PPTX 1273 KB

advertisement

Curriculum Vitae Management System

Taming the CV Data Beast

Robert (Bob) Dalgleish, Systems Analyst

Alan Deschner, Senior Analyst and Project Manager

Information & Communications Technology

Noises Off

Help reduce interruptions.

Please turn off the beeps and boops from your portable devices.

The Project

Alan Deschner

Senior Analyst, ICT Applications

Project Manager, CVMS Project

Early History

• 2007, 2008 – Various colleges at U of S investigated or partially built CV systems

• Oct’08 – College of Medicine:

– Formed eCV Task Force

– Driven by costs of accreditation reporting

– Wrote project charter for software development

• Fall’08 thru Spring’09

– Requirements gathering and analysis

Options and Decisions

• Considered commercial systems, other

Universities’ systems, other colleges at U of S

• Deficiencies (3 main ones)

– No support for U of S standard CV format

– Lack of import facilities (e.g., citations)

– Lack of integration with other in-house data sources (student info, research info, etc.)

• Decision: develop in-house

History: Implementation Project

• Feb’10 – proposal to develop in-house

• April’10 – project start-up, analyst and P/A

• July’10 – added another developer

• Aug’10 – added ½ time project manager

• May’11 – alpha testing

• June’11 – beta testing

• End of June’11 – ready to go-live, with a few features not yet implemented

Production Go-Live

• June 28, 2011 – ready, but college decided not to rush into production:

– Reduced availability in the college over the summer

– Desirability of additional features

• July and Aug’11 – extra development, testing, remediation, and getting ready for go-live

• End of Aug’11 – live for College of Medicine

• End of Sept’11 – live for College of Nursing

Project Scope

• Release 1 (this project)

– Data entry screens

– Load data from EndNote, RefMan

– Produce U of S Comprehensive and Form 1 CV

– Interfaces to some internal systems (deferred)

• Releases 2 & 3 (the future)

– Reporting at department and college levels

– Publishing CV to funding agencies, websites, document management system (workflow)

Project Organization

• Requirements gathering was fairly traditional

• Development used agile, iterative approach

• Use of Jira to manage the backlog, estimates, iteration definitions

• Use of Confluence wiki for documentation

• eCV Task Force acted as the steering committee

• Co-sponsors from Medicine and ICT

Agile Development

• Team was inexperienced in agile methods

• Daily 10-15 minute scrum

– Often took longer, sometimes ½ hour

– Hard to keep on track (inexperience)

• Started with 4-week iterations

– Started to vary, some stretched to 5 weeks, some chopped to 3 weeks

– Got out of step with eCV Task Force meetings

User Involvement

• Representative from Medicine was assigned to the project team.

– Administrative person who deals with CVs

– We wanted her as much as ½ time

– She was only available ½ - 1 day per week

• Many said, “You’re lucky to have that much!”

• Agile says, “You need a SME embedded in the project team, full time if possible!”

Working Group

• A working group was put together from the colleges and various departments

– Review and test the application deployed in the previous iteration

– Identify new or changed functionality

– Help with details of the requirements

– Make recommendations to the eCV Task Force

• Met every second week, and did some additional testing between meetings

Iteration Schedule

• In iteration 6, we started 2-week iterations with defined reviews, releases to the test environment.

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday am: deploy N-1 pm: plan N

Begin work on iteration N

Testers review iteration N-1

Last day to develop iteration N am: deploy N pm: plan N+1

Testers review iteration N

The Product

Bob Dalgleish

Systems Analyst, ICT Applications

Lead Analyst, CVMS Project

Faculty

CV

Administrative Staff

CV

Granting Agencies

Promotions and

Tenure Committee

Activity

Report

Research Services

Faculty

CVMS

Grad Studies

Citation

Management

Software

Administrative Staff

Contact Database

Human Resources

Course Information

Technical Architecture:

Application Stack

• RedHat Linux, JBoss EAP 5

CVMS

Application

Java 6 Virtual Machine

And many more

Java 6 Virtual Machine

Java 6 Virtual Machine

Java 6 Virtual Machine

RedHat Enterprise Linux

Virtual Machine Container

Deployment Process

• Deployment: Workstations and Servers

Developer

Workstation

Subversion

Repository

Jira Issue

Repository

Jenkins

Continuous

Integration

TestDT Test Prod

Development Architecture

• Eclipse (JBoss Developer Studio)

• Subclipse (Subversion connector)

