complete financial registration as soon as possible and would not be able to access facilities such as the library and other facilities until registration had been completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented developed and are being tested by staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your Specialist User Group representative details of whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2

The University should review the relationship between MyCampus and advising and the role of advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was not optimised and the relationship between MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be reviewed The Board supports the concern set out in the report that advisers of Study should meet with students before the point at which their curriculum could no longer be changed David Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the same direction

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all Colleges were already committed to the practice of advisers meeting students before their curriculum was finalised

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on 8th May The proposed workcentre functionality was demonstrated and the group suggested a number of refinements to this The workcentre has been developed and members of the SUG were involved in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on 20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to ensure all advisers undertake the required training both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

3

The option for students to choose courses directly from the course catalogue should be removed so that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a measure which should reduce the incidence of course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group members the designs for enhancements to the registration amp enrolment process have been documented and developed Students and staff conducted UAT on 20th and 28th June respectively with students also being involved in reviewing the guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4

The revised SLP project plan as well as regular reports on progress should be shared with the University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via Campus e-news each month and via the SRC newsletter for students following Project Board meetings

Recommendation Implemented

5

Information about contacts within the user community and the SLP team should be published widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with the other areas clarifying College University Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6

Usability and the user experience of staff and students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the introduction of Work Centres which will improve navigation and may reduce the number of clicks required for certain transactions This is an ongoing activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going live on 20 June The enhancements to financial registration and enrolment will also improve the user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design and development activity is helping ensure the user interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7

MyCampus handbooks should be produced for Advisers administrative staff and appropriate academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and updated In line with the training schedule As part of this consideration is being given to how these might be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An Adviser handbook has been produced and is being reviewed by the SUG

8

Two new members should be added to the Project Board to represent the user community including one representing administrative users and one academic users Each individual should convene a user group which should receive administrative support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now members of the Board and therefore were not required to convene separate groups or be members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9

The user groups should be involved in comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives (recruited through SRC) are directly participating in User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of all new developments and enhanced functionality Their comments and feedback have been used to either further refine functionality or to identify areas for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being prepared by the SLSD team

10

Comprehensive user training should be provided in a timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published Courses can be booked using the online booking system

Training activity has been mapped to the Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for resource planning within Colleges and Services Colleges and Services have been asked to identify any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11

Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st line support team started on 9th July and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25 support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the business They have undertaken full training in readiness for delivery of 1st line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local support over the summer period including recruitment of additional temporary staff where required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points from the 1st line to 2nd and 3rd line support has been produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance materials has been produced to support registration and enrolment

12

Project implementation protocols should be reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10 functional areas As part of their remit they will ensure more robust implementation protocols are adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13

If possible a replica of the live database should be provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created (CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff attending training being recommended to use this as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14

The services of an individual or groups of individuals should be secured to review academic plans in a holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources implications and consistency of plans) to be discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for planning and monitoring activity to ensure completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to Progression being run This process was run at the end of June with results being in line with expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15

Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

middot Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and BI-Query models

middot Request development of additional reports and queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

16

A properly trained adequately-staffed and appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set up to assist students with registration and enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17

In undertaking any substantial project in the future the University should learn the wider lessons from the MyCampus implementation captured in this report Specifically robust project governance and best practice in project management disciplines must be employed allowing adequate time and appropriate user engagement at each stage Benefits management should be fully embedded from the outset such that success criteria are clearly identified and understood by the user community as a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University Management

Page 17: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Recommendations

Status and progress updates

The process for publishing the updated recommendations document each month following

presentation to the Project Board is now fully established

Where a recommendation is complete or has been passed to another body (eg SMG) for

action it will be shown lsquogreyed outrsquo and no further updates will be recorded against this

item

Appendix E F0259054

17

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 18: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Lessons Learned Review ndash Recommendations Update June 2012

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

1 The University should allow students (especially

international students) to enrol before completing

financial registration

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

There should be a move away from the linear

process and students should still be encouraged to

complete financial registration as soon as possible

and would not be able to access facilities such as the

library and other facilities until registration had been

completed

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented developed and are being tested by

staff and students

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

For more information on this please contact your

Specialist User Group representative details of

whom can be found under the Whorsquos Who section

of the SLP website

Recommendation Implemented

2 The University should review the relationship

between MyCampus and advising and the role of

advisers in MyCampus

6212 This recommendation must be considered

by the Chief Advisers Group

The interface between advising and MyCampus was

not optimised and the relationship between

MyCampus and the role of the advisers should be

reviewed The Board supports the concern set out

in the report that advisers of Study should meet

with students before the point at which their

curriculum could no longer be changed David

Newall would discuss with Graham Caie suggesting

the existing Chief Advisers Group join up with the

Advising SUG to ensure discussions moved in the

same direction

Specialist User Group (SUG) for Advising was held on

8th

May The proposed workcentre functionality was

demonstrated and the group suggested a number of

refinements to this The workcentre has been

developed and members of the SUG were involved

in UAT prior to the workcentre being made live on

20 June

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are taking steps to

ensure all advisers undertake the required training

both College-specific and MyCampus

Recommendation Implemented

Appendix E F0259054

18

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 19: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Chairmans Note This matter was discussed at SMG

