Jisc case studies wiki Case studies / Postgraduate Research Administration Module (PRAM)
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Postgraduate Research Administration Module (PRAM)

Funded by the: JISC Flexible Service Delivery programme.

Lead Institution: University of Nottingham.

Partner Organisations: University of OxfordUNIT4 and Business Software Ltd.

Key Words: Working with commercial suppliers.

 

Background

 

Aims and Objectives

 

This project aimed to disaggregate the Unit4 Agresso Student Management product to provide a free standing module(s) for the administration of postgraduate research students (PRAM). This is an area of student administration where there is limited provision within the sector and therefore the sector should benefit from a modular commercial solution that could be integrated using open standards, web services and/or an enterprise service bus.

 

The Universities of Nottingham and Oxford have worked in partnership with Unit4 to disaggregate and enhance the existing postgraduate research student (PGR) functionality in the Unit4 product, through working with academic and administrative staff to analyse the processes and requirements for a PRAM solution at each University, and more broadly across the sector. The completed documentation is being aggregated by Unit4 to build a PRAM solution which, using a suite of web services and enterprise service bus interfaces, will offer a configurable module that can be integrated with existing systems.

 

The analysis documentation from the project is linked to from the Appendices of this case study. A further output from the project provides an open XML standard for the exchange of postgraduate student information to ease interoperability and avoid supplier lock-in.

 

Context

 

This project was delivered under the JISC Flexible Service Delivery programme.

 

At the University of Nottingham it is forming part of the modular replacement of the student management system.

 

The University of Oxford are also replacing their current student system, with a focus on integration of systems to support the student experience. PRAM is viewed as an option that could be integrated, either as a whole or in part, within the new system.

 

Unit4 worked with the two Universities to develop a generic solution for the sector that could be configured to meet local variations and could be integrated with any student management system, whether a commercial or in-house developed system.

 

The business case

 

The agreed Project Plan identified that this an area of student administration where there is limited provision within the sector and a clearly identified benefit is the provision of this functionality, on a modular basis, using web services and/or enterprise bus technology to allow flexible integration into existing student management systems.

 

The original functionality to support PGR administration within Unit4's Agresso Business World (ABW) was integrated within its student management module. Therefore, in order to use this functionality the purchaser would need to replace their existing student management system with Agresso Students. Furthermore, integration with systems outside of Agresso Students was restrictive as it did not allow for the orchestration of processes; data could be easily extracted from Agresso Students but could not be easily inserted.

 

The following two diagrams represent the original framework for the Agresso Students PGR module (Figure 1) and the revised structure showing how the module has been disaggregated (Figure 2).

Figure 1 PGR in the Agresso Campus Solution

 

Figure 2 - PGR Functionality disaggregated into PRAM

 

The PGR module in Agresso Campus, as shown in Figure 1, provides a full management system for all student research undertaken within an institution, allowing management of research student records from the point of application/registration through to final outcome. Grants maintenance, applications, publication recording and project maintenance are also available to be utilised.

 

Previously, this functionality was an integrated part of the Agresso student management product, so its implementation could only be achieved as part of the overall implementation of a full student management system. This project disaggregated this functionality enabling it to be integrated into existing systems.

 

The disaggregated PGR functionality is shown in the following diagram: 

Figure 3 - PGR Functionality

 

To ensure that a PRAM solution would meet the combined requirements of each of the partner Universities, and to determine the module or modules required by each, there was an opportunity to review the existing functionality within the Unit4 product. Where it was determined that further functionality was required to meet the needs of PGR administration, analysis was undertaken at each of the partner institutions. This also included reviewing central systems and those developed locally by Academic Schools/Departments to manage PGR administration.

 

The analysis outputs are referenced in the Appendices. The project has also built on previous JISC projects including:

 

  • the development of XCRI - eXchange of Course-Related Information using an XML standard
  • Exploiting Web Services (Project EWES)

 

Key drivers

 

University of Nottingham:

 

  • Quality of the research student experience
  • Savings and efficiency
  • Delivery on the University Plan

 

University of Oxford:

 

  • Improved automation of administrative processes, for example integration of use of online forms and approval processes
  • Development of the Graduate Supervision System (GSS), used for termly progress reporting, which was released in 2009
  • Development of central facilities for administration of Research Council funding and administration of training
  • Better integration of systems to provide an enhanced, streamlined user experience 

 

Establishing and maintaining senior management buy-in

 

At the University of Nottingham this project formed part of the Student Academic Management System (SAMS) Programme.

 

At the University of Oxford it formed part of the Student Systems Programme.

