The faculty schedule system stores information about the schedule/timetable for each grade. It can produce reports to show grade timetables and teacher timetables. It can also locate teachers and students. It stores schedule information for the subject-section (ie. class/course) including the Day (in school cycle), Period, Term, and Grade. This system contains on course numbers, section designators, classing meeting days, times, rooms, and instructor(s) responsible for conducting classes. It also contains other information, which the academic departments to input and maintain information about their respective academic class schedules for the fall, Spring Semester, and Summer Sessions. Scheduling is the process of deciding how to commit resources between varieties of possible tasks.
Background of the study:
As early as July 22, 1991, the then Mayor Jose T. Capco, Jr. filed a letter of intent to the Department of Education Culture and Sports- National Capital Region for the establishment of a community college in Pateros. The recommendation is supported by resolutions of the Pateros Municipal Council, Secretaries and Treasurers. A nine-man Special Committee was then formed to help establish the college with the target to open classes in June 1992. The special committee agreed the college be named PATEROS TECHNOLOGICAL COLLEGE (PTC) since it would offer technical vocational courses. Therefore, the proponents intend to develop software entitled “Faculty Scheduling System” that will help to assign the faculty in their designated rooms and schedules. The software is advanced, efficient, reliable and dependable in organizing the schedule of the faculty.
The application software will be managed by the school administrator, the only one capable of editing and or altering the said program, while the faculty members can only view their designated rooms and schedules. The proposed software will solve the existing problem encountered in existing system. In PTC they have 2 kinds of schedule of faculty members:
1. Regular or Plantilla 2. Part time. For regular they have the schedule of instructor which is 21 units and they can teach the student from 7am to 4pm. For the department head they can hold 18 units only and they teach the student from 8am to 5pm. Part time also have two types: regular and irregular, the regular(part time)- can only teach above 18 units but in irregular(part time) they can only teach 18 units or below. The schedule of the faculty members is depending on the schedule of the student. Statement of the problem:
How to develop a faculty scheduling system that is more efficient and with greater accuracy than the manual operation? Specific problem:
How will be the process is more accurate and flexible in faculty loading system? How the current system will lessen the time consuming and wasted time on creating a manual scheduling?
Objective of the Study:
To develop the proposed software entitled, “Faculty Scheduling Module”. Specific objectives:
To create a system that will make the process of scheduling be more accurate and flexible The Faculty Loading System provides the ability to analyze the availability of the faculty teachers to reduce a redundancy of the data. Scope and Limitation of the Study:
Automatic checking of date/time conflicts
This will help the faculty members on tracking the schedule of the students for their availability. Individual coloring of subjects
This process includes the subject of the teachers on how they hold students for their subject mastery. Graphical view of schedules (automatic grid plotting)
Summary of teaching load
Printing of schedules
Only the faculty members should access the system.
Time line for the full time and part time schedule of the faculty members. Generates the schedule for the faculty members, also for the availability of the students. Records of who uses the system at a specific time.
Significance of the study:
The Faculty Scheduling System will serve as a useful tool for the school to minimize the time consumed in the process of loading schedules for the teacher and will prevent redundancy and deficiencies. In this study, an intelligent scheduling system has been developed based upon artificial intelligence techniques. This system provides two scheduling mechanisms: a predictive scheduling mechanism and a reactive scheduling mechanism. The proposed “Faculty Scheduling Module” will serve as a useful tool for the school administrator to minimize the time consumed in the process of loading schedules for the teacher and will prevent redundancy and deficiencies. The proposed study will be significance to the following:
To the School. The proposed system is essential and beneficial for productivity and it lessens the time element for managing and loading of teacher’s schedule. To the Dean and Program Head. This study will benefit the Dean and Program Head in organizing the faculty schedule. The Proposed system contains on course numbers, section designators, classing meeting days, times, rooms, and instructor(s) responsible for conducting classes. It also contains other information, which the academic departments to input and maintain information about their respective academic class schedules for the fall, Spring Semester, and Summer Sessions.
To the Proponents. It gives them a chance to apply the knowledge they acquire in their years of studying. It also gives them opportunity to enhance and practice their ability and creativity. Computer science is a course that is directly engaged in software or computer program designing & hardware engineering. To the Future Researchers. We would like to encourage the next researcher to be motivated to enhance our Proposed system to be more detailed regarding in creating and to maintain course offers by semester. Each offering includes the instructor(s), section information, course meeting day/time(s), enrollment preferences, and information about course meetings in addition to lectures (labs, film screenings, discussion sections, etc.). Course data will be integrated with a classroom scheduler (product to be determined) to assign classrooms for all course-related meetings (including final exams) based on collected/stored classroom requirements and location preferences.
Review of Related Literature and Studies:
In “A Mathematical Programming Model for Faculty Course Assignments” by McClure and Wells (1984) they develop a method for faculty assignment where each variable represents a full teacher schedule and the problem is formulated as a set partitioning problem with side constraints. In “Constructing a course schedule by solving a series of assignment type problems” by Hertz and Robert (1998) presents an approach that was similar to the one presented in this thesis in that it decomposes the problem into a series of smaller similar problems however, in this paper it was decomposed into many more pieces. The solution generated is satisfactory, but not optimal.
Badri et al. (1998) combines both assignment of courses to faculty and assignment of courses to the timetable into one model. Faculty preferences are incorporated in a 3 levels and goal programming is used to solve the problem. Each faculty member defines 3 timeslot preferences are for each course and 3 course preferences for each timeslot. This creates a limited solution space; however since course conflicts are not taken into consideration, this isn’t an issue.