on 16 February where Graham Caie noted that all

Colleges were already committed to the practice of

advisers meeting students before their curriculum

was finalised

3 The option for students to choose courses directly

from the course catalogue should be removed so

that they have to use MyRequirements

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Students must go through MyRequirements a

measure which should reduce the incidence of

course clashes and of poor curricular choices

Following feedback from Specialist User Group

members the designs for enhancements to the

registration amp enrolment process have been

documented and developed Students and staff

conducted UAT on 20th

and 28th

June respectively

with students also being involved in reviewing the

guidance materials produced

The enhanced enrolment functionality was deployed

to the live system on 25 July 2012 for registration

and enrolment opening in Summer 2012

Copies of the design documents have been

published on the Sharepoint site for information

Recommendation Implemented

4 The revised SLP project plan as well as regular

reports on progress should be shared with the

University community

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Publication of project plan and progress updates to

be taken forward with SLP Team and Peter

Aitchison

High Level Plan published on SLP website and will be

refreshed monthly

Regular updates will be communicated to staff via

Campus e-news each month and via the SRC

newsletter for students following Project Board

meetings

Appendix E F0259054

19

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 20: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

5 Information about contacts within the user

community and the SLP team should be published

widely

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

The SLP team would address this in conjunction with

the other areas clarifying College University

Services and SLP contacts

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Recommendation Implemented

6 Usability and the user experience of staff and

students should be given the very highest priority

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

The User Interface is being enhanced with the

introduction of Work Centres which will improve

navigation and may reduce the number of clicks

required for certain transactions This is an ongoing

activity with the first Work Centre (Advising) going

live on 20 June The enhancements to financial

registration and enrolment will also improve the

user experience

The involvement of students in testing functionality

and the contribution of SUGs and CLGs to the design

and development activity is helping ensure the user

interface continues to have a high priority

Recommendation Implemented

7 MyCampus handbooks should be produced for

Advisers administrative staff and appropriate

academic staff

6212 ndash Project Board determined that SLP team

will take forward

Training Materials are currently being reviewed and

updated In line with the training schedule As part of

this consideration is being given to how these might

be logically grouped into role-based User Guides An

Adviser handbook has been produced and is being

reviewed by the SUG

Appendix E F0259054

20

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 21: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

8 Two new members should be added to the Project

Board to represent the user community including

one representing administrative users and one

academic users Each individual should convene a

user group which should receive administrative

support

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Lillias Robinson and Fred Cartmel were now

members of the Board and therefore were not

required to convene separate groups or be

members of the SUGS Christine Lowther Janice

McLellan and Lillias Robinson would discuss whether

Lillias Robinson should take a specific role in the

weekly Support Meetings convened by Janice

McLellan and attended by HoASAs and others

Peter Aitchison (Corporate Comms) has also joined

the Board

More active role in the Support Meetings for Lillias

Robinson agreed

Recommendation Implemented

9 The user groups should be involved in

comprehensive system testing

6212 ndash Project Board agreed with

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Specialist User Groups and student representatives

(recruited through SRC) are directly participating in

User Acceptance Testing for all newenhanced

functionality

Staff and students have been involved in the UAT of

all new developments and enhanced functionality

Their comments and feedback have been used to

either further refine functionality or to identify areas

for future development

A summary of the outcomes of UAT is being

prepared by the SLSD team

10 Comprehensive user training should be provided in a

timely manner ahead of roll-out

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Full training calendar developed and published

Courses can be booked using the online booking

system

Training activity has been mapped to the

Appendix E F0259054

21

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 22: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Registration amp Enrolment timeline to allow for

resource planning within Colleges and Services

Colleges and Services have been asked to identify

any additional training requirements

Weekly reports are being provided to each College

detailing attendees at training

Recommendation Implemented

11 Appropriate support mechanisms should be put in

place to support users during the roll-out phase

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

The central 1st

line support team started on 9th

July

and comprises Team Manager team Lead 25

support assistants and 5 secondees (3 FTE) from the

business They have undertaken full training in

readiness for delivery of 1st

line support

Colleges are implementing their models for local

support over the summer period including

recruitment of additional temporary staff where

required

Clarification on call handling and the hand-off points

from the 1st

line to 2nd

and 3rd

line support has been

produced

A comprehensive range of training and guidance

materials has been produced to support registration

and enrolment

12 Project implementation protocols should be

reviewed and made more robust

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Specialist User Groups have been established for 10

functional areas As part of their remit they will

ensure more robust implementation protocols are

Appendix E F0259054

22

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 23: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

adopted

Recommendation Implemented

13 If possible a replica of the live database should be

provided to facilitate user testing

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Once system fully up to date with bundles a replica

of live database will be available

A replication of the live database has been created

(CSSAND) and is now in general use with staff

attending training being recommended to use this

as a lsquoplayrsquo environment

Recommendation Implemented

14 The services of an individual or groups of individuals

should be secured to review academic plans in a

holistic way

6212

Review of academic plans (including resources

implications and consistency of plans) to be

discussed with Deans of LampT

Deans of Learning amp Teaching are responsible for

planning and monitoring activity to ensure

completion of this task

Deans of Learning amp Teaching to provide update on

progress at each Project Board

Plan testing and building was completed prior to

Progression being run This process was run at the

end of June with results being in line with

expectations

Recommendation Implemented

15 Issues concerning queries permissions and lines of

communication should be addressed immediately

6212

SLP Team progressing

Formal procedures established to

bull Obtain access to MyCampus functionality and

BI-Query models

bull Request development of additional reports and

queries

These are available through the SLP website

Whorsquos Who section published on SLP website to

provide additional contact information

Appendix E F0259054

23

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 24: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

