University of Central Florida Spreadsheet Model Approaches for Generating Student Class Schedules...

University of Central Florida

Spreadsheet Model Approaches for Generating Student Class Schedules

Robert L. ArmacostDirector, University Analysis and Planning Support

Magdy HelalResearch Associate, University Analysis and Planning Support

Dianne AdamsCoordinator of Computer Applications, University Analysis and

Planning SupportUniversity of Central Florida

2005 SAIR Conference October 24, 2005Presentation available at http://uaps.ucf.edu

http://uaps.ucf.edu/

Spreadsheet Models for Generating Student Class Schedules 2October 24, 2005

Goals for the Presentation

Challenges in addressing graduation rates Introduction to Grad On Track solution Challenges in meeting guarantees Challenges developing student class schedules Optimization approach using Solver Add-in Limited enumeration approach Stand-alone Visual Basic implementation Comparison of approaches


The University of Central Florida

Established in 1963 in Orlando Florida (first classes in 1968), Metropolitan Research University

Grown from 1,948 to 45,000 students in 37 years 38,000 undergraduates and 7,000+

graduates 12 regional campus instructional sites 9th largest public university

Stands for Opportunity

Doctoral intensive 92 Bachelors, 94 Masters, 3 Specialist, and 25 PhD programs

Largest undergraduate enrollment in state Approximately 1,200+ faculty and 3,100 staff Nine colleges

Arts and Sciences, Biomedical Sciences, Business Administration, Education, Engineering and Computer Science, Health and Public Affairs, Honors, Hospitality Management, and Optics and Photonics


Graduation is the Goal63

.4%

53.5

%

52.0

%

49.2

%

49.1

%

48.6

%

48.3

%

47.3

%

44.0

%

43.6

%

41.8

%

41.8

%

40.2

%

40.1

%

38.9

%

38.8

%

37.8

%

36.6

%

35.3

%

34.9

%

33.2

%

33.1

%

32.1

%

31.0

%

22.8

%

0.0%

10.0%

20.0%

30.0%

40.0%

50.0%

60.0%

70.0%N

CSU

UC

F

ASU USF

UN

C-C

GM

U

UC

FIU

SDSU U

T

OD

U

VCU UH

UA

UW

-M

UN

T

UN

LV

UT-

A

FAU

UL

PSU

UM

GSU

WSU

IUPU

I

UCF

Aspirational

Medical School

Large MRU Peers

Other MRUs

Large Metropolitan Research University 6-year Graduation Rates—IPEDS 97


Graduation is the GoalLarge Metropolitan Research University 4-year Graduation Rates—IPEDS 99

27.7

%

26.6

%

26.0

%

24.3

%

22.6

%

22.0

%

19.7

%

17.9

%

17.7

%

16.4

%

15.5

%

14.8

%

14.4

%

14.1

%

13.7

%

13.2

%

12.9

%

12.6

%

12.6

%

12.3

%

11.1

%

9.3%

9.1%

7.3%

5.8%

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

UC

F

NC

SU

ASU USF

GM

U

UN

C-C

UT-

A

UM FIU

UA

VCU

UC

UW

-M

OD

U

FAU

UN

T

PSU

UL

UT

UN

LV

GSU

SDSU UH

WSU

IUPU

I

UCF

Aspirational

Medical School

Large MRU Peers

Other MRUs


Graduation is the GoalUCF Time to Degree —2003-04 Baccalaureate GraduatesSemesters to Graduation--2003-04 Graduates (entered as FTICs)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 28 29 30 31

Number of semesters to graduation

Num

ber o

f gra

duat

es

Average time to graduation = 11.83 semesters

67.9% graduated in 12 semesters or less

(Semester count includes summer, fall, and spring)


Graduation is the Goal BUT

Florida SUS 4-year graduation rate = 33% University of Florida 4-year graduation rate = 52% University of Central Florida 4-year graduation rate = 29.5%

Differences in institutional mission Time to degree

1998 FTIC cohort—46-51% of graduates graduate in 4 years or less (81-90% in 5 years or less)

1998 FTIC cohort—41-47% dropped out 2003-04 graduates—average time to degree was 11.83

semesters


Improve Graduation Rate

Delayed graduation represents significant lifetime losses

Perception: UCF = U Can’t Finish Class availability Unplanned delays System inefficiency—excess hours