• TestNG – test suite runner

• Selenium – UI test suite developer & runner

• Clover – test coverage reporter

– Goal was 70% coverage, stabilized at 63%

• Jira – Issue reporting tool, release management, communications

• Confluence (wiki) – requirements & design capture

Technology Challenges

• Information Architecture:

– Information doesn’t mean the same thing to two different people, departments or colleges

• Standards, so many of them, so little time

• Publishing: iText vs DocBook,

• Hibernate as object repository

• Categorization, for publishing and reports

• Work flows

Information Architecture

• Many sources for data models and metadata

– CASRAI, Dublin Core, HR-XML.org, CommonCV.net

– Decided to normalize data and minimize structure clashes

• Working group process

– Discuss data elements, how they would be used, collected, verified

– Built prototypes, tested by working group members

– Repeat

• Focused on requirements of university CV

– Publishing requirements

– Review process

IA – Imprecise Dates

IA – Field Lengths

Sample Published Output

Hibernate Data Handling

• Implements persistence (Java Persistence

Architecture)

– Push data to repository if it has been changed

– Coordinate network of linked objects

– Minimizes SQL to be written

• Inversion of Control

– LazyInitializationException - means you aren’t where you think you are

– While Hibernate handles much of it …

Categories: Publishing …

• Each line item has a section selector

Categories: … Selecting

• Some items have many categories, some have only one available.

Categories: … Published

• The section is where the item appears in our standard CV …

Item Work Flow

• Each item goes through a sequence, Entered

(Not Approved), Requires Attention, Approved

citations.xml

citations.txt

Importing Citations

JAXB

Parser

EndNote

XML

Import

RefMan

Import

Import

Feedback

CVMS

Next Steps

Phase I is complete for two colleges, what now?

• Next biggest need is reporting

• Complete some of the deferred features

• Integrate with other systems

• Roll out to the rest of campus

This looks like an on-going program.

Next Steps - Reporting

• Reporting for departments and colleges

– Faculty activity reports

– Research reports

– Reports for accreditation

• User-defined query, extract, reporting facility

– Facilitate external analysis

Reporting

Reporting

Data

Audiences

Faculty & Committees

Accreditation Panels

Reporting

Reporting

Audiences

Faculty & Committees

Accreditation Panels

Data

Data Quality

Management

Governance

Processes

People

Reporting

Data Quality Management

- Incorrect data

- Missing data

- Redundant or duplicated data

Report Parameters

- Periods

- Categories

- Populations

Report Format

- Raw Excel file

- Formatted Word or HTML file

- Dashboard

Next Steps – CV Publishing

• Publish CV to document management system

– Enable workflows for college reviews related to tenure and promotion

• Publish to personal website

• Publish to commonCV.net

• Additional citation formats (only NLM now)

• Additional CV formats

– Other funding agencies

Next Steps - Data

• Pull data from other U of S systems

– Student info, HR, research admin, grad studies

• Pull data from external systems

– e.g., PubMed, Scopus

• Bulk load of legacy data using cut-and-paste and data parsing

• Additional data fields to support other disciplines (e.g., humanities, fine arts)

Next Steps - Data

Lessons Learned

Lessons Learned

• Improve the change management processes:

– Changes identified by the working group need approval from eCV Task Force, but there was not enough time to answer the question,

“How much will it cost?”

– Scope creep is insidious! Beware!

– Help users understand that adding a new feature means dropping something else.

Lessons Learned about Agile

• Include an expert agile practitioner when an organizational goal is to change software development methods to agile.

• Shorter iterations are better.

• The more user involvement, the better.

And constant involvement is best.

• Overall, agile is better than the alternatives!

Even More Lessons Learned

• Don’t expect users to know what they want until they see what they don’t want!

• The great thing about standards is that there are so many to choose from!

Questions?

Contact us:

Alan.Deschner@usask.ca

Bob.Dalgleish@usask.ca

http://www.usask.ca/its/services/cv_management_system/

Credits

Project Team

• Bob Dalgleish

• Boris Tchoursine

• Aileen Garcia

• Carla Zorn (Medicine)

• Alan Deschner (PM)

• Kirby McInnis (AIS Manager) eCV Task Force & Work Group

• Dr Roger Pierson (co-chair)

• Dr Vivian Ramsden (co-chair)

• Dr Ron Doucette

• Dr Roger Keith

• Dr Angela Busch (PT)

• Dr Phil Woods (Nursing)

• John Costa

• Special guests

Download