student information systems transcripts - jm … transcripts bpr report.pdf · student information...
TRANSCRIPT
ÆVOARBOR
VELUT
University of TorontoStudent Information Systems
February 19, 1998
TRANSCRIPTSBUSINESS PROCESS RE-ENGINEERING
FINAL REPORT
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
ii Student Information Systems
© 1998 University of Toronto
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form without the express written permission of the University of Toronto
ÆVOARBOR
VELUT
University of TorontoStudent Information Systems
Student Information Systems iii
Report of the TranscriptsBusiness Processing Re-engineering Team
CONTENTS
Summary of Recommendations v
Main Recommendations.................................................... v
Other Recommendations ................................................. xi
Major Benefits of the Re-Design xii
Client Focus ..................................................................... xii
Institutional Integrity .................................................... xiii
Divisional Roles & Identity ............................................. xiii
Institutional Benefits ...................................................... xiii
1. Introduction 1
1.1 The Team..................................................................... 1
1.2 Focus, End Results & Constraints ................................ 2
A) End Results ............................................................ 2
B) Constraints ............................................................ 2
C) SRS Vision ............................................................. 3
D) Team Goals ............................................................ 3
E) Focus ...................................................................... 4
1.3 Overview of the Re-Design Process ..............................4
A) Mapping the Current Process ................................ 4
B) Brainstorming ........................................................ 5
C) External Research.................................................. 5
D) Re-Design .............................................................. 5
E) Walkthrough and Verification ..............................5
F) Development of Team Report and
Recommendations .............................................. 6
1.4 Definitions ................................................................... 6
1.5 Clients ......................................................................... 7
1.6 End-Users ..................................................................... 7
2. Current Process 8
2.1 Overview...................................................................... 8
2.2 The Current Process..................................................... 8
A) Step 1: Information............................................... 8
B) Step 2: Request ....................................................... 9
C) Step 3: Verification of Request and Student
Record Data ........................................................ 9
D) Step 4: Production................................................. 9
E) Step 5: Distribution/Issuance (Send/Pick Up)...... 10
F) Step 6: Information ............................................. 10
2.3 Transcript Data .......................................................... 12
A) Admission............................................................ 12
B) Transfer Credit and Credit Elsewhere ..................13
C) Individual Grade ................................................. 13
D) Individual Average .............................................. 13
E) Course Average .................................................... 14
F) Course Information ............................................. 14
G) End of Session Data ............................................. 14
H) Degree Information ............................................ 15
I) Miscellaneous ....................................................... 15
J) Production Information....................................... 15
2.4 Other Credentials and Documents ............................19
2.5 Fees ............................................................................ 19
2.6 Analysis of the Current Process ................................. 20
A) Problems.............................................................. 20
B) What is Right with the Current Process .............. 23
3. Research 24
3.1 Other Institutions...................................................... 24
3.2 Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) ............................25
3.3 Kiosks ......................................................................... 26
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
iv Student Information Systems
4. The New Design 27
4.1 The Foundation ......................................................... 27
A) The Report of the Commission on Grading........27
B) Assumptions......................................................... 28
C) Principles ............................................................. 29
D) Authenticity ........................................................ 30
E) Data & Document Integrity ................................. 33
4.2 The “Document” ....................................................... 33
4.3 Design Elements ........................................................ 34
A) The “Diploma Card” ............................................ 35
B) Public Domain Information ................................ 35
C) Request, Production & Issuance of Hard Copy
Documents ....................................................... 36
D) The “Electronic Transcript” for Internal End-
Users ................................................................. 43
4.4 Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) ............................45
4.5 Physical Design & Output .......................................... 46
A) Data ..................................................................... 46
B) Layout .................................................................. 52
