illinois cas project—phase two frequently asked...

Illinois CAS Project—Phase Two Frequently Asked Questions

Updated 01-04-05 To navigate through this document, either click on the question (make sure the “hand” function is on) or scroll through the pages. At the end of each answer, you will find a link you can click on to return to this point. The first edition of the CAS Phase Two FAQs included 28 questions. These original questions follow newly added questions.
As a general note, we strongly encourage anyone interested in understanding how CAS works to create a CAS account and “play” with the system—it’s the best way to see what CAS can do. To do so, go to www.transfer.org, click on Illinois, select “new account,” and follow the directions. Setting up an account is free. Simply pretend you are a student with some courses (enter a few from your favorite community college, and feel free to give yourself all A’s), look at the “Course Equivalencies,” and run a few “Planning Guides.” If you’d like highly detailed step-by-step instructions, you can find a document called “Step-by-Step Instructions to use CAS” at http://www.ibhe.org/cas/AdminDocuments.htm.
Questions added for the first revision of the FAQs:

29. What outside experts can my institution turn to for information about technical questions for support in implementing CAS interfaces?

30. What are the course banks the colleges and universities are expected to load and maintain?

31. How are the course banks and the Course Equivalency Guides (course articulations) related?

32. I have a question regarding the course bank: Are the upper-division universities going to enter what they accept our courses as, or is that the sending institution’s responsibility?

33. Which Illinois community colleges would be good candidates to become CAS Receiving institutions and which would be better served by participating as CAS Sending institutions?

www.transfer.org

http://www.ibhe.org/cas/AdminDocuments.htm

CAS Phase Two FAQs 2.

Questions (1-28) included in initial version of FAQs:

1. What is CAS?

2. What is the difference between CAS and IAI?

3. Are there information resources available for me to learn about CAS and the Illinois CAS Project?

4. How does my institution learn what the CAS technical specifications are?

5. What is the difference between a CAS-Sending and a CAS-Receiving institution?

6. What factors should an institution consider in deciding whether to participate in Illinois CAS as a Sending versus a Receiving institution?

7. What are the responsibilities of a CAS-Sending institution?

8. What are the responsibilities of a CAS-Receiving institution?

9. Can my school start as a sending institution and move to receiving status later?

10. Is there a prescribed deadline for when an institution has to be fully “functional” if the institution declares an intent to participate as a receiving institution?

11. What will CAS participation cost my institution?

12. How will the Illinois CAS co-directors decide which institutions will be licensed under Phase Two?

13. What does the CAS license cost the state?

14. What is a “course bank?” How do I load and/or maintain my institution’s course bank?


15. In some Illinois CAS Project documents (e.g., the Illinois CAS Planning Project report), reference is made to four levels of CAS participation. However, the Illinois CAS Project is currently focusing on two levels of participation. What do these levels mean?

16. Is the information I read in the Illinois CAS Planning Project report (available for download at http://www.ibhe.org/cas/) still valid?

17. What is the status of Illinois CAS Project Phase One?

18. What are “XML standards”?

19. What is “Request Import” or the “XML interface?”

20. In what way is “Request Import” or the “XML interface” important to the Illinois CAS Project?

21. What technical support is needed to implement “Request Import” (XML)?

22. What is an EDAG?

23. Are the results of the pilot tests with EDAG available?

24. What do the terms “home” and “target” mean?

25. How will non-faculty approved IAI courses be handled in Illinois CAS?

26. What is Illinois CAS policy regarding catalog rights?

27. How is student privacy maintained?

28. Who makes decisions on CAS policy?


If you have a question which is not on this list, contact one or both of the Illinois CAS Project co-directors: Sheri C. Kallembach Director of Registrar Support Services Registration and Records Northern Illinois University (815) 753-8217 [email protected]

Marilyn M. M. Marshall Associate Director for Academic Policy Analysis Planning and Budgeting University of Illinois (217) 244-3174 [email protected]

The information contained in this document is valid, to the best of our knowledge, as of January 4, 2005. Check back for updates.


Questions added for the first revision of the FAQs:

29. What outside experts can my institution turn to for information about technical questions for support in implementing CAS interfaces?

CAS was developed by Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. Detailed information on CAS is available on the Degree Audit Reporting System (DARS) website at http://www.dars.muohio.edu/. It is each institution's responsibility to gather as much information as possible and the best resource at this time is the DARS website. This provides background information on how DARS works, the technological aspects/requirements, and other important information. The CAS development team in Ohio has established a joint effort to link CAS (and DARS and DARwin) with other student information systems with a contractor called Interface Management Services (IMS). Although it is vital to note that no one associated with the Illinois CAS Project intends to endorse or recommend a particular vendor, IMS is one option institutions may choose in seeking technical support. For example, IMS may be able to work with an institution to develop the EDAG the institution needs to run CAS and/or the programming necessary to use the CAS request import functions. For reference, a recent IMS communication with their pricing information is provided on the following page. More information on the services IMS offers and their relationship with the CAS team at Miami University can be found at: http://www.interfacemgmt.net/SUPPORT/cas/cas.html For more information about EDAGs see FAQ number 22. For more information about request import function, see FAQ number 19. Institutions are encouraged to contact other firms which may be able to offer the services they seek. (Last updated 01-04-05.)

