Strategic Issue
Issue: Whether consideration of a University-wide solution for the allocation of instructional
space and the reservation of non-instructional space is within the scope of the implementation of
a new Student Information System (SIS).
PRISM #: 084
Student System Project Contact (PRISM Issue Owner): Robert LeHeup
Scope Type:
Issue Priority:
General |
Critical |
School/Unit Issue |
High |
Medium |
Coordinating Project |
New Functionality
Low
Impact Statement:
 Best practice is the automated allocation of instructional space to improve efficiency, maximize the benefits of rules governing
space allocation, and achieve space utilization target rates.
 Currently, some schools and units use Resource 25 (R25) and Schedule 25 (S25)—a scheduling algorithm—to allocate space.
Instructional space for some schools is allocated centrally, through UREG, while other schools and units use manual processes
to allocate instructional space for courses and to make ad hoc reservations for spaces within their respective buildings.
 Current school- and department-based space allocation practices limit the availability of instructional space across the Grounds
and require manual intervention and assignment by space “owners” who do not use R25.
 The University is taking steps to increase the percentage of instructional and non-instructional space allocated through R25.
Approximately 75% of space currently is allocated through R25.
 The University’s room utilization rates lag below targets established by the state. Scheduling more courses and rooms with an
automated, centralized scheduler may increase utilization rates and reduce manual effort.
 When R25, widely perceived as “best in class” for space allocation management, was implemented at the University in the
summer of 2005, the expectation was that it would remain in place for the foreseeable future. Student system vendors are
unlikely to offer space allocation functionality.
 Implementation of an interface between a space allocation solution and the student system, such as currently exists between
R25 and ISIS, will be required to prevent a loss of significant functionality.
 The use of R25 to centralize allocation of space use across the University and to simplify reporting to state agencies will
require significant time and effort.
Options and Implications:
1. Implementation of an automated, University-wide solution for the allocation of instructional space and the scheduling of
University space is outside the scope of the implementation of a new SIS. In this option, the University will continue to have
information on space usage recorded in multiple stand-alone systems. If an interface between the new student system and R25
is not integrated initially during implementation of the new student system, allocation of instructional space may need to be
done manually, and use of R25 will be severely diminished.
2. Implementation of an automated, University-wide solution for the allocation of instructional space and the scheduling of
University space is within the scope of the implementation of a new SIS. In this option, the University will be able to maximize
space utilization and store space allocation information in one system. An interface between R25 and the new student system
will serve the entities that currently use R25, as well as any new users of a centralized scheduler.
Recommendation:
 Option 2: Implementation of an automated, University-wide solution for the allocation of instructional space and the
scheduling of University space is within the scope of the implementation of a new SIS.
 R25 should be adopted as the University's single solution for managing and scheduling all space, instructional and otherwise,
and the use of its S25 component should be expanded where practicable to all schools.
Dependencies:
 The desire of the University to centralize space allocation in conjunction with the new student system.
 The desire of the University to review the relationship between course enrollment practices and space allocation—to review
cultural and policy issues that may impinge on the effectiveness of a space allocation management solution.
 The scope of implementing an interface between R25 and the new student system depends upon the vendor selected; R25 is
supported by at least one potential student system vendor, with a vendor-supplied interface to R25.
 The compatibility of releases of the new student system and R25 with the new student system.
Next Steps (if in scope):
 Create working group to develop priority and space utilization rules that can be included in the new student system.
 Work with current R25 implementation team (Intramural-Recreational Sports, Newcomb Hall, and University Registrar) to
implement R25's use by all scheduling entities.
Deadline for Executive Committee:
Decision by Executive Committee:


Option 2: Implementation of an automated, University-wide solution for the allocation of instructional space and the
scheduling of University space is within the scope of the implementation of a new SIS.
R25 should be adopted as the University's single solution for managing and scheduling all space, instructional and otherwise,
and the use of its S25 component should be expanded where practicable to all schools.
Executive Committee Reviewer/Approver: : Full IS Executive Committee
Signature of Reviewer: Gene Block
Date: 3/1/06