C) The Guide ............................................................ 53
4.6 Fees ............................................................................ 54
4.7 Old Paper Records ...................................................... 56
4.8 Old Electronic Records ............................................... 57
5. Implementation 59
5.1 Institutional Culture ................................................. 59
5.2 Focus on Client Need................................................. 60
5.3 Impact on the Community....................................... 61
6. Other Issues 62
6.1 Other Recommendations .......................................... 62
7. Appendices 63
7.1 Walkthrough Interviews ........................................... 63
7.2 Special Guests............................................................. 64
7.3 Other End-Users Consulted ....................................... 64
7.4 Verification Letters .................................................... 65
7.5 Number of Degree Certifications by Year of
Graduation ............................................................... 67
7.6 Client Surveys ........................................................... 68
7.7 Document Mock-ups ................................................. 79
Figures
Figure 2-A – Transcripts and Documents Process ...............8
Figure 2-B – PRS Transcript .............................................. 21
Figure 2-C – Local Database Transcript ............................21
Figure 2-D – Card Record/Label Transcript.......................22
Figure 4-A – Seal ............................................................... 31
Figure 4-B – The Document Spectrum .............................34
Figure 4-C – Diploma Card Mock-up ...............................35
Figure 4-D – Online Degree Verification Mock-up...........36
Figure 4-E – Web Request Mock-up.................................. 37
Figure 4-F – Electronic Transcript Mock-up...................... 44
Figure 4-G – Paper ............................................................ 53
Figure 7-A – Degree Certifications (1997) ........................67
Figure 7-B – Consolidated Transcript (2 divisions) ...........79
Figure 7-C – Transcript Including Detail from 1
Division.................................................................... 84
Figure 7-D – Confirmation of Registration...................... 88
Figure 7-E – Confirmation of Admission .........................89
Tables
Table 2-A – Current Process ............................................. 10
Table 2-B – Transcript Data .............................................. 17
Table 4-A – Data on the New Consolidated Transcript .... 47
Survey Results
Survey 1 – Recent Participants in the Process ................. 68
Survey 2 – Current Participants in the Process ................ 73
Survey 3 – General Distribution....................................... 77
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems v
Summary of Recommendations
MAIN RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations relate directly to the End Results (see page 2)
assigned to the team by the Executive Steering Committee for the Student
Record System Replacement project.
Authenticity (see page 30)
1. The team recommends that authenticated documents display a “printed
seal” as opposed to an “embossed seal” (which is currently used by various
divisions within the University of Toronto).
Page 31
2. The team recommends that the official University seal be printed only on
documents produced and issued through the institutional production
facilities (see Institutional Production Facilities on page 41).
Page 31
3. The team recommends that documents produced in an institutional
production facility (see Institutional Production Facilities on page 41)
include a printed signature of one senior University officer.
Page 32
4. The team recommends that the paper adopted for production be tamper-
proof (i.e. in a way that assures end-users that the document has not been
altered). As well, the paper should be unique to the University and of high
quality so as to allow for quick recognition and identification by end-users.
The paper should also help enhance the image of the University.
Page 32
5. While the team does not have a specific recommendation with respect to
the practice of producing “security” paper which reveals “copy” when
photocopied, the team does recommend that at no time should the word
“void” be revealed on a photocopy of a transcript. If “copy” is included, it
should appear only once when photocopied.
Page 32
Data & Document Integrity (see page 33)
6. The team recommends that the SRS include a provision for divisions to
“flag” student record data for “non-release.” This might be a manual
operation in less frequent cases or an automatic operation in situations
which are much more common.
Page 33
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
vi Student Information Systems
Design Elements (see page 34)
The “Diploma Card”
7. The team recommends that the University issue a wallet sized Diploma
Card bearing the usual signatures and University seal on the back. The card
should be a good quality durable document which includes features which
make it difficult to produce counterfeit copies.
Page 35
Public Domain Information
8. The team recommends that “public domain” information be made available
on the World Wide Web in a searchable database. If student name and other
relevant data (e.g. degree conferred or year of graduation) were entered in
an online form, registration and degree information should be made freely
available.
Page 36
In developing the online searchable database, the design should prevent the
possibility that the information could be exploited for inappropriate uses
(e.g. it should not be possible for a user to compile a complete list of
graduates for a particular discipline and/or year). The focus of an online
search should be on a person, not a program or year of study.