Return to List of Questions

http://www.dars.muohio.edu/

http://www.interfacemgmt.net/SUPPORT/cas/cas.html

1

December 14, 2004 Marilyn M. (Murphy) Marshall Sherri C. Kallembach State of Illinois CAS Initiative Summary A proposal for Interface Management Services to provide Student Information System integration solutions to the Miami University Course Applicability System (CAS). This proposal consists of short term pricing available until 2/15/2005 for higher education institutions of the State of Illinois. Available interfaces: PeopleSoft 7.6 or newer: Request Planning Guide Interface- Academic Advising Module, Request Import Interface Jenzabar CX: Request Planning Guide Interface, Request Import Interface SCT / Banner: Request Planning Guide Interface, Request Import Interface Datatel: Under development, available Summer 2005 Pricing: Short term pricing: For any institutions that provide a letter of intent, or purchase order from 1/1/2005-2/15/2005. The interface must be installed or payment provided prior to the 1 year anniversary of contract/intent date. No limit to number of schools that can participate. Must have one of the following SIS: PS, Banner CAP, Datatel, Jenzabar CX. Request Import Interface: License: $4,500 Maintenance: $2,000 per year with 3 year contract $1,800 installation fee, plus travel and per diem of $65 daily(if required). Request Planning Guide: License: $4,500 Maintenance: $2,000 per year with 3 year contract $1,800 installation fee, plus travel and per diem of $65 daily (if required). Notes:

Change or upgrade to SIS: With a current Maintenance Contract, any school participating in this offer can change or upgrade their SIS, and receive the required interfaces with no license cost. The school would be responsible for the $1,800 installation fee, plus travel and per diem of $65 daily. This upgrade is available for a period of 5 years from the contract date. Please contact me with any questions, or if you require additional information. Documentation and a summary of our interface products are available online @ http://www.interfacemgmt.net/SUPPORT/cas/cas.html Sincere regards, Scott Brady Project Director (909) 374 1153 [email protected]

http://www.interfacemgmt.net/SUPPORT/cas/cas.html


30. What are the course banks the colleges and universities are expected to load and maintain?

The course bank is an inventory of courses (not to be confused with course articulations) for each institution; the course bank populates both the “Course Descriptions” and “Your Courses” options in CAS. Each institution participating in CAS (both sending and receiving) is responsible for populating the course bank with the course inventory from their institution. This makes it easier for students and advisors to add their course work to CAS. The course bank is typically loaded from a flat file (as defined specifically for CAS). This importable comma-delimited file containing all the institution’s courses should be extracted from the institution’s student information system or course catalog maintenance file. Once the file is created, the institution will import (upload) it into CAS. The course bank entries are formatted into a ‘pick list’ so that students can accurately enter the courses they've taken or plan to take when adding to their course portfolio. Rather than entering the courses freeform, students will be able to choose courses from the ‘pick list’ so that CAS can accurately match their courses to the course equivalency tables at the receiving institution. The course articulations are then accurately reflected in the CAS system through the course equivalency guides and the planning guides. See FAQs number 31 and number 32 for more information on the CAS course bank. Note that the course bank file contains only the institution’s course inventory; this file does not contain information about how courses transfer to particular receiving institutions. Documents covering technical and administrative functions will be available at http://www.ibhe.org/CAS/. An instructions guide for loading course banks will be available shortly. Check the CAS IBHE website to see if it is available. (Last updated 01-04-05.)


http://www.ibhe.org/cas/


31. How are the course banks and the Course Equivalency Guides (course articulations) related?

The CAS course banks are files containing only the courses an institution offers. Determining how those courses transfer to another institution is the responsibility of the receiving institution (whether that is a two-year or a four-year school). When a CAS user examines the Course Equivalency Guide (CEG) or runs a Planning Guide, CAS matches the courses stored in the course bank to the course articulation table containing the same courses supplied by the receiving institution. Also see FAQ number 30 for a description of the CAS course bank. The course banks (loaded and maintained by all CAS participating institutions) should not be confused with course articulation tables. It is the responsibility of each CAS participating institution to maintain its course bank so that the course(s) the CAS user is interested in are available to enter into his or her course history (CAS option “Your Courses”). It is the responsibility of the receiving institution to maintain the transfer articulation tables that CAS uses to match the courses contained in a CAS user’s individual course history. Note that in other places in the FAQs, we refer to CAS Sending and CAS Receiving institutions. These are formal distinctions between Illinois CAS Project participation levels, which are important to make because the former does not need to purchase the CAS license while the latter does. In the above text, however, “sending institution” simply refers to any school at which any given student has earned or intends to earn credit which he or she will then take to another institution, the “receiving institution.” In this usage, any two-year or four-year school is a “sending institution” (and consequently must load the course bank) whether licensed and participating as a CAS Receiving institution or not licensed and participating as a CAS Sending institution. (Last updated 01-04-05.)



32. I have a question regarding the course bank: Are the upper-division universities going to enter what they accept our courses as, or is that the sending institution’s responsibility?

Some people are under the impression that the course bank contains articulation information—this is not the case. As noted in FAQ number 31, the course banks should not be confused with the course articulation tables. It is the responsibility of the receiving institution to determine how they accept transfer courses. The receiving institution maintains course articulation tables, which are independent of the course banks that all CAS sending institutions (two-year and four-year, CAS Sending and CAS Receiving) load and maintain in CAS. CAS matches the information contained in the course bank to the receiving institution’s articulation tables.