Solution: New program that guarantees class availability

Grad On Track (GOT) was born


Grad On Track

http://gradontrack.sdes.ucf.edu


Grad On Track Requirements

FTIC student Declares single major on entry Has appropriate math and chemistry placements Agrees to follow a restricted schedule for the major

Limited electives Generally 15 hours per semester

Maintains satisfactory performance UCF

Guarantees a seat in every class that is needed Guarantees graduation in four years


Biology GOT ScheduleBiology BS

SEMESTER Fall 15 SEMESTER Spring 15Course No. Hours Course No. HoursBSC 2010 General Biology 4 BSC 2011 Biological Diversity 4ENC 1101 English Composition I 3 CHM 2046 Chemistry Fundamentals with Lab 4CHM 2045 Chemistry Fundamentals 4 MAC 2312 Calculus with Analytical Geometry II 4MAC 2311 Calculus with Analytical Geometry 4 ENC 1102 English Composition II 3

SEMESTER Fall 17 SEMESTER Spring 14Course No. Hours Course No. HoursBOT 4303 Plant Kingdom 5 CHM 2211 Organic Chemistry II 3CHM 2210 Organic Chemistry I 3 CHM 2211L Organic Chemistry Lab 2PCB 3304 Principles of Ecology 3 PCB 3063 Genetics 3STA 2023 Statistical Methods I 3 PCB 3442 Florida Aquatic Ecology 3PSY 2012 General Psychology 3 POS 2041 American National Government 3

SEMESTER Fall 16 SEMESTER Spring 15Course No. Hours Course No. HoursPCB 4302 Physiochemical Limnology 4 MCB 3020 General Microbiology 5ZOO 3713 Comparative Vertebrate Anatomy 5 PCB 3233 Immunology 3EUH 2000 Western Civilization I 3 EUH 2001 Western Civilization II 3PHY 2053 College Physics I 4 PHY 2054 College Physics II 4

SEMESTER Fall 13 SEMESTER Spring 15Course No. Hours Course No. HoursMCB 3203 Pathogenic Microbiology 3 BOT 3800 Ethnobotany 3PCB 3023 Molecular Cell Biology 3 PCB 4683 Population Biology & Evolution 4PCB 4723 Animal Physiology 4 ZOO 4603 Embryology/Development 5SPC 1016 Fundamentals of Technical Presentations 3 REL 2300 World Religions 3


How to Guarantee Classes? Biology BS

BSC 2010: 3 lecture sections, 22 lab sections CHM 2045: 16 lecture sections ENC 1101: 110 lecture sections MAC 2311: 22 lecture sections

2,555,520 combinations!!! Potential conflicts with times that classes are offered Technical challenge

Construct a feasible class schedule that identifies which sections of which courses need seats to be reserved

Administrative challenge How to actually reserve those seats


Scheduling Approaches Foundation is first obtaining scheduled dates and times

for all classes offered Objective is to identify a feasible schedule for a given

program Problem reduces to finding a class schedule for one

week Alternative scheduling approaches

Optimization-based approach—find a feasible solution for a particular “set-covering” 0-1 integer program

Enumeration-based approach—develop a feasible schedule by constructing a schedule adding one class at a time


System Guidelines Scheduling tool should

Read input from the university database (class data) Classes open in the semester Number of sections of each class Meeting dates for each section Meeting start and end times

Read input from academic departments (program data) List of courses required for the program in that semester

Manipulate these inputs Generate feasible schedules for the classes

Implementation should Be accessible on a desktop or on the Web Spreadsheet based (initially)


StructureUniversity Database

Access Database

Classes data.Excel file each semester.

Scheduling Tool

Filtered, coded, formatted data.Two Excel files each semester.

Academic Departments

Program data.Excel file each major

Schedules.Excel File each Major.


Class Data Preparation

Download from PeopleSoft to Excel

Used as is Import to Access

database Filter then format

and code meeting times

Generate Excel sheets for input to scheduler


Program Requirement Data Obtained for each program with GOT students Use shown template


Optimization-based Scheduler Finding student class schedule is a “set-covering”

problem Find the class sections that will “cover” the “set” of program

requirements (courses) Constraints

No two sections can be scheduled at the same time Exactly one section of each course must be scheduled during

a week Maximum of five hours of classes may be scheduled in a given

day Objective

No particular objective is required—only looking for a feasible solution

Objective could be changed to generate different feasible solutions


Excel Setup Columns correspond to class sections offered at

different times Rows correspond to half-hour time periods for each

day of the week Cell values = 1 if class section is offered at that time or

= 0 if section is not offered at that time Decision variable row cells = 1 if that section of the

course is scheduled and = 0 otherwise SOLVER Add-in

Tools > Solver (go to Tools > Add-ins and check “Solver Add-in” if not loaded)