SLPxx xx

Ref Recommendation Decision Responsibility Current Position

Recommendation Implemented

16 A properly trained adequately-staffed and

appropriately empowered Help Desk should be set

up to assist students with registration and

enrolment

6212 ndash Project Board accepted the

recommendation

Project Board will come back to this at a later date

Summer 2012 Support Model has been approved

See item 11 above

Recommendation Implemented

17 In undertaking any substantial project in the future

the University should learn the wider lessons from

the MyCampus implementation captured in this

report Specifically robust project governance and

best practice in project management disciplines

must be employed allowing adequate time and

appropriate user engagement at each stage

Benefits management should be fully embedded

from the outset such that success criteria are clearly

identified and understood by the user community as

a whole

6212

Noted as a University issue

Recommendation to be progressed by University

Management

Appendix E F0259054

24

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 25: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From David NewallTo Janice McLellan Michael Arthur Christine Lowther Sandy MacdonaldSubject FW Registration amp enrolment checklistsDate 26 July 2012 103054Attachments College Checklist v7doc

All

For info

David

_____________________________________________From David NewallSent 26 July 2012 1030To David Fearn Alice Jenkins Jill Morrison Moira Fischbacher-SmithSubject Registration amp enrolment checklists

Alice David Jill Moira

We have the next SLP Board on Monday 6 August and I would like to spend a fewminutes reviewing the College and University Services checklists for Registration andEnrolment I hope that will help address any areas where there is continuinguncertainty or a need for further action resource

The General College checklist is attached for reference (I think you may have tailoredthis within the College) Irsquoll put this and the University Services checklist on the agendafor us to review

David

Appendix E F0259054

25

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a negative impact on student experience

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH

Task

Resp

Staff identified

Staff trained

Security roles assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp

Notes

Confirm tuition fees

NA

NA

NA

30 March

Progression rule testing

February

31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking

February

31 May

Class scheduling

16 April

31 May

If not complete then data has to entered in both CMIS and MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements

23 April

30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs

1 May

31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students

30 April

31 July

Load exam results

18 May

12 June

Check progression reports

2 July

9 July

New task agreed with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and any required action

9 July

New task agreed with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required

18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results

18 May

12 June

Load resit results

18 August

4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits

6 Sept

14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required

2 July

9 July

31 July

Check fees and apply discounts

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid

28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required

11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad

11 June

22 June

Note required for progression If not applied then student would lsquofailrsquo progression and the record then updated manually

Allocate update advisers

2 July

30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students

1 August

24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for visiting students

2 July

31 July

New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students

9 July

31 July

New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol

1 August

30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students

1 August

31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule

30 April

30 June

Deliver 2nd line student support

2 July

30 Sept

Page 26: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Registration amp Enrolment ndash Summer 2012 Colleges Preparation Checklist

Task Resp Staff

identified

Staff

trained

Security

roles

assigned

Start date

Revised

End date

Revised

Comp Notes

Confirm tuition fees NA NA NA 30 March

Progression rule testing February 31 May

Plan completenessaccuracy checking February 31 May

Class scheduling 16 April 31 May If not complete

then data has to

entered in both

CMIS and

MyCampus

Confirm enrolment arrangements 23 April 30 April

30 June

Produce enrolment guidance amp URLs 1 May 31 May

30 June

Conduct PGR annual review amp progress students 30 April 31 July

Load exam results 18 May 12 June

Check progression reports 2 July 9 July New task agreed

with plan testers

Issue student communication re progression and

any required action

9 July New task agreed

with HoASAs

Check holds and action as required 18 June

9 July

31 July

Load degree results 18 May 12 June

Load resit results 18 August 4 Sept

Check holds and action as required post-resits 6 Sept 14 Sept

Update plans - Hons to Designated as required 2 July

9 July

31 July

Appendix E F0259054

26

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH
Page 27: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Check fees and apply discounts 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply bench fees 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply financial aid 28 May

18 June

31 July

Update lsquoacademic loadrsquo where required 11 June

9 July

31 July

Apply credit - students returning from year abroad 11 June

22 June Note required for

progression If not

applied then

student would lsquofailrsquo

progression and

the record then

updated manually

Allocate update advisers 2 July 30 Sept

Assign dummy course for outgoing students 1 August 24 August

Attach student groups to relevant courses for

visiting students

2 July 31 July New

Apply lsquoTransfer Creditrsquo for GIC students 9 July 31 July New

Enrol students via quick or block enrol 1 August 30 Sept

Add placement data for outgoing students 1 August 31 August

Create research training courses amp schedule 30 April 30 June

Deliver 2nd

line student support 2 July 30 Sept

Notes

31 July date against various tasks is for those students expected to be able to register amp enrol from 1 August Each is then an ongoing task as students are

either term activated or new information is added (eg later PGR reviews)