33. Which Illinois community colleges would be good candidates to become CAS Receiving institutions and which would be better served by participating as CAS Sending institutions?

Illinois is a national leader in administering a wide-ranging and diverse community college system. Because institutional missions vary by community, so do institutional and student characteristics. To provide a crude estimate of which Illinois community colleges serve large numbers of “reverse transfer” students (students who transfer to the two-year school with the objective of earning the Associate’s degree), the IBHE data is provided to develop a comparison of the undergraduate enrollment, transfer enrollment, and Associate’s degrees awarded at the state’s community colleges. Similarly, data is provided for Illinois not-for-profit institutions. These data are shown on the following three pages. For more information about CAS Sending and CAS Receiving institutions, see FAQ numbers 5 through 8. The following statements offer a brief response to this frequently asked question:

All Illinois community colleges serve some portion of their students by preparing them for transfer to a senior institution. We believe that all Illinois community colleges would benefit from participating in the Illinois CAS Project as Sending institutions. Institutions which both serve large numbers of incoming transfer students and award large numbers of degrees should consider participating in Illinois CAS as Receiving institutions. CAS Receiving institutions gain all the benefits that CAS Sending institutions gain, in addition to benefits that serve the needs of reverse transfer students.

(Last updated 01-04-05.) Return to List of Questions

Comparison of the Undergraduate Enrollment, Incoming Transfer Enrollment, and Associate Degrees Awarded

Illinois Community Colleges

Ratios2003 Fall

UndergraduateEnrollment

Fall 2002Transfers In

2002-03 Associate

Degrees Tran/Enr Deg/Enr Tran/DegrAll Community Colleges 235,879 15,415 22,977 0.07 0.10 0.67 Black Hawk College 5,398 26 576 0.00 0.11 0.05 Carl Sandburg College 2,861 8 328 0.00 0.11 0.02 CCC - Harold Washington College 7,138 492 240 0.07 0.03 2.05 CCC - Harry S Truman College 4,929 215 201 0.04 0.04 1.07 CCC - Kennedy-King College 3,419 84 228 0.02 0.07 0.37 CCC - Malcolm X College 3,661 166 174 0.05 0.05 0.95 CCC - Olive-Harvey College 2,825 21 181 0.01 0.06 0.12 CCC - Richard J. Daley College 5,330 243 286 0.05 0.05 0.85 CCC - Wilbur Wright College 6,591 306 273 0.05 0.04 1.12 College of DuPage 20,136 1,891 1,696 0.09 0.08 1.11 College of Lake County 8,268 656 849 0.08 0.10 0.77 Danville Area Community College 2,315 34 208 0.01 0.09 0.16 Elgin Community College 8,292 822 725 0.10 0.09 1.13 Heartland Community College 4,192 1,149 510 0.27 0.12 2.25 Highland Community College 2,016 108 259 0.05 0.13 0.42 Illinois Central College 10,292 611 1,132 0.06 0.11 0.54 Illinois Eastern - Frontier 464 1 81 0.00 0.17 0.01 Illinois Eastern - Lincoln Trail 930 25 229 0.03 0.25 0.11 Illinois Eastern - Olney 1,092 - 308 - 0.28 - Illinois Eastern - Wabash Valley 849 187 240 0.22 0.28 0.78 Illinois Valley Community College 3,140 140 435 0.04 0.14 0.32 John A. Logan College 4,455 357 505 0.08 0.11 0.71 John Wood Community College 1,881 180 267 0.10 0.14 0.67 Joliet Junior College 10,050 223 731 0.02 0.07 0.31 Kankakee Community College 2,299 213 250 0.09 0.11 0.85 Kaskaskia College 2,982 2 463 0.00 0.16 0.00 Kishwaukee College 3,056 594 423 0.19 0.14 1.40 Lake Land College 5,598 299 650 0.05 0.12 0.46 Lewis & Clark Community College 4,026 44 476 0.01 0.12 0.09 Lincoln Land Community College 5,805 351 636 0.06 0.11 0.55 McHenry County College 3,855 308 358 0.08 0.09 0.86 Moraine Valley Community College 9,167 185 1,059 0.02 0.12 0.17 Morton College 2,174 8 299 0.00 0.14 0.03 Oakton Community College 9,902 1,075 416 0.11 0.04 2.58 Parkland College 6,437 1,416 822 0.22 0.13 1.72 Prairie State College 4,311 564 297 0.13 0.07 1.90 Rend Lake College 2,434 141 414 0.06 0.17 0.34 Richland Community College 2,859 1 324 0.00 0.11 0.00 Rock Valley College 5,492 3 706 0.00 0.13 0.00 Sauk Valley Community College 2,201 41 234 0.02 0.11 0.18 Shawnee Community College 1,634 9 232 0.01 0.14 0.04 South Suburban Coll. of Cook Co. 4,583 690 443 0.15 0.10 1.56 Southeastern Illinois College 1,606 25 253 0.02 0.16 0.10 Southwestern Illinois College 10,432 208 1,133 0.02 0.11 0.18 Spoon River College 1,467 271 217 0.18 0.15 1.25 Triton College 8,379 1 686 0.00 0.08 0.00 Waubonsee Community College 4,974 148 499 0.03 0.10 0.30 William Rainey Harper College 9,682 873 1,025 0.09 0.11 0.85