“Target cell” is the objective to be optimized “Changing cells” are the decision variables “Constraints” are the conditions to be satisfied


Solver Setup


SolverStart

New class data

Update class data

Read existing course list

No

Show selection user interface

User selects major and semester (and courses)

Identifying sections for selected courses

Checking the availability of data

Preparing and formatting data

Exporting data to Solver File

Data available

Exit

No

Solver generates Schedules

Developing graphical representations

Saving Results in an Excel file

End

Yes

Yes


User Output


The Scheduler Used VBA to integrate data preparation and generate

multiple schedules


Demo


Solver Pros and Cons Pros

Generates feasible solutions Modifiable to add other constraints (e.g., minimum time

between classes) Relatively easy to customize output

Cons Requires mathematical understanding to set up Requires careful mapping of class schedule data Relatively long execution times Potential automation connection problems Need to “trick” the set up to generate alternate schedules


Enumeration Approach Potential for reducing processing time Use existing data structure with class and program

information Constructive generation of student class schedule Apply heuristic scheduling rule

Schedule most restrictive class first Add next most restrictive class while satisfying time conflict

constraints Number of feasible schedules is limited by the amount

of time to be spent or number specified in advance Output format is same as for Solver


Enumeration ApproachStart

New class data

Update class data

Read existing course list

No

Show selection user interface

User selects major and semester (and courses)

Identifying sections for selected courses

Checking the availability of data

Preparing and formatting data

Exporting data to Enumeration File

Data available

Exit

No Graphical representations for completed schedules parts

Saving Results in as Excel file

End

Yes

Yes

Arranging sections in ascending order of the number of sections

per course

Setting up schedules for each section

Adding sections one after one to existing schedules


Demo


Enumeration Pros and Cons

Pros Easier to set up than Solver Computer processing time efficient Less automation connection problems

Cons Rigid structure—must be recoded for customized results Must be run until finished to get any solutions Limited number of feasible solutions as coded


Stand-Alone VB Application Based on the constructive enumerative approach


Demo


VB Application Pros and Cons Pros

Offers more control and user-friendly capabilities than Solver or Enumeration

No need to deal with underlying Excel or database files Faster, at least 10 times faster when using Solver DLL Extendable to connect directly to the internet, SQL servers, and university

database Scalable

No language limitations as with VBA Cons

Advanced programming skills Special software and/or add-ins needed Difficulty in using automation and data objects Time consuming to develop Sensitive to software releases and upgrades


Use of Student Schedules

Output includes a relatively large (50-60) set of schedules Replaces previous trial and error generation approach

GOT first year advisor Selects a schedule and registers the student Uses the set of feasible schedules to help student identify

alternatives Uses to advise registration for second year

Program advisors Set of schedules provide input for advisors for third and fourth

years


Benefits of GOT Initiative Programs required to prepare four-year schedule Led to full year registration Highlighted schedule conflicts Publication of planned offerings of courses

Facilitates better advising and planning by students Program issues

Attractive to uncertain students with uncertain parents 15 hour requirement is a potential barrier Self-directed student do not need or desire the program

Identified potential benefits of having a tool to generate a four year program of study tailored to individual desires and planned course offerings


Future Technical Extensions Stand-alone VB application Real-time connection to university database Local SQL/database servers for advisors and students Student web access with advisor approval Allow online registration Link to academic departments to dynamically update

program data


Questions

???

Mr. Magdy HelalResearch Associate, University

Analysis and Planning SupportUniversity of Central Florida12424 Research Parkway, Suite

215Orlando, FL [email protected] http://uaps.ucf.edu

Dr. Robert L. ArmacostDirector, University Analysis and

Planning SupportUniversity of Central Florida12424 Research Parkway, Suite

215Orlando, FL [email protected] http://uaps.ucf.edu

mailto:[email protected]


mailto:[email protected]


University of Central Florida Spreadsheet Model Approaches for Generating Student Class Schedules...

Documents

Transcript of University of Central Florida Spreadsheet Model Approaches for Generating Student Class Schedules...