Appendix E F0259054

27

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH
Page 28: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Dates associated with these items are fixed deadlines Failure to meet these dates will impact on other tasks and timescales including the ability of

students to register and enrol from 1 August

End dates not marked indicate that there is no absolute requirement for the task to be completed by this date nor a direct impact on dependent tasks

which would affect the ability of students to register and enrol However failure to meet these deadlines would result in incomplete records (eg no

location information for outgoing study abroad students incomplete timetables as a result of block enrolments not being completed) and would have a

negative impact on student experience

Appendix E F0259054

28

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH
Page 29: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 091134

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

29

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH
Page 30: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092404Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgow

Appendix E F0259054

30

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu
Cc
Hugh Woods
Recipients
slp-infraglasgowacuk BarryCrozierglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk HughWoodsglasgowacuk

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

JobReporthtm

JobReporthtm

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Caroline Weir
To
Barry Crozier SLP Infra
Cc
Patrick Nwaozuzu
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk slp-infraglasgowacuk PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

Hi

How do we progress this

Caroline

From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023 To Caroline Weir Subject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Caroline

The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in the export directory going back to last Tuesday

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email

From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852 To Patrick Nwaozuzu Subject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick

GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is

Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping

Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file or directory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14

Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me

I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failing but I could be wrong

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----From [ ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 216855

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Type Name
User BATCH
Page 31: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

G12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

31

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Page 32: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Caroline WeirTo SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 083700Attachments JobReporthtm

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

32

Instance Process Name Description Process Type Run Status Run Control ID Type Output Format Server Name Begin DateTime End DateTime
219574 Agresso GL Response Application Engine Not Successful Response_Agresso Web Text Files (txt) PSUNX 2012-07-25-052007933924 2012-07-25-052020129645

Parameter

psae -CT ORACLE -CD CSPROD -CO BATCH -CP OPRPSWD -R Response_Agresso -I 219574 -AI UOG_GL_RESP -OT 6 -FP packagespsoftpsoftcscsprodappservprcsCSPRODlog_outputAE_UOG_GL_RESP_219574 -OF 14

Distribution List

Application Messages

PeopleCode Exit(1) Abort invoked by Application at UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (108543)

Process 219574 ABENDED at Step UOG_GL_RESPMAINReadFile (PeopleCode) -- RC = 16 (108524)

219574 UOG_GL_RESP MAIN ReadFile PeopleCode 16 7 8 9 (6530)

Successfully posted generated files to the report repository (6571)

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Type Name
User BATCH
Page 33: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier SLP InfraCc Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 23 July 2012 113600

Hi How do we progress thisCaroline From Patrick Nwaozuzu Sent 23 July 2012 1023To Caroline WeirSubject RE The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Caroline The process for picking up the response file has not worked I have response file sitting in theexport directory going back to last Tuesday Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx From Caroline Weir Sent 23 July 2012 0852To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully ) Hi Patrick GL Response process from Friday failed message I get is Error in opening Inbound Agresso GL response file Program Stopping Open of file slpsharedtransitfinanceimportAGR_CS_23072012txt failed No such file ordirectory (2633) UOG_GL_RESPMAINGBLdefault1900-01-01ReadFileOnExecute PCPC1431 Statement14 Did you generate a response file and if so could you send it to me I checked the GL file and there doesnrsquot seem to be anything obvious failingbut I could be wrong Thanks

Appendix E F0259054

33

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Page 34: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Caroline -----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ] Sent 23 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) Process Instance 216855Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

34

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Page 35: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 092705Attachments FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )msg

Hi Barry ndash email attached

Many thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

35

FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

From
Andrew Charters
To
Barry Crozier
Recipients
BarryCrozierglasgowacuk

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface from Campus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problem particularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get it resolved

Thanks for your help

Andrew

Andrew Charters

Group Financial Controller

Tel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----

From Patrick Nwaozuzu

Sent 25 July 2012 1514

To Andrew Charters

Subject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from the Agresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since we had the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind Regards

Patrick Nwaozuzu

___________________________________

System Support and Development Section

Tel No +44(0)141-330-2756

Email PatrickNwaozuzuglasgowacuk

-----Original Message-----

From Andrew Charters

Sent 25 July 2012 0947

To Patrick Nwaozuzu

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with this

Many thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----

From Carolyn Timar

Sent 25 July 2012 0929

To Andrew Charters

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Financial Accountant

0141 330 3934

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----

From Hugh Woods

Sent 25 July 2012 0917

To Carolyn Timar

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

-----Original Message-----

From Caroline Weir

Sent 25 July 2012 0837

To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick Nwaozuzu

Cc Hugh Woods

Subject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we are approaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

Thanks

Caroline

-----Original Message-----

From slp-infraglasgowacuk [mailtoslp-infraglasgowacuk]

Sent 25 July 2012 0521

To Caroline Weir

Subject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574

Process Name UOG_GL_RESP

Process Type Application Engine

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Page 36: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry CrozierSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )Date 25 July 2012 160600

Hi Barry - I wonder if you could help with this We are having a problem with the interface fromCampus into Agresso as described by Patrick below This is causing a significant problemparticularly with yearend approaching Are you able to do anything quickly for us to try and get itresolved