Source: IBHE Data Book (http://www.ibhe.org/Data%20Bank/DataBook/default.asp)

P:\Artic & Transfer\Transfers within Illinois\02 total transfer to cc by inst.xls 1/5/2005

Comparison of the Undergraduate Enrollment, Incoming Transfer Enrollment, and Associate Plus Baccalaureate Degrees Awarded

Illinois Not For Profit Institutions

Ratios

2003 FallUndergraduate

EnrollmentFall 2002

Transfers In

2002-03 Assoc. &

Bacc. Degrees Tran/Enr Deg/Enr Tran/DegrAll Not-For-Profit Institutions 125,204 12,300 27,499 0.10 0.22 0.45 Advocate Kutsch College of Nursing -- 32 -- -- -- --Augustana College 2,309 75 518 0.03 0.22 0.14 Aurora University 1,646 271 343 0.16 0.21 0.79 Benedictine University 2,114 225 460 0.11 0.22 0.49 Blackburn College 615 48 104 0.08 0.17 0.46 Blessing-Rieman College of Nursing 178 6 42 0.03 0.24 0.14 Bradley University 5,305 320 1,125 0.06 0.21 0.28 Christian Life College 88 9 13 0.10 0.15 0.69 Columbia College Chicago 9,265 1,325 1,370 0.14 0.15 0.97 Concordia University 1,203 112 252 0.09 0.21 0.44 DePaul University 14,585 1,387 2,524 0.10 0.17 0.55 Dominican University 1,211 119 276 0.10 0.23 0.43 East-West University 1,006 79 26 0.08 0.03 3.04 Elmhurst College 2,396 352 608 0.15 0.25 0.58 Eureka College 490 44 102 0.09 0.21 0.43 Finch University of Health Sci/Chi. Med. Sch. -- 4 -- -- -- --Greenville College 1,188 144 295 0.12 0.25 0.49 Hebrew Theological College 328 60 27 0.18 0.08 2.22 Illinois College 1,016 53 179 0.05 0.18 0.30 Illinois Institute of Technology 1,942 119 359 0.06 0.18 0.33 Illinois Wesleyan University 2,107 11 479 0.01 0.23 0.02 Judson College 1,123 240 329 0.21 0.29 0.73 Kendall College 628 111 139 0.18 0.22 0.80 Knox College 1,127 30 241 0.03 0.21 0.12 Lake Forest College 1,345 53 294 0.04 0.22 0.18 Lakeview College of Nursing 103 39 16 0.38 0.16 2.44 Lewis University 3,216 503 774 0.16 0.24 0.65 Lexington College 43 3 8 0.07 0.19 0.38 Lincoln Christian College 758 37 137 0.05 0.18 0.27 Lincoln College 1,313 142 324 0.11 0.25 0.44 Loyola University of Chicago 7,916 483 1,366 0.06 0.17 0.35 MacCormac College 377 9 60 0.02 0.16 0.15 MacMurray College 673 87 116 0.13 0.17 0.75 McKendree College 2,115 270 505 0.13 0.24 0.53 Midwestern University 57 37 168 0.65 2.95 0.22 Millikin University 2,602 128 537 0.05 0.21 0.24 Monmouth College 1,162 75 224 0.06 0.19 0.33 Moody Bible Institute 1,431 230 289 0.16 0.20 0.80 Morrison Institute of Technology 143 2 60 0.01 0.42 0.03 NAES College no data 8 6 -- -- 1.33 National University of Health Sciences 123 9 94 0.07 0.76 0.10 National-Louis University 2,497 705 1,042 0.28 0.42 0.68 North Central College 2,086 213 521 0.10 0.25 0.41 North Park University 1,726 93 327 0.05 0.19 0.28 Northwestern University 9,360 59 2,084 0.01 0.22 0.03 Olivet Nazarene University 2,427 192 420 0.08 0.17 0.46 Principia College 552 20 139 0.04 0.25 0.14 Quincy University 1,130 95 255 0.08 0.23 0.37 Robert Morris College 5,139 883 2,362 0.17 0.46 0.37 Rockford College 866 130 242 0.15 0.28 0.54

(Continued next page)


Comparison of the Undergraduate Enrollment, Incoming Transfer Enrollment, and Associate Plus Baccalaureate Degrees Awarded

Illinois Not For Profit Institutions (Cont.)

Ratios

2003 FallUndergraduate

EnrollmentFall 2002

Transfers In

2002-03 Assoc. &

Bacc. Degrees Tran/Enr Deg/Enr Tran/DegrRoosevelt University 4,290 632 938 0.15 0.22 0.67 Rush University 186 78 51 0.42 0.27 1.53 School of the Art Inst. Chicago 2,159 256 332 0.12 0.15 0.77 Shimer College 138 11 30 0.08 0.22 0.37 Springfield College in Illinois 431 25 91 0.06 0.21 0.27 St. Anthony College of Nursing 101 26 28 0.26 0.28 0.93 St. Augustine College 1,710 20 221 0.01 0.13 0.09 St. Francis Medical Center College of Nursing 183 50 66 0.27 0.36 0.76 St. Johns College 64 40 25 0.63 0.39 1.60 St. Xavier University 3,062 493 627 0.16 0.20 0.79 Trinity Christian College 1,263 80 186 0.06 0.15 0.43 Trinity College-Nursing 157 95 34 0.61 0.22 2.79 Trinity International University 1,058 77 243 0.07 0.23 0.32 University of Chicago 4,355 74 1,001 0.02 0.23 0.07 University of St. Francis 2,473 574 839 0.23 0.34 0.68 VanderCook College of Music 114 5 12 0.04 0.11 0.42 Wheaton College 2,430 83 594 0.03 0.24 0.14