 

Technologies used

 

Signavio process mapping was used to document the business process mapping to Business Processing Modelling Notation version 2 standards and PRAM product is being developed using the current software suite underpinning the Unit4 Agresso Business World (ABW) software solutions.

 

Outcomes

 

Achievements

 

Benefits

 

Tangible

 

The PRAM project successfully completed and published the analysis of the business processes and requirements for a PRAM solution. This documentation is currently being synthesised by JISC into an infoKit to be published later in 2011.

 

Although the two partner universities have very different organisational structures it should be possible to design a PRAM solution that would be suitable for a wide range of Higher Education Institution (HEI) organisational structures across the sector by the appropriate configuration and parameterisation in the software application.

 

The University of Nottingham and the University of Oxford will continue to work with Unit4 as they develop PRAM into a fully functioning application. (Time frame for this work is still to be defined as at August 2011). Approximately 40% of the software was developed within the project timeframe, covering Administer Student and Assess and Award functionality.

 

See Appendices A and C for the Process Hierarchy diagrams.

 

The project set out to develop the following products:

 

  • Documented core set of common processes and data required across HE to manage postgraduate research students.
    • These are now published and freely available for the HE sector to use. It is planned this documentation will be synthesized into a JISC infoKit to be published later in 2011.
  • Mapping of common processes and data onto existing Unit4 offering.
    • Process areas Administer Student and Assess and Award have been mapped. The remaining processes will be mapped as part of the design phase by Unit4.
    • Appendix G shows the combined process hierarchy as at the end of this phase of the project.
  • Documented core set of common services required across HE which allow integration with other administrative and research systems.
    • Unit4 are continuing work in this area beyond the JISC PRAM project and it is planned that this will be available as part of the solution. (Timescales to be defined as at August 2011).
  • Documented outline and working group for an open XML standard for the exchange for postgraduate research student information.
    • As above; Unit 4 are continuing work on this deliverable beyond the end of the JISC phase of the project. The delivery of this XML standard relies on the definition of common services, which in turn relies on the completion of the PRAM solution.
  • Documented baseline costing for the administration of PGR and environment impact assessment.
    • The business processes have been mapped and potential savings identified by each institution to be utilised internally within business cases for implementation of the PRAM system when it has been completed.
  • Open XML standard for the exchange for PGR information.
    • This item will form part of the deliverables of the completed Unit4 PRAM solution.
  • Unit4 PRAM module(s).
    • The Unit4 development as part of the JISC phase of the project focused on the Administer Student and Assess and Award aspects of the application functionality. It was estimated that this completed approximately 40% of the overall PRAM module functionality. As highlighted previously Unit4 are continuing work on the PRAM solution and both Nottingham and Oxford Universities have agreed to support this work. (Timescales to be advised by Unit4).
  • Core set of web services for the Unit4 PRAM.
    • This deliverable will form part of the overall PRAM solution to be delivered by Unit4.
  • Implemented test system of Unit4's PRAM. Integrated with existing student management systems at University of Nottingham and Oxford using web services.
    • Testing of the solution will be carried out at a later stage.
  • Case study and guidelines on how to implement a PGR administration system – PRAM. Specifically how it was achieved in two different Universities replacing (or taking out) the existing system. This would cover both the technical, organisational and cultural issues which had to be addressed.
    • As noted previously it was not possible to complete this aspect of the deliverables as part of the JISC phase of the project.
  • Lessons learned and recommendations. 
    • These are included in this case study. 

 

Intangible

 

The PRAM project was aimed at disaggregating the functionality within the existing Unit4 PGR product so that it was possible to integrate the resulting module into existing systems, without the need to replace an institution's complete student management system. The project has shown it is possible to identify functionality that relates only to PGR student management. The project has started to show that business services can be thought about and translated into common web services and supported through web technologies.

 

The project also allowed for the sharing of best practice; two examples are: firstly, in respect of the documentation of processes through the use of BPMN standard; secondly, the use of an agile methodology allowed for an adaptive style of development of the PRAM product elements.

 

New skills

 

Developing a PRAM solution for the sector required close collaboration with each of the partners to provide a standardised set of analysis documentation, which could be combined to produce a configurable solution to reflect the processes and requirements of each of the HEI's.

 

Unit4 have utilised the opportunity to learn more in relation to specific requirements of the management of PGR students. Unit4 have also had the opportunity to build a module which uses an adaptive development methodology through agile and product infrastructure through the use of web technologies.

