Timetabling for 2006
Consultative Forum
02 February 2005
1. Objectives
To outline plans for producing a comprehensive 2006
academic timetable for the Kensington campus
To set the proposed changes in the context of an
expanded set of functions in myUNSW for Staff
To obtain support from faculties and schools on those
aspects of the proposal that are beneficial to them
(or largely neutral)
To identify issues and concerns that may affect each
faculty’s ability to participate fully in the revised
timetabling business process
To constitute a timetabling reference group
To reach consensus on the best way forward.
2. The problem
What’s wrong with the timetable?
Low effective utilisation of physical resources and
time
Poor choices for students, especially in combined
programs
No coordinated strategy for updating the academic
timetable
Some parts of the timetable are locked into a 1970s
time warp
No way of investigating feasibility of new programs or
effect of changes in teaching space availability
UNSW uniquely uses no scheduling tools
Room utilisation 9am-6pm
% of time room is booked
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Large theatre frequency
Large theatre occupancy
Medium theatre frequency
Medium theatre occupancy
% of seats
occupied
when in use
Target utilisation (frequency x occupancy) = 75%
Mon
Tue
Wed
Thu
Fri
Source:
CATS
bookings,
S1 2003
Large: 180-500 seats (excl. Clancy, NSG, Ritchie, Sci; 16 theatres)
Medium: 100-168 seats (22 theatres)
3. Options
1. Do nothing. Probable consequences:


Increased demands on physical space: more buildings
required
More difficulty in introducing courses and new or modified
programs
2. Construct complete timetable for selected faculties


Blacked out bookings entrench inequities and inefficiencies
Little gain (except in experience) unless fairly extensive
3. Construct complete timetable for all feasible faculties


New timetable can be based on established need rather than
historical accident
Significant challenges to capture all relevant parameters,
especially course compatibility requirements based on
program rules
4. Proposed approach
Brief History




1990s: issue raised repeatedly at Academic Board, no resolution
Since 2003: analysis of time and room utilisation, faculty
consultation (funded by Facilities Dept)
Oct 2004: Academic Services Committee recommends approval of
project, later endorsed by Academic Board
Dec 2004: Funding provided by DVC Resources. Sponsored by
DVC (Academic)
Principles





Improve utilisation, goal is accepted standard of 75% (frequency
x occupancy) compared to current 50%
Increase available course combinations for students
Smooth chronological peaks
Level the playing field for recently introduced courses
Accommodate preferences where possible
Proposed approach – new business process
Class scheduling requirements are captured in NSS



Based on schedule from previous year
New fields created on class schedule for timetabling
parameters such as expected enrolment, room requirements,
eLearning needs etc
Some optional fields become mandatory to improve data
integrity and quality
Provisional schedule generated using external engine
(Syllabus-Plus Course Planner)
Schedule imported to NSS, bookings to CATS
Casual bookings and low-enrolment course needs
forwarded to CATS
Most interaction occurs via myUNSW for Staff
5. Scope
What’s included and what’s not?
Courses: all on-campus above minimum threshold enrolment


All regular large- and small-group teaching activities included
Small Honours seminar courses and similar offerings remain school
responsibility
Sessions: 2006 S1 and S2. X1 and X2 from 2007.
Faculties: all Kensington except undergraduate Medicine (at least
initially). ADFA, CFA, Singapore: 2007.
Staff scheduling: not yet (implemented after 2006 with faculty
agreement)

Staff availability constraints may still be incorporated
Students: allocation of students to classes is not in scope: existing
on-line enrolment procedures apply
6. Integration
Timetabling is just one aspect of maintaining rules governing
what students must or may enrol in to complete their program
Staff should be able to see and manage all aspects of