Source: IBHE Data Book (http://www.ibhe.org/Data%20Bank/DataBook/default.asp)



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Questions (1-28) included in initial version of FAQs:

1. What is CAS?

The Course Applicability System (CAS) is a web-based information-access tool that communicates up-to-date information to students and advisors on how coursework will transfer and apply toward an undergraduate degree at a participating CAS institution. Using an institution’s course articulation and degree audit systems, CAS provides answers to users—transfer students, native students with transfer coursework, academic advisors, and others—on course equivalency, acceptability and applicability. CAS is presently being implemented as a statewide system to improve the transfer experience for students in the Illinois higher education system. (Last updated 12-09-04.) As the best way to see what CAS is and what it can do, we strongly encourage anyone to create a free CAS account and “play” with the system. To do so, go to www.transfer.org, click on Illinois, select “new account,” and follow the directions. Setting up an account is free. Simply pretend you are a student with some courses (enter a few from your favorite community college, and feel free to give yourself all A’s), look at the “Course Equivalencies,” and run a few “Planning Guides.” If you’d like highly detailed step-by-step instructions, you can find a document called “Step-by-Step Instructions to use CAS” at http://www.ibhe.org/cas/AdminDocuments.htm.


www.transfer.org

http://www.ibhe.org/cas/AdminDocuments.htm


2. What is the difference between CAS and IAI?

IAI (Illinois Articulation Initiative) is a statewide articulation agreement. CAS is a tool to let users learn what IAI, and any other articulation agreements, mean to individual students. (Last updated 12-09-04.)


CAS Phase Two FAQs
16.
3. Are there information resources available for me to learn about CAS and the Illinois CAS Project?

The IBHE hosts a web page with information regarding the Illinois CAS Project status and history. Training materials and informational presentations are available for students and advisors to read and download. You are welcome to use the materials as they are or to adapt them for your own institution as you see fit. This web site can be found at: http://www.ibhe.org/CAS In addition to the information on the Illinois CAS Project available on the IBHE web site, the program’s developer has made available a good deal of information about the product. CAS was developed by Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. For help, go the Miami home page http://www.dars.muohio.edu/. (Last updated 12-09-04.)





4. How does my institution learn what the CAS technical specifications are?

CAS was developed by Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. Detailed information on CAS is available on the Degree Audit Reporting System (DARS) website at http://www.dars.muohio.edu/. It is each institution's responsibility to gather as much information as possible and the best resource at this time is the DARS website. This provides background information on how DARS works, the technological aspects/requirements, and other important information. Briefly, a few of the key technical requirements are:

One technical responsibility that is required of all participating institutions is loading a course bank. Initial course banks for some of the community colleges were obtained from the ICCB Course Master File; however, institutions will be responsible for updating and maintaining the files. Additionally, the Advisory Committee will need to determine the process for loading subsequent course banks. Another technical matter that CAS requires of all institutions includes designating staff for the “administrator” role. This person has access to advanced CAS capabilities. Receiving institutions must load academic program information, develop interfaces –including the Request Import and the EDAG planning guide interfaces where necessary, and insert links to student services and admissions sites. The primary technical expertise needed is in supporting the background structures that CAS accesses, that is, the course articulation system and the degree audit system. Though these systems are not a part of CAS, an institution’s ability to run CAS at the Receiving level depends on these structures. As noted above, it is each institution's responsibility to gather as much information as needed. The preceding notes are not a comprehensive list of CAS technical responsibilities. (Last updated 12-09-04.)




5. What is the difference between a CAS-Sending and a CAS-Receiving institution?

Sending CAS-Sending institutions are characterized by:

• Students transfer courses out toward a degree elsewhere. • Few incoming transfers earn a degree at the sending institution.

Benefits to CAS-Sending institutions: Advisors/counselors can:

• Help diverse populations meet varied goals. • Work with students on higher-level issues. • Quickly see all degree requirements for high-demand majors. • Look up accurate and up-to-date transfer articulation information. • All articulation information is in one place, and it’s always the most recent

information. Students can:

• Explore degree programs at all CAS-Receiving institutions from one web page.

• Create Planning Guides (unofficial degree audits) for any CAS-Receiving institution.

• Select their current institution’s courses to meet post-transfer goals. • Reduce time to degree.

Thus, your institution becomes more attractive to students wishing to ultimately earn a degree (e.g., a baccalaureate) at a CAS-Receiving institution. CAS is a useful advising tool for your institution’s current students, and it can be used as a recruiting tool as well. CAS-Sending institutions are expected to:

• Load and maintain course banks. • Market CAS. • Participate in Illinois CAS committees.

Licensing requirement for Sending institutions:

• The CAS license is not required for participation at the Sending level. Receiving CAS-Receiving institutions are characterized by:

• Students transfer courses in to earn a degree at receiving institutions. • Students may transfer out to earn a degree at another institution.