Bohol Island State University, Main Campus C.P.G. Avenue, Tagbilaran CityBohol, Philippines: The study tested the functionality of Automated Class Scheduling System in terms of speed, data handling, accuracy, security, stability and adaptability in making class schedules. This study was conducted in Bohol Island State University Main Campus, Tagbilaran City during the second semester of school year 2010-2011. The respondents of this study were the 6 expert instructors in the field of computer programming. They tested and evaluated the functionality of the program in terms of its design, accuracy, data handling, security, stability and adaptability.
Another 8 instructors who are in charge of making class schedules determined the functionality of the system in terms of speed, accuracy, data handling, stability and adaptability of the software. Separate set of questionnaires were given to two groups of respondents. The study concluded that the manual and the automated class scheduling systems are both functional. However, the automated system is more functional because of its extra features which solve the primary problems in creating class schedules. Foreign:
In “University Course Scheduling System (UCSS) – A UML Application with Database and Visual Programming” by Fang (2005) a constraint based decision support system is designed and does not automatically solve for a solution. In “Using information on unconstrained student demand to improve university course scheduling” by Thompson (2005) the author builds on his previous paper Hinkin and Thompson (2002) and improves the planning process. He concludes that determining student demand should be collected thru surveys instead of assuming which sections students need. We conducted some student surveys to get input for tech elective interests, but this can be a future extension and implemented more thoroughly for required courses.
The first UP Diliman Faculty Manual was published in 1989. Since then many rules and regulations have been amended and new ones instituted. These changes made it imperative to update the Manual.
The information contained in this revised version are based on the university code resolutions of the UP Board of Regents, decisions of the university council and the Executive Committee of the University Council, Executive orders and memoranda at the System and Up Diliman levels, and relevant documents from various units of the University and some government agencies.
Figure 1.0 Research Paradigm
The Faculty Scheduling Module will help the teachers to easily determining what courses to offer, how many sections are needed, determining the best term to offer each section, assigning a faculty member to instruct each section, and scheduling each section to a timeslot to avoid conflicts. This process is typically broken down into three major phases: planning, faculty assignment, and course scheduling.
Relevance of the Study:
This study related to our system is planning schedules replace forecast schedules for requirements and, in some cases, relevance when you enter a planning schedule instruction in the scheduling agreement item. For this reason, we recommend that you remove the instruction if you do not regularly create or maintain planning schedules in the scheduling agreement. This ensures that schedule lines in the planning schedule do not affect the requirements and delivery relevance of the other types of schedules agreement.
Operational Definition of Terms:
1. Computers – An electronic device for storing and processing data, typically in binary form, according to instructions given to it in a variable program. 2. Efficiently – can describe any action that’s done without wasting time, effort, or materials and still manages to produce the desired outcome. 3. Documents – A piece of written, printed, or electronic matter that provides information or evidence or that serves as an official record. 4.
5. Faculty – Any of the divisions or comprehensive branches of learning at a college or university. The teachers and instructors within such a division. 6. Module – Standardized or self-contained segment that with other such segments constitutes an educational course or training program. 7. Planning – (also called forethought) is the process of thinking about and organizing the activities required to achieve a desired goal. 8. Scheduling
– Assigning an appropriate number of workers to the jobs during each day of work. 9. System – A set of connected things or parts forming a complex whole, in particular. 10. Respondents – is a person who is called upon to issue a response to a communication made by another.
Methods of Research:
The research is adapted to a descriptive method. A questionnaire consisting of two parts was used as the main tool for data gathering. Pre-testing of the questionnaire was done to elicit their comments and suggestions for the finalization of the instrument. Part 1 consisted of the respondent’s profile, while Part 2 consisted of data and survey of the present system that the school is using. A scale of 1-5 will be used to rate the present system corresponding to 5 levels; Outstanding, Very Satisfactory, Satisfactory, Fair, Not Satisfied.
Data Gathering Techniques:
In this study, we will be using survey questionnaires to gather data. The survey will compose of questions that best suites the respondents’ perception regarding of the enrolment system. These questions were modified from related researches and our individual questions. The survey will comprise of 10 questions. In the survey, we will be using the sloven’s formula to generate the sample size which corresponds to the size of the respondents who answered the survey questionnaire. And also, we will use the percentage formula to generate the entire percentage value of those who participated in the questionnaire. We will also use a closed-ended type of questionnaire to give the respondents an easy and simple way of answering the survey.
Statistical Treatment of Data
In getting the sample size, we will be using the Sloven’s formula which is, n = N / (1 + Ne^2), n stands for number of samples, N stands for the whole population of the students or children who will be answering the survey, while e, stands for the margin of error. The data collected were tabulated and analyzed. Analyses of data were guided by percentage. Sloven Formula – it’s a random sampling technique formula to estimate sampling size.
Sloven’s formula:Percentage formula
n = N / (1 + Ne^2)P = n/xx 100
n = number of samplesP = percentage
N = total population n = sample size
e = margin of errorx = total number of respondents
100 = constant number
(This is a survey question is based on the data we gather in our system implementation.)
Name: _________________________________ Year/Section: __________ Age: ____ Gender: ______
Please rate the survey from 1 – 5
4 Very satisfactory
1 Not Satisfied
________1. Fast checking of schedule process.
________2. Schedules were generated immediately.
________3. Less mistakes on records.
(Such as spelling of names, birthday entries, etc.)
________4. Records are kept accordingly.
________5. Fast and efficient production of information and printing of schedules.
COMMENTS AND SUGGESTIONS:
________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Among the 50 faculty members that we have interview about the efficiency of making software for the scheduling of their teaching loads they rank it 2 to 5, it means they answer satisfactory to excellent . The respondents are all participate then for the percentage is 100%. P=n/xx 100. 5=fair22=satisfactory15=very satisfactory8=excellent