Thanks for your helpAndrew

Andrew ChartersGroup Financial ControllerTel No 0141 330 2831

-----Original Message-----From Patrick NwaozuzuSent 25 July 2012 1514To Andrew ChartersSubject RE The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Andrew

This issue is to do with a routine that MIS have written (Barry Crozier) that takes a file from theAgresso Export directory and moves it to an area that the SLP system can pick it up from Since wehad the new Agresso business server installed on the 14th 15th July this has not worked

If you require any further information just give me a call

Kind RegardsPatrick Nwaozuzu___________________________________System Support and Development SectionTel No +44(0)141-330-2756Email xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-----Original Message-----From Andrew ChartersSent 25 July 2012 0947To Patrick NwaozuzuSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Hi Patrick - do you know what the issue is with thisMany thanks Andrew

-----Original Message-----From Carolyn TimarSent 25 July 2012 0929To Andrew ChartersSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Fyi

Carolyn Timar

Appendix E F0259054

36

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Page 37: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Financial Accountant0141 330 3934The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

-----Original Message-----From Hugh WoodsSent 25 July 2012 0917To Carolyn TimarSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

-----Original Message-----From Caroline WeirSent 25 July 2012 0837To SLP Infra Barry Crozier Patrick NwaozuzuCc Hugh WoodsSubject FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to completesuccessfully )

Are we any closer to getting the problem with the file transfer from Agresso to MyCampus resolved This is happening everyday so the automated interface is becoming very manual and we areapproaching year end so this is a critical problem

Patrick - can you send the file to me manually to load in the meantime

ThanksCaroline

-----Original Message-----From slp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailtoslp-xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]Sent 25 July 2012 0521To Caroline WeirSubject The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully )

Process Instance 219574Process Name UOG_GL_RESPProcess Type Application Engine

Appendix E F0259054

37

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Page 38: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Barbara MuellerTo Christine Lowther Sandy Macdonald Janice McLellan Michael ArthurSubject DRAFT Interim Project Board Progress ReportDate 27 July 2012 104545Attachments Interim PB Progress Report 20120725doc

Draft report is attached

Please let me have any comments

Thanks Barb

Barbara Mueller SLP Project Manager Level 2 Fraser Building University of Glasgow Glasgow G12 8QQ

Telephone 0141 330 7482 Email BarbaraMuellerglasgowacuk httpwwwglaacuk

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

38

Admissions

Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans

All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August

In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically

Academic Advisement

The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students

The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly

The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study

Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August

Student Records

Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment

Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes

Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc

In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions

Finance

User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT

New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records

The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so

Training

In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining

Technical

In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

image1jpg

INTERIM PROJECT BOARD

PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By

Barbara Mueller

Report Date

25 July 2012

Page 39: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Confidential ndash For SLP Use Only Page 1 of 3 Printed copies are uncontrolled

INTERIM PROJECT

BOARD PROGRESS REPORT

Completed By Barbara Mueller Report Date 25 July 2012

Admissions Direct Admissions end to end user acceptance testing was conducted the week of 9 July Students and admissions processers participated at various stages throughout the testing cycle to ensure a complete end to end test was executed for a range of applications across a variety of programs and plans All Graduate Schools PGT and ErasmusStudy Abroad testers passed the system subject to some additional testing in August once additional functionality is available and some minor changes have been implemented EFL testers would not sign off UAT as they were unhappy with the design and usability Their concerns will be addressed through training and it was agreed they would conduct further testing in August In preparation for the go-live on Tuesday 4th September key members of the SLSD and IT Services teams are meeting week commencing 6 August to discuss the cutover strategy including determining when DAS and DOAS will be switched off and agreeing who will have responsibility for manually transferring documents into MyCampus All open applications will be migrated programmatically Academic Advisement The progression process was run in report mode on 2nd July and queries were made available to nominated members of staff to review results for their SchoolCollegeResearch Institute This exercise produced no major issues but did provide an opportunity to tidy up some of the plan data prior to publishing results to students The progression process was then run in update mode on Sunday 8 July for all full time UG students If students met the plan criteria to progress to the next level their academic standing code was updated to PROG For those who did not meet the criteria their academic standing code was changed to REVIEW Advisers should now be looking at their advisees reviewing those that have not progressed and updating their academic standing accordingly The final draft of the Advising Handbook has been reviewed by the Advising SUG and CASC and both groups are happy with both the content and the format Related job aids are currently being reviewed for accuracy and once complete will be made available along with the handbook on a website for Advisers of Study Training classes for advisers have been offered throughout July and classes are scheduled in August Student Records Changes to the student self-service enrolment pages were moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July and are undergoing testing by the SLSD team to ensure everything works as expected Online guidance materials have been created and will be published on the website prior to the opening of registration and enrolment Enhancements to administrative enrolment functions were also moved into the live system on Wednesday 25 July Improvements to the Quick Enrol process as well as a new page to process lsquoExams Onlyrsquo enrolments will simplify these procedures and prevent errors in subsequent processes Term activation has been run and created records for the 201213 term This process will run nightly so students will be term activated as they become eligible Tuition calculation has also been run and will run nightly Once the 201213 records are created they are available for School and College staff to