Benefits to CAS-Receiving institutions:

• All the benefits of a CAS-Sending institution. • CAS can be a powerful recruiting tool. For example, an institution’s

programs are displayed for all potential students who are looking for programs offered at an institution.

• Native students who wish to earn credit at another institution (for example, students who will take a summer course at their local community college) can plan how those credits will apply toward their degree program.

• Institutions’ relationships with their key feeder institutions, as well as their relationships across sectors around the state, will be enhanced.

CAS-Receiving institutions are expected to:

• Load and maintain course banks. • Market CAS. • Participate in Illinois CAS committees. • Load and maintain academic programs. • Connect/interface course articulation systems to CAS. • Connect/interface degree audit systems to CAS.

Licensing requirement:

• The CAS license is required for participation at the Receiving level. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



6. What factors should an institution consider in deciding whether to participate in Illinois CAS as a Sending versus a Receiving institution?

The most important factor is transfer student enrollment. If your institution serves a large number of incoming transfer students who seek degrees at your school, and if those students wish to apply credit toward those degrees, you should be a CAS-Receiving institution. This level of participation requires the purchase of the CAS license, as well as the annual maintenance fee. Additionally, all CAS receiving institutions are responsible for maintaining a degree audit system and course articulation system. If your institution serves predominantly transfer students who earn credit at your school which they wish to apply toward degrees at other institutions in addition to or instead of applying the credit to degrees awarded by your institution, you should be a CAS-Sending institution. This level of participation does not require the purchase of the CAS licenses, but does require institutional resource allocation (details of CAS-Sending versus CAS-Receiving status are covered in FAQ number 5). (Last updated 12-09-04.)



7. What are the responsibilities of a CAS-Sending institution?

• Submit an up-to-date and comprehensive course bank. Update the course bank annually.

• Participate in CAS training workshops. • Promote CAS in campus materials, online and print. • Designate a staff member to serve as the institutional CAS contact. • Appoint staff to serve on the Illinois CAS Project

implementation/advisory team. Return to List of Questions


8. What are the responsibilities of a CAS-Receiving institution?

• Implement and/or provide necessary support for an electronic degree audit system that will connect with the Illinois CAS Project.

• Provide necessary EDAG interface (see FAQ number 22) to link the degree audit system with CAS (using internal and/or external development resources).

• Encode academic programs requirements into CAS. • Maintain current course information (course bank), making this

information available to the Illinois CAS Project (see FAQ number 14). • Host the CAS application on an existing institutional server or utilize an

established server at another participating CAS institution via a lease agreement.

• Participate in CAS training workshops. • Promote CAS in campus materials, online and print. • Designate a staff member to serve as the institutional CAS contact. • Appoint staff to serve on the Illinois CAS Project

implementation/advisory team. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



9. Can my school start as a sending institution and move to receiving status later?

Yes. Many schools in the state—most of the community colleges, for example—are currently Sending institutions. The hope is that all community colleges will participate actively in Illinois CAS as, at a minimum, Sending institutions. Any Sending institution that wishes to move to Receiving status is welcome to consider the change. Consideration for this move will be based on the limits of the HECA grant. Additional commitment will be required (see FAQ number 5), and potential Receiving institutions should consider the factors critical to determining the ideal status to meet your needs (see FAQ number 6). (Last updated 12-09-04.)



10. Is there a prescribed deadline for when an institution has to be fully “functional” if the institution declares an intent to participate as a receiving institution?

No. But because the state is investing monetary resources into the Illinois CAS Project, particularly in these difficult budgetary times, it is hoped that all institutions which are licensed as a receiving institution will be fully functional. Therefore, priority in determining which schools are included in Phase Two as Receiving institutions will be given to those schools which are most likely to be able to bring CAS up quickly (for example, those with electronic degree audit systems and those with the resources to make the commitment to support CAS implementation; see FAQ number 6.) (Last updated 12-09-04.)



11. What will CAS participation cost my institution?

The cost of the CAS license has been provided by the IBHE via a HECA grant. The opportunity for institutions to participate in CAS through this grant is competitive, and the number of institutions included under the CAS license and maintenance agreement will be based on the limits of the grant. For CAS-Sending institutions, no license is required. For institutions designated and selected to be a CAS-Receiving institution, a license and maintenance agreement will be distributed based on the availability of the grant award and the submission of the Intent to Participate agreement. Institutions are responsible to devote resources to Illinois CAS Project participation (see FAQ numbers 7 and 8 for details about institutional responsibilities). The costs of meeting these participation requirements are the institution’s responsibility. A limited amount of supplemental funding is available through an RFP process to defray a portion of these costs for CAS-Receiving institutions. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



12. How will the Illinois CAS co-directors decide which institutions will be licensed under Phase Two?

Preference will be given to institutions with fully functional automated degree audit and articulation systems. Although the process is competitive, institutions which do not currently have electronic transfer course articulation and degree audit systems but which are well on their way to implementing such systems will be considered. Additionally, the IBHE has funded the Illinois CAS Project largely to increase the number of students from underrepresented groups in the State’s four-year colleges and universities by improving the transfer of minority students from two-year institutions. Minority students are more likely than majority students to enter higher education via a community college. Institutions serving large numbers of incoming transfer students and large numbers of minority students will be given preference. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