Page 36
Request, Production & Issuance of Hard Copy Documents
Requesting Documents
9. The team recommends taking an “anytime-anywhere” approach to allowing
clients to request documents. Students and alumni should be able to make
requests in person, by mail, over the phone, via fax, via email, and through
the World Wide Web.
Page 36
10. In accordance with the recommendations made by the Access to Student
Record Information BPR Team, clients should be able to request any type of
document via a Web interface.
For detailed recommendations regarding Web-enabled requests, see page 36.
Page 36
11. Online request systems must be available 24 hours a day. Page 40
12. A client should be able to make a request for a document at any office
which performs registrarial functions at the University. The team
recommends that a public access computer running a Web browser should
be available in as many of these locations as possible in order to permit
clients to load their own requests for documents.
Page 40
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems vii
13. Clients should be able to make a request for pick up or delivery to a
common recipient via the University’s Student Telephone Service.
Page 40
14. The team recommends that one office be established to handle written,
telephone and email requests for documents.
Page 40
15. The team recommends that a signature or Personal Identification Number
(PIN) be required from the client in order to authorize release of record data.
Page 41
16. When a request for a document is loaded on the system, it should be
immediately queued for production. Clients should be provided with an
estimate of the time when a document will be ready for distribution or pick
up.
Page 41
Producing Documents
17. The team recommends that one production facility be established on each
of the three main campuses where the fully “authenticated” document is
produced.
Page 41
18. The team recommends that clients and University staff be given the option
of producing these documents locally on their own printers without any of
the institutional authentication devices (i.e. special paper and seal).
Page 42
Issuing Documents
19. The team recommends that when a client requests documents for pick up,
he or she should have the choice of picking it up at any campus, in any
divisional office, or in the case of cash payment, at the Student Accounts
Receivable Office.
Page 43
20. When a client requires a fully authenticated document on a rush basis, he or
she could load the request at any location on campus (or at the campus
production facility) and then contact the production facility for pick up.
Staff in the production facility should have the option of changing the
queue order for production of particular documents for rush requests.
Page 43
21. For documents issued through the mail or by courier, the team recommends
that the campus production facility handle issuance and distribution of
these documents.
Page 43
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
viii Student Information Systems
The “Electronic Transcript” for Internal End-Users
22. The team recommends that a special SRS screen and/or Web-enabled
“electronic transcript” be designed for internal University of Toronto end-
users of documents.
Page 43
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)
23. The team recommends that the University continue to work with other
Ontario post-secondary institutions to agree upon and develop a single
standard for EDI in Ontario.
Page 45
24. The team recommends that the EDI system adopted, at the very least,
should provide an interface with which the University might exchange data
with universities and colleges using the SPEEDE system.
Page 45
Physical Design & Output (see page 46)
Data
25. The types of data the team recommends for inclusion in a comprehensive
consolidated transcript is summarized in Table 4-A – Data on the New
Consolidated Transcript on Page 47.
Page 47
Layout
26. Although the team feels that the final design of the transcript should be left
in the hands of professional designers, it recommends that certain
directions be observed with respect to the organization of the data blocks
and features of the transcript paper.
Page 52
The team recommends that an “Enrolment History”, which traces
chronologically the student’s entire participation at the University of
Toronto, be included on a transcript.
Page 51
The “Enrolment History” should be distinct from the main body of the
document data; ideally as brief notes down the left margin of the
document. The enrolment history is always present and complete (whether
or not a client has requested a transcript which omits detailed results from a
particular division).
Page 52
“Admission Notes”, “Transfer Credit and Credit Elsewhere”, “Course
Information”, “Grades”, “End of Session Data”, “Degree Requirements Met”,
“Honours, Scholarships and Awards” and “Special Notes” data blocks should
be organized by division.
Page 52
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems ix
The divisions should be arranged in the chronological order of first
registration.
Page 52
To promote divisional identity, the team recommends that divisional logos
and banners be used to highlight the beginning of each divisional section.
Page 52
The “Student Identification” data block should begin the main body of the
transcript. This should then be followed by the “Issued To” data block,
which should be printed on the page so as to allow for the use of a window
envelope.