Appendix E F0259054

39

Confidential ndash For SLP Use Only Page 2 of 3 Printed copies are uncontrolled

view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions Finance User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so Training In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining Technical In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

Appendix E F0259054

40

Confidential ndash For SLP Use Only Page 3 of 3 Printed copies are uncontrolled

Appendix E F0259054

41

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 105638

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I have

Appendix E F0259054

42

contacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

43

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 110033

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry Crozier

Appendix E F0259054

44

Sent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

45

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 40: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Confidential ndash For SLP Use Only Page 2 of 3 Printed copies are uncontrolled

view and update as necessary (eg confirm fees apply fee discounts change academic load or mode of study etc In preparation for opening registration and enrolment on the 1st August lsquoboot camprsquo classes have been on offer from the 17th of July and uptake has been very high The central support team as well as support staff from each of the Colleges have or will have attended These classes take staff members through the student self-service processes as well as administrative functions Finance User acceptance testing for the new financial registration process was conducted Thursday 5th July and results captured electronically Feedback was generally positive and no major issues were identified Comments and suggestions will be collated for future consideration Development of guidance materials is underway and once complete will also undergo student UAT New students (UCASGTTR applicants made Unconditional Firm and Direct Applicants made Unconditional Accept) are now being matriculated on a daily basis which creates a programplan record for them in MyCampus Fund administrators should now be applying financial aid to these students records The uptake for training on miscellaneous charges continues to be slow and there is concern that those responsible for posting bench fees and other charges to studentsrsquo accounts prior to registration will not be in a position to do so Training In addition to the courses discussed above the training team continue to offer MyCampus Fundamentals and Lunch amp Learn sessions every Monday The full calendar of training events can be found online at httpwwwglaacukservicesstudentlifecyclemycampustraining Technical In addition to conducting the load testing for the online application the infrastructure team is beginning preparations for the application of Campus Solutions bundles 25 amp 26 As both of these bundles contain critical fixes they will need to be applied prior to the end of September and will require MyCampus to be down for a short period of time SLSD will work with the Colleges to arrange a suitable time for this maintenance

Appendix E F0259054

40

Confidential ndash For SLP Use Only Page 3 of 3 Printed copies are uncontrolled

Appendix E F0259054

41

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 105638

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I have

Appendix E F0259054

42

contacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

43

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 110033

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry Crozier

Appendix E F0259054

44

Sent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

45

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 41: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Confidential ndash For SLP Use Only Page 3 of 3 Printed copies are uncontrolled

Appendix E F0259054

41

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 105638

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I have

Appendix E F0259054

42

contacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

43

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 110033

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry Crozier

Appendix E F0259054

44

Sent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

45

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 42: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 105638

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I have

Appendix E F0259054

42

contacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

43

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 110033

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry Crozier

Appendix E F0259054

44

Sent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

45

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 43: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

contacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

43

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 110033

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry Crozier

Appendix E F0259054

44

Sent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

45

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 44: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Andrew ChartersTo Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 110033

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry Crozier

Appendix E F0259054

44

Sent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

45

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 45: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Sent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

45

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 46: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Caroline WeirTo Andrew Charters Barry CrozierCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 111108

Hello

Our process will only load files for the current date so anything already loaded manuallywont be affected

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Andrew ChartersSent 27 July 2012 1101To Barry Crozier Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Barry ndash thanks for this Not sure about the issue on the real files I will let Carolynanswer that

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1057To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Irsquove run a full end-to-end test of the process manually and everything looks to be inorder The transfers in both directions are working as expected Irsquove scheduled anautomated test at 1100am this morning which will run in exactly the same way as theovernight jobs so hopefully this will give us more information Irsquove been using test filesso as not to affect Finance or SLP so the results may not be completely reliable

If I understand correctly there are a set of files waiting at the Finance end that havenrsquotbeen automatically uploaded to SLP but have been transferred manually If I get thescheduled task working with the real files again and the backlog is cleared (ie uploadedto SLP) will this cause problems at the SLP end

Barry

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 0924To Barry Crozier Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Appendix E F0259054

46

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 47: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Hello all

Please see attached emails sent

Caroline

ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 219574 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed tocomplete successfully ) gtgt ltlt Message FW The Process Instance ( 216855 - Process (UOG_GL_RESP) failed to complete successfully ) gtgt

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

47

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 48: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Barry CrozierTo Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 112832

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folderThis causes the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that fileswere being transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in theother direction

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

48

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 49: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

49

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 50: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Caroline WeirTo Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115024

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in both

Appendix E F0259054

50

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 51: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

directions but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx so

Appendix E F0259054

51

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 52: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

that if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

52

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 53: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Andrew ChartersTo Caroline Weir Barry Crozier Sandy Macdonald Patrick NwaozuzuCc Christopher EllisSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 115751

Hi Patrick ndash are you ok with what is being proposed below

Thanks Andrew

_____________________________________________From Caroline WeirSent 27 July 2012 1150To Barry Crozier Andrew Charters Sandy MacdonaldCc Christopher EllisSubject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hello

See below our infrastructure would prefer that we went with Option 1 ndashIrsquom not surewho would authorise the change

Caroline

_____________________________________________From Christopher EllisSent 27 July 2012 1140To Caroline WeirSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline

Option 1 is by far the best solution As Barry says Option 2 is flawed a copy as opposed to amove will do exactly that and leave a copy at source Too much of an overhead

Cheers

Chris

_____________________________________________

From Caroline Weir

Sent 27 July 2012 1130

To Christopher Ellis

Subject FW AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

Could you have a look over this and advise the best solution

Caroline

Appendix E F0259054

53

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 54: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 1129To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi

The scheduled file transfer at 1100am worked correctly and transferred files in bothdirections but it gave me the information I needed to identify the cause of theproblem

The configuration of the new server is not the same as on the previous server and I nolonger have permissions to remove any files from the Agresso ldquoData Exportrdquo folder Thiscauses the ldquomoverdquo of the files to SLP to fail From this I am assuming that files werebeing transferred from SLP to Finance but nothing was being transferred in the otherdirection

There are two solutions to this problem

1 If someone can authorize the change I can grant myself permissions to removefiles from the ldquoData Exportrdquo folder and everything will carry on as on the previousserver

2 I can change the file transfer to copy rather than move the files from Finance toSLP The side-effect would be that no files would be clear out of the ldquoData Exportrdquofolder and they would

a Continue to consume additional resources every day

b Each file would be transferred to SLP every day

If you can let me know how to proceed Irsquoll make the necessary changes Either solutionwould allow the backlog to be cleared at the 307pm run of the scheduled transfer

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for help

Appendix E F0259054

54

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 55: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Unfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott BuildingUniversity of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

55

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 56: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Christopher EllisTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Barbara Mueller Paul McGlone John Young (MIS)Subject CSOLA - load TestDate 27 July 2012 123328Attachments UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_07_18docx

Hi Sandy

Attached is a copy of last weeks load test report relating to the Admissions Online Application

With the volumes weve received as a comparison then the system indicates that it will perform well with 20 concurrent users at any given time However as you are aware before we move this to Production we are scaling up the infrastructure initially by additional memory at the webserver level

I also want to meet with Admissions next week to confirm volumes and discuss the report with them

ThanksChris

From Christopher Ellis Sent 26 July 2012 1550To Barbara MuellerSubject FW CSOLA - load Test

Hi Barb

Wouldve liked to have given you a summary in this mail just not had the time to review this properly

CheersChris

From Sent 26 July 2012 1509To Christopher EllisCc Paul McGlone John YoungSubject Re CSOLA - load Test

Hi Chris

Here you go Sorry I still had it as a draft

Appendix E F0259054

56

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

By Mick Sear Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Result charts2

1Introduction2

2Test Requirement 1 Course Search2

3Test Requirement 2 Student Applications3

Test runs3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time5

1

Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2

Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

middot ~ 5000 applications per month

middot ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

HD-PCTU3DropboxDropboxPersonalJuly

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

image4png

image1png

image2png

image3png

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 57: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Best regards

From Christopher Ellis ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxgtDate Thu 26 Jul 2012 144243 +0100To Cc Paul McGlone ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gt John Young ltxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx gtSubject RE CSOLA - load Test

Hi Could you send me through the load test report today I need to provide feedback to Sandy etc on results CheersChris

Appendix E F0259054

57

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 58: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

University of Glasgow

Load Testing Report

Succeed Consultancy July 17-18 2012

Appendix E F0259054

58

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 59: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Result charts 2

1 Introduction 2

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search 2

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications 3

Test runs 3

Result charts

Figure 1 Course search response times over time 3

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time 4

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions 4

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time 5

1 Introduction

The tests detailed in this report are part of a wider engagement with Succeed

Consultancy to test areas of Glasgow Universityrsquos implementation of PeopleSoft

Campus Solutions

This engagement started in June 2011 with load testing of student registration

and financial enrolment student navigation through the SharePoint portal and

by association LDAP This area of testing continued through to August due to

system issues and functional process or architecture revisions

This document is a supplement to the report issued as

UOG_Succeed_Test_Report_2012_06_15docx

2 Test Requirement 1 Course Search

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Appendix E F0259054

59

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 60: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Figure 1 Course search response times over time

3 Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

This is a re-run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated t

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two

wizard with a total of betwe

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected v

bull ~ 5000 applications per month

bull ~ 40-50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Test runs

Below are results charts from the test runs

1) 20 concurrent

Course search response times over time

Test Requirement 2 Student Applications

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

difference Test results indicated that in fact the deployed code had not

impacted the operation of the test

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

application process The process is quite long consisting of a two-phase form

wizard with a total of between 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

With these tests we are aiming to simulate an expected volume of applications

~ 5000 applications per month

50 concurrent applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Below are results charts from the test runs

run of the earlier test to see if changes to deployed code had made a

hat in fact the deployed code had not

Prospective students applying for study at the university use the online

phase form

en 14 and 16 steps As such although the total

number of applications may be low the potential performance impact is quite

high because a user transaction can take a considerable length of time

olume of applications

Due to an incompatibility between Weblogicrsquos handling of multipart file uploads

and JMeterrsquos adherence to the spec it was not possible to test PDF file uploads

Appendix E F0259054

60

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 61: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Figure 2 20 concurrent users response times over time