13. What does the CAS license cost the state?

Miami is allowing Illinois to purchase collective licenses in order to take advantage of economies of scale. The Illinois Board of Higher Education has funded two phases of CAS licensing, which pools institutions into groups under a single license. This is an economical approach for licensing CAS in Illinois. The cost to license CAS is $1.25 per student for the first 15,000 students; $1.15 per student for the next 15,000 students; $1.00 per student for the next 70,000 students; and $0.75 per student for the remaining students. The minimum license cost is $10,000. An annual maintenance fee for software is based on enrollment (18%). The IBHE has indicated commitment to cover this cost. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



14. What is a “course bank?” How do I load and/or maintain my institution’s course bank?

A course bank is a database of the courses offered by an institution. Initial course banks for some of the community colleges were obtained from the ICCB Course Master File; however, all CAS participating institutions, sending and receiving, will be responsible for updating and maintaining their course banks. Institutions will need to designate staff to load the updated course banks into CAS periodically. (Last updated 12-09-04.) See also FAQ 30, added 01-04-05.



15. In some Illinois CAS Project documents (e.g., the Illinois CAS Planning Project report), reference is made to four levels of CAS participation. However, the Illinois CAS Project is currently focusing on two levels of participation. What do these levels mean?

At the time of the CAS Planning Project (academic year 2002-03), the committee (comprising representatives from Illinois public and private, two-year and four-year institutions) developed a scheme by which different institutions would be able to participate in Illinois CAS at different levels (detailed below). The levels were modeled upon implementation of CAS in Ohio and Kentucky. However, at this point in the Illinois CAS Project, the key participation levels to consider are Sending versus Receiving; details comparing Sending and Receiving information are given in FAQ number 5. However, as institutions move to implement CAS, we are finding that the levels serve a useful purpose. Due to varied circumstances, institutions may implement CAS in stages, for example, making course articulation guides available first, followed by the planning guide feature. For your information, the levels as they were initially conceived are described below. Note: This information is provided for historical context; those interested in the development of the Illinois CAS Project over time may wish to see this archival information. As noted above, currently the key distinction to consider in thinking about Illinois CAS participation is between CAS Sending and CAS Receiving institutions (see FAQ number 5). Essentially, Level 1 described below would correspond to CAS Sending participation, and Levels 2 through 4 would correspond to CAS Receiving participation.

Level 1 The minimal Level of CAS involvement we propose is for an institution to be “sending only.” In this case, students who attend the institution can create Planning Guides using the coursework at the sending institution to plan degree completion at any institution participating in CAS at a higher Level than Level 1. Students at or interested in transferring to a Level 1 institution, however, cannot create Planning Guides for degree programs at that Level 1 school. At Level 1, public-type information about the institution is available to users. This includes information about course offerings and degree options—in short, the type of information contained in program and course catalogs. To maximize the effectiveness of CAS, each institution’s course bank should be loaded so that users can select courses for their academic history. There is no cost to the institution at this


level. We expect at the onset institutions that do not have degree audit and articulation systems in place will elect to participate at Level 1, send only. Level 2 In addition to the responsibilities and functions described above, Level 2 institutions will create and maintain limited articulation data in CAS. These data will enable students to review the courses needed to fulfill the IAI General Education Core Curriculum. Level 3 In addition to the responsibilities and functions described in each of the two levels above, a Level 3 school has send and receive capabilities with its major feeder institutions for the most popular programs transfer students choose. Students at the partner institutions can learn how their credits at that school will apply toward a degree at the Level 3 participant. Level 4 In addition to the responsibilities and functions described in the three levels above, Level 4 institutions have articulated courses and established degree audit data for most, if not all, sending institutions and most, if not all, transfer programs. (Last updated 01-04-05.)



16. Is the information I read in the Illinois CAS Planning Project report (available for download at http://www.ibhe.org/cas/) still valid?

Because Illinois CAS planning has been ongoing for several years, the Project has evolved over time. The Illinois CAS Planning Project report was written in 2003 after a year-long process of statewide, multi-sector consideration of the program. The results of this planning process are now somewhat dated as the Project has moved forward. Additionally, the recommendations that followed the report’s conclusions were based on what the planning committee considered ideal at that time. As Phase One has progressed and Phase Two has begun in the current budget reality, the Illinois CAS Project has begun to look different than the Planning report indicated. The report is useful, however, as an information source relative to how CAS works, and it provides valuable background information relative to how the Illinois CAS Project has evolved. Also see FAQ number 15. (Last updated 01-04-05.)




17. What is the status of Illinois CAS Project Phase One?

In Phase One, the state purchased the CAS license for all the public universities. Because the per-student cost (the CAS license fee is based on enrollment) diminishes as enrollment increases (“bulk orders” save money), the state purchased the public universities’ license at one time, regardless of individual institutions’ CAS-readiness. So far, Northern Illinois University and University of Illinois at Chicago have implemented CAS fully. Northeastern Illinois University, Southern Illinois University at Carbondale, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, and Western Illinois University have brought up some CAS functions; UIUC is very close to full CAS implementation. The remaining institutions are working on bringing CAS functions up. Information about the status of the institutions will be maintained on the IBHE website at http://www.ibhe.org/CAS. (Last updated 01-04-05.)