 

Drawbacks

 

In respect of University of Nottingham this was a much sought after solution. Whilst the core student management systems offered some functionality to maintain this cohort of students it does not yet offer a full solution, therefore many Faculties and Schools have evolved systems and processes to integrate to a greater or lesser extent with the student management core systems to provide this functionality. The management of expectations in relation to a solution being available 'instantly' was a key consideration ensuring that Faculties and Schools were aware that they would not only need to support this analysis and development stage, but also the implementation and configuration of a delivered PRAM solution.

 

A second consideration at University of Nottingham was ensuring that the scope was kept within the context of PGR students only. A number of aspects of the analysis could have easily led to scope creep to cover all cohorts of students. However, where these items were identified they have been captured and documented to allow consideration by the overall SAMS programme.

 

In respect of the University of Oxford a key necessity was that PRAM should be able to relinquish tasks that were common for PGR and PGT students to a core system (for example allocation of supervisors) but that interfacing should then enable relevant 'core system data' to be captured and utilised for PRAM-based processes. The first phase of development work focused on 'Administer student', much of which would occur within Oxford's core system rather than in PRAM. Another important factor was the requirement of staff out in divisions and departments to devote time to this project, whilst recognising its pilot nature. From an early stage it was emphasised that any implementation of such a solution would require full engagement across the relevant stakeholders and that, to ensure completion during the appropriate timescales, it was not possible to engage everyone involved in the management of PGR students in this project.

 

Key Lessons

 

The effort required by a supplier to modify an existing enterprise module into a decoupled Service Orientated Architecture (SOA) enabled offering is as significant as writing a module from scratch; it should not be underestimated.

 

It is acknowledged that there are a number of deliverables that still remain to be completed; however Unit4 have advised that they are committed to the delivery of a PRAM solution and therefore the identified deliverables should be available in the future.

 

In respect of the timescales and budget for the project, this relied on the completion of the analysis outputs to provide the full picture of the work. As this analysis work progressed the scale of the project became much clearer, leading to the conclusion that it would not be possible to complete all aspects of the project. To mitigate this, both Universities agreed with Unit4 the key priority process areas to be developed in the JISC project phase.

 

Developing a generic product that can be configured for different universities adds an additional layer of complexity and analysis and thus requires more effort. Although many of the processes and activities at Nottingham and Oxford were common, the terminology and cultural aspects were different. This posed a challenge to Unit4 to produce a flexible system that could be adjusted to fit either environment.

 

Analysis of the process for administering postgraduate research students is useful in itself. It aided the business in developing a better understanding of operations and led to a number of changes being made to improve efficiency, especially in the management of research funding which is estimated to save the University of Nottingham potentially £100k over the first year of implementation.

 

Engagement from users (i.e. academics, administrators and research students) is essential to the success of the development and its eventual implementation. At Nottingham, wide consultation and involvement in project governance was facilitated. This successfully engaged the PGR community and has prepared the University for the change involved in introducing a system such as PRAM. At Oxford, with its devolved structure, consultation was coordinated between the central student systems programme team and divisional contacts, with the requirements gathering and analysis integrated into the work of the student systems replacement programme, and with weekly reports to the Operations Group and monthly reports to the Management Group. This was afforced through regular meetings between the lead University of Oxford business analyst and divisional representatives, ensuring effective engagement from key stakeholders, whilst ensuring that the work was incorporated into the evaluation phase of the replacement programme.

 

In order to work using an Agile methodology there needs to be a close working relationship between all parties involved. Use was made of phone conferences and also the WebEx functionality available from Unit4 to allow a desktop to be viewed by participants in a phone conference. However, the benefit of face to face meetings should not be under estimated.

 

The establishment at University of Nottingham of a Working Group and an internal Project Board in addition to the JISC PRAM Project Board gave a strong governance structure to the project. In the early stages of the analysis the Working Group established a weekly meeting pattern that members bought into and attended on a regular basis. This represented a wide cross-section of stakeholders involved in working with PGR students; including academic and administrative staff predominantly based on 

the UK campuses. However both the Project Board and Working Group had representatives from the University of Nottingham international campuses who, where appropriate, participated via video conference.

 

Although the administration of PGR students is underpinned by The Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) requirements, the actual processes analysed did have variations across the HEIs and therefore the ability to parameterise and ensure that HEIs could use terminology specific to their institution was a key deliverable in the project. However, it was noted that the different organisational structures in place at University of Nottingham (Faculty/Department/School) compared with University of Oxford (Collegiate) did not impact the design of the solution.

 

Once the analysis deliverables started to be published it became clear that it was unlikely that all of the functionality would be fully available from Unit4 in the JISC phase of the project; however the close working relationship between University of Nottingham and University of Oxford aided the task of prioritisation in guiding Unit4 in their development strategy.