2) 40 concurrent

Figure 3 40 concurrent response times over time

20 concurrent users response times over time

40 concurrent response times over time - entire transactions

Appendix E F0259054

61

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 62: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

Figure 4 40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

requests started to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the sl

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

Conclusion

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

components should alleviate pressures during peak periods

40 concurrent users response times over time

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

memory usage was within an acceptable limit

The delta between the fastest overall transaction time and the slowest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

once provided that there is no heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

alleviate pressures during peak periods

These charts show that with 20 concurrent users the system was under an

acceptable load but when 40 concurrent users was reached many of the ICPanel

tarted to create delays pushing the overall transaction time out

Issues were also observed on the server during this test although overall

owest overall

transaction time was in excess of 400 seconds when using 40 concurrent users

The system should perform acceptably if 20 concurrent users are applying at

heavy background load from other processes

This achieves the goal of supporting 5000 applications per month since a

sustained level of 20 concurrent users results in over 4000 applications per day

The system load mostly hit the app servers and web servers so scaling these

Appendix E F0259054

62

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 63: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

63

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 64: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

64

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 65: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Barry CrozierTo Andrew Charters Caroline WeirCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE AgressoSLP GL InterfaceDate 27 July 2012 152819

Hi

Irsquove made the change to my security rights on the Agresso server and the scheduledrun of the file transfers at 307pm has now completed It looks like all of the backloghas been cleared and the various files are where they should be Someone fromFinance and SLP would need to confirm that from their respective sides

Regards

Barry

_____________________________________________From Barry CrozierSent 27 July 2012 0912To Caroline Weir Andrew ChartersCc Sandy MacdonaldSubject AgressoSLP GL Interface

Hi Caroline Andrew

Sandy has contacted me to let me know that there are some issues with the GLinterface not working properly and that you have been trying to contact me for helpUnfortunately I donrsquot have a record of any emails from Andrew and the last email Ihave from Caroline was dated 12072012 in reference to the Barclaycard URLs I havecontacted the Exchange team to see if there has been a problem delivering emails tomy mailbox

Could you please forward on to me the emails that you sent previously

For future reference please either raise a helpdesk request with the ITS CS ServerTeam or the ITS MIS DBA team or send emails requesting help to xxxxxxxxxxxxx sothat if Irsquom not available someone will still be able to get back to you I am on leave nextweek so the sooner you can get these emails to me the better

Regards

Barry

Barry CrozierBSc (Hons)Database Administrator

Direct line +44 (0)141 330 5373Fax +44 (0)141 330 4953

IT Services (South)Gilbert Scott Building

Appendix E F0259054

65

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 66: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

University of GlasgowUniversity AvenueGlasgowG12 8QQ

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

66

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 67: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Michael ArthurTo Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 091411

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

67

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 68: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From David NewallTo Michael Arthur Sandy MacdonaldSubject RE Progress questions from pre-BoardDate 30 July 2012 092517

Thanks for checking this Mike Thats clear

David

-----Original Message-----From Michael ArthurSent 30 July 2012 0914To Sandy Macdonald David NewallSubject Progress questions from pre-Board

Hi David amp Sandy

You had asked me a couple of questions about progress re-sits during the pre-Board meeting onFriday

Assuming the grade achieved in the course they are re-sitting is causing a student to fail rules thecurrent academic standing will be RVPL (review plan) RVPR (review program) or COMM (refer toProgress Committee) All of these are described to the student as In Review

Before resits a student will only be term-activated if there is manual intervention and the advisermakes the decision to allow the student to progress regardless of the resit result If an improved result at resit is required before the student can progress nothing will happen untilthe student achieves the required grade The progression process will then change academicstanding to PROG and the student will be term-activated OR the adviser chooses to allowprogression and amends the academic standing code to PROG

After the second run of the progression process we can identify students who are still in reviewWe could set up a query to identify students where there has been no change to the academicstanding code since the date the progression process was re-run However no action on a recordmight mean that the student has not yet decided what to do - take a repeat year leave theuniversity transfer to a new prog or plan etc It might also mean that the student has been referredto a Progress Committee and is awaiting the outcome

Also an adviser might be in contact with a student to discuss the next step without any changeappearing in the academic standing record In some cases withdrawal may have already beennotified to Registry

Hope this helps

Mike

Appendix E F0259054

68

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69

Page 69: Appendix E F0259054 - WhatDoTheyKnow...From: Rolly Gilmour To: Sandy Macdonald Subject: RE: SLP performance - July Date: 25 July 2012 08:28:36 Attachments: SLP Monitored statistics

From Sharon CookTo Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject FW SLP Project Board - Performance ReportDate 30 July 2012 141110

Hi Sandy

Just a reminder as per email below

Many thanksSharon

-----Original Message-----From Sharon CookSent 24 July 2012 1620To Sandy MacdonaldCc Janice McLellanSubject SLP Project Board - Performance Report

Dear Sandy

Can you please provide a Performance Report for August project board meeting If we can have thisby lunchtime Monday 30th July that would be great

Many thanks

Kind RegardsSharon

Sharon CookProject Support AssistantStudent Lifecycle ProjectTel 0141 330 1681E-mail SharonCookglasgowacuk

wwwglaacukstudentlifecycleproject

The University of Glasgow charity number SC004401

Appendix E F0259054

69