18. What are “XML standards”? Short for eXtensible Markup Language, this terminology is used to create commands in web documents to define, transmit, validate and interpret data between the application and the recipient. A standardized XML format has been created for the higher education community to assist in transmitting academic information from one institution to another using a consistent sending and retrieval method. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



19. What is “Request Import” or the “XML interface?”

When building their course histories, students use the “Your Courses” button to choose one of three methods of course entry: “Request Import,” “course bank,” and free form. “Request Import” offers transmission of unofficial student transcripts in XML (eXtensible Markup Language) format. With Request Import, students are able to download course histories instantly into CAS, allowing for easy, error-free establishment of records. These records carry a source of “campus,” but if a user modifies the course history in any way, the source is changed to “student.” This is an attractive feature for institutions with the expertise to develop the interface between CAS and the institution’s student information system, but this feature is not necessary to participate in CAS. Institutions in Ohio, notably The Ohio State University, have offered the Request Import for several years. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



20. In what way is “Request Import” or the “XML interface” important to the Illinois CAS Project?

CAS offers transmission of unofficial student transcripts in XML format. If an institution has established this option in CAS, students would be able to instantly download their course histories into CAS, allowing for easy, error-free establishment of records. If a user modifies the course history in any way, the source of the information is changed from “campus” to “student.” This is an attractive feature for institutions with expertise, but it is not necessary to participate in CAS.

Some advisors have reported that students do not accurately remember their course-taking history; however, with the Request Import feature, students can instantly load all courses with the proper term and grade assigned. Some students may not use CAS because they are unwilling to take the time to load their courses, even with the availability of the point and click method. The strength of CAS lies in the articulation and planning guide functions, but the student must load the courses to use those features. If Request Import increases the number of students who load their courses, then it increases the utility of CAS and aids more students. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



21. What technical support is needed to implement “Request Import” (XML)?

The answer is dependent upon each institution’s student information system platform and the interfaces available for that SIS. To enable the Request Import feature, an institution would establish an interface between CAS and its student information system. Vendors are available to build the interface and CAS-Receiving institutions can request supplemental funding to offset some of the costs of building that interface. The availability of supplemental funding is limited, however. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



22. What is an EDAG?

An External Degree Audit Guide (EDAG) is an interface that allows non-DARwin degree audit systems to send and receive data to students requesting planning guides through CAS. The interface picks up the students request, formats it into XML, requests the degree audit system to run an audit, and then sends back the result to the student. The data are not manipulated in CAS so the student receives a planning guide in the same format in which the institution produces the degree audit. An EDAG may be developed in-house by an institution or by an outside vendor. CAS supplemental funding can be used to offset some of the costs of developing the EDAG for CAS-Receiving. The availability of supplemental funding is limited, however. Only “receiving institutions” needs EDAGs. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



23. Are the results of the pilot tests with EDAG available?

Chicago State and Eastern Illinois Universities are in the process of developing interfaces between their student information systems and CAS. Institutions in Ohio and Arizona are also working toward this same goal. As of this writing, several Ohio schools are set to bring up interfaces before the end of calendar 2004. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



24. What do the terms “home” and “target” mean?

In the CAS program’s functions, servers “talk” to each other. The “home” server is the location where any given CAS account (created by users) resides. The “target” server is the location where any given institution’s CAS program information is located. This is best understood by considering an example. A student creates a CAS account at institution A, and is interested in learning about institution B. In requesting a Planning Guide, server A (the “home”) will retrieve information from server B (the “target”). It may be that both institutions’ information are on the same server (hence, the “home” and “target” server may be the same server), or they may be on different servers. In the latter case, the machines communicate behind the scenes—students will not be aware of the seamless exchange of information. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



25. How will non-faculty approved IAI courses be handled in Illinois CAS?

CAS gives users access to information regarding existing articulation agreements. The articulations that each institution has set up for handling IAI and non-IAI courses, as maintained in its transfer articulation tables, will be reflected in the Planning Guides, Course Equivalency Guides, and other CAS outputs. Policy decisions become apparent using CAS, but the CAS project does seek to coordinate or otherwise manage policy. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



26. What is Illinois CAS policy regarding catalog rights?

Administrators and advisors have raised catalog right policy as an issue because they are concerned that students will expect the information in the Planning Guide to apply to a degree years later. Illinois CAS is an information-access project rather than a policy-setting body. Individual institutions are responsible for setting catalog rights policies. It is advised that CAS-Receiving institutions state their policy clearly on the Planning Guides and elsewhere. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



27. How is student privacy maintained?

Students’ accounts are not accessible by admissions personnel. Students may choose to set up accounts using pseudonyms, or they may create an account they can share with an advisor. Advisors at a particular institution have access to information in the accounts created at that “home” site, but not to others. (Last updated 12-09-04.)



28. Who makes decisions on CAS policy?

Decisions on policies that affect inter-institutional processes will be reviewed by an advisory committee. The committee will be comprised of participating institutional representatives from the various sectors. The project co-directors will organize a meeting of this committee in late February 2005. In other states, technical matters are referred to an additional committee of technical staff and Illinois may want to adopt a similar approach. Some policy decisions are made by the institution, such as matters that relate to granting degrees, while other issues cross institutions and need to be coordinated statewide. As the Illinois CAS project expands, the administrative structure will develop to accommodate the increased complexity. (Last updated 12-09-04.)