 

The project offered Unit4 the opportunity to learn about the specific aspects of management of PGR students. This enabled them to integrate this functionality within their existing ABW modules, whilst utilizing data structures and functionality already available in the product.

 

The ability to test during the on-going cycle of development of the product would have been beneficial as this would have allowed a fuller reflective review of the development at the end of each sprint and potentially would have provided more formalised feedback on the product.

 

Unit4 used an agile methodology to develop the product, and over the course of the JISC phase there were five sprints which provided aspects of functionality: in Sprints 1, 2 and 3 for Administer Student (excluding funding); Sprints 4 and 5 aspects of Assessment and Award. Whilst prototyping was not used in the screen design shared with University of Nottingham and University of Oxford, care needed to be taken to ensure those viewing screen prints at the end of each sprint did not take this to be the finished screen, and that the methodology used allowed for further iterations of the design, via a product backlog, where necessary.

 

Certain aspects of functionality required for PRAM, for example the requirements for student screen views, run across the process areas that were identified for the analysis work and development. There would have been advantages to including these 'cross-area items' in the initial sprints so that greater definition and understanding of these requirements could have been gained.

 

Looking Ahead

 

It is acknowledged by Unit4, Nottingham and Oxford that the effort involved in the development of PRAM was initially underestimated. This is understandable as it is only possible to accurately quantify the effort once you have the analysis to base it on. At the end of the project the PRAM system was approximately 40% complete.

 

Unit4 has committed to completing PRAM by Spring 2012 and will continue working with Nottingham and Oxford. Once PRAM is complete it will be available to universities at a discounted cost due to the input and investment by JISC and the Universities of Nottingham and Oxford, as originally proposed under JISC funding.

 

Summary and reflection

 

The project did not achieve the envisaged PRAM solution within the 10 months of the project. It did however complete detailed analysis of the process and requirements for the administration of postgraduate research students which are reflective of and have been validated by key staff at the University of Nottingham and University of Oxford. This output has now been made available to the sector.

 

There is still some way to go in developing a full solution that can be piloted; however as noted previously, Unit4, University of Nottingham and University of Oxford have committed to the on-going development of the product.

 

As a proof of flexible service delivery (FSD) it does illustrate the difficulties in provisioning modular products. The PRAM development was slow, highlighting conflicts between the constraints of the underlying ABW enterprise application and the flexibility desired in a free standing module. Disaggregating functionality whilst continuing to develop and deploy it within a priority enterprise framework (i.e. ABW) requires a level of compromise for the user and the integrator.

 

JISC in their Briefing Paper in February 2010 (http://www.jiscinfonet.ac.uk/flexibleservice-delivery/fsd-briefing.pdf ) commented 'Flexible service delivery is about universities and colleges joining up their disparate corporate information and academic systems, and considering new modes of service provision such as shared services so that they can deliver improved cost effective administrative and student services.'

 

The paper also highlighted a number of problems an FSD solution could address in respect of:

'Large monolithic solutions with long term supplier lock in'

 

This project has started to demonstrate that it is possible to build a modular solution which is connected by web services to support a complex set of processes. This showed that in the longer term it will be possible to move away from supplier lock in and that the solution should be more flexible to keep pace with changing demands and priorities. However, there is an obligation on universities to be flexible in their approach to implementation and tailoring of their processes accordingly, to avoid bespoke developments that come at considerable cost.

 

One of the key deliverables from the project was the analysis of the processes for the administration of a postgraduate research student. Whilst 'As Is' processes have not been documented, the 'To Be' analysis has identified where there should be integration between systems and therefore the focus on integration through the use of web services. This should reduce manual manipulation of data between systems and also minimise the duplication of effort in maintaining existing systems.

 

The third aspect in the above paper was in reference to locked in data in a single system and therefore the same data is potentially maintained in a number of systems. Again the PRAM solution, through the analysis done, has demonstrated how PGR data should be managed and where this needs to be made available to other applications within the student management suite. The application development has initially demonstrated that this can be resolved through the initial web service and further development of the Unit4 PRAM should continue to display that this problem can be resolved through a flexible service delivery solution.

 

In conclusion, the FSD approach on this project has demonstrated the benefits of this method of application delivery and as the Unit4 PRAM solution evolves these should be able to be demonstrated in the full product solution.

 

Appendix A

University of Nottingham Process Flows

 

Appendix B

University of Nottingham Requirements Catalogue

 

Appendix C

University of Oxford Process Flows

 

Appendix D

University of Oxford Requirements Catalogues 

 

Appendix E

Unit 4 User Stories/Product Backlog

 

Appendix F

Web Service information—awaiting documentation from Unit4.

 

Appendix G

Combined Process Hierarchy