Calendars
Offerings and enrolment constraints (course catalogue)
Program rules (handbook, or a more structured system)
Class timetable requirements and room needs
Class activities: in-person, eLearning, distance, exams
Class operational schedule: response to changes in demand
Roles for teachers, administrators and supervisors – including Vista
roles
Maintain teachers (according to to school/faculty procedures)
Accessed and updated via myUNSW for Staff
Eventually supports on-line self-service advising processes
Systems today and tomorrow
Results
History
Configuration
maintained
by Schools
Program
Rules
Academic
Advising
Students,
Advisers
Course
Catalogue
Online
Handbook
All users
Enrolment
Requirements
Equivalent
Courses
WebCTVista
Students, Staff
Class
Schedule
myUNSW
Reserve
Capacities
Enrolment
Quotas
Meeting
Times
Students,
Staff (proposed)
Existing functionality
Timetabling
Syllabus
Plus
Potential functionality
7. Some issues – technical
UNSW has little expertise in the use of scheduling software
The volume, complexity and volatility of existing program
rules may make a feasible greenfield timetable elusive
Stage 1 rules are captured in potentially usable form (Sitar),
but many rules are expressed as overall requirements
(courses listed independent of stage)
Not all classes are fully described on NSS


Activities missing; components misnamed
Course linkages not always explicitly recorded
NSS and CATS are only partly synchronised
Class Schedule growth
2001
Active classes
Empty classes
Inactive classes
2002
2003
2004
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Classes (x 1000)
Active: available (possibly stopped), enrolment not zero
Empty: available, no enrolments
Inactive: cancelled or tentative
12
13
14
Class Schedule profile
2004 Semester 1 Course Sizes
UGRD Lev1-3
500
UGRD Other
PGRD
Number of Courses
400
300
200
100
0
Closed
0
1-9
10-19
20-29
30-49
Number of Enrolled Students
50-99
100-199
200-299
300+
Empty classes: where and why?
Empty Classes 2004
7
305
Non-award
355
Research
Postgrad - consent
250
488
237
Postgrad - open
Undergrad - consent
Undergrad - open
Classes: 1642
Open:
542 (33%)
Consent: 738 (45%)
Other: 362 (22%)
Goal: improve accuracy of class schedule so it reflects
genuinely available and running courses
Timetabling – CATS/NSS correlation
1200
NSS class matched
No NSS match
Casual
Not used (after audit)
Number of CATS Bookings
1000
800
600
Source:
CATS bookings,
S1 2004
400
200
0
COMM
ARTSC
SCI
ENG
LAW
MED
BLTEN
8. Some issues – policy
CATS-2 system exacerbates scheduling problems and low
utilisation figures (yet some reserve school space is justified)
Need for wider range of learning space, yet no drop in demand
for conventional rooms
Reluctance of some faculties to record small-group classes on
NSS
Reluctance of some faculties to pre-schedule small group
classes at all
Possible reluctance to accept wider range of teaching hours
Conflicting needs and wishes
9. Some issues – operational
Demand is notoriously difficult to predict: how easy will it be to
schedule a new class quickly or cancel an non-viable one (with
automatic advice to the students affected too)?
Room requirements can change after enrolment (low/high
demand; disabled facilities required)
Staff may not be available to teach at the scheduled time
2006 Timetable (one-off conversion)
Provisional timetable
NSS
External sources
(CATS-2005, TAS)
Existing modules
Planned modules
Interim data sources
Rapid
prototyping/
conversion
module
Faculty
reviewers
Sitar
UEF
Syll+
Room
bookings
CATS
Program
rules
database
Online
handbook
Enrolment
History
Timetabling and academic advising
from 2007 onwards
Provisional timetable
NSS
Timetable
parameters
Syll+
Room
bookings
CATS
Results
Main
data
flow
Academic
advising
engine
Program rules
database
Program audit
Handbook
myUNSW portal
Students
Staff
Updates;
casual
bookings
10. Timeline
Feb – May



Establish parameters and approved principles
Capture clash-free requirements from program rules
Investigate scheduling patterns available with Syllabus-Plus
May – July




Produce of prototype timetables based on 2005 data
Review by faculties, refinement of models
Implement changes to class schedule panels, possibly via myUNSW
Implement interfaces between NSS and S+
Aug – Sept



Conduct info sessions for school staff
Roll class schedule forward, update timetabling parameters
Convert data from external sources (mainly CATS, one-off)
Oct – Nov


Produce provisional 2006 schedule
Review, amend as required and publish.
11. Conclusion
What do we agree on?
What can we not yet resolve?
Next steps