Page 52
All degree conferral information (including date conferred and, if applicable,
the level of achievement, e.g. Distinction) should appear at the beginning
of the transcript data (above any and all divisional results detail).
Page 52
Additional degree information such as program, thesis title and supervisor,
should appear at the beginning of divisional data.
Page 53
Document Paper
27. To promote the uniqueness of the transcript to the University, the team
recommends: that the paper used be unique (in order to reduce the
possibility that counterfeit documents could be produced) and of very high
quality; that a blue tint field be part of the paper design (the blue tint
should be light enough so as not to overwhelm the text when printed and
when the transcript is photocopied); that the text of verification letters and
divisional transcript data be printed on the blue field; that an institutionally
significant and recognizable image (which is not division-specific) be
embedded in the blue field (e.g. Convocation Hall, Hart House, etc.); that
the University crest, name and address be pre-printed on the paper on a
white field across the top of the paper; and that the Enrolment History be
printed on a white field to the left of the blue field and below the University
crest.
Page 53
The Guide
28. The team recommends that full text, as opposed to codes and abbreviations,
be used on transcripts as much as possible.
Page 53
29. The team recommends that a context-sensitive guide be designed. The guide
should include information relevant only to the data printed on the
document.
Page 54
30. The team recommends that a more comprehensive guide should be made
available on-line.
Page 54
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
x Student Information Systems
31. The team recommends that a single phone number be established for end-
users in order to assist them with interpretation of document data.
Page 54
Old Records (see page 56)
Old Paper Records
32. There should be no general undertaking to transcribe information on paper
records, microfilm or microfiche, into an automated transcript system.
Page 56
33. The team recommends that divisions be given the option of: retaining
archival records and continuing to issue transcripts based on those records
(on the understanding that in some cases, the institutional production
facility may coordinate the request if multiple registrations are involved); or
transferring old archival records to the central production facility (with the
understanding that their special knowledge and expertise about the archival
records must also be transferred).
Page 57
34. The team recommends that records for programs no longer offered by the
University, along with all relevant program and grading practices
information, expertise and special knowledge should be transferred to the
relevant campus production facility and transcripts based upon those records
should be issued from that office.
Page 57
Old Electronic Records
35. The team recommends that the output of older electronic records be
accompanied by a context sensitive guide (see The Guide on page 52) for
the older data.
Page 58
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems xi
OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS
Although the following do not relate directly to the End Results (see page 2)
assigned, the team makes the following recommendations to the University.
Fees (see page 54)
1. The team recommends that the University continue charging for document
issuance and production on a per document basis.
Page 56
2. The team recommends that the fee charged should cover the costs of
document request, production and distribution only.
Page 56
3. The team also recommends that there not be an additional fee for rush
service.
Page 56
Other Issues (see page 62)
4. Given that University sanctioned academic honours, scholarships and
awards (i.e. merit based awards) are to be included on transcripts, the team
recommends that the University review the list of awards to ensure that
those that are merit based are clearly identified as such (i.e. the names of
some scholarships and academic honours may give the impression that they
are awards based solely on financial need).
Page 62
5. Documents, artwork, portfolio submissions, letters of recommendation and
other hard copy information provided to the University which ultimately
become part of a student’s academic record should be scanned and stored
within the SRS.
Page 62
6. The team recommends that when a student’s grade is amended as a result of
a review or resolution of a deferral, there should be no special mention of
these facts on a transcript.
Page 62
7. When a University of Toronto student’s academic record and/or degrees
from another institution are assessed by the Comparative Education Service,
this data should be included in the student’s University academic record.
Page 62
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
xii Student Information Systems
Major Benefits of the Re-Design
CLIENT FOCUS
1. The new process was designed from the point of view of students and
former students. Clients’ needs with respect to transcripts and other
documents were given the highest priority in the re-design.
2. The new design will be extremely convenient for clients. Requests can be
made from virtually any place around the world and many campus
locations. Clients picking up documents can choose the campus and/or
divisional office from which they obtain their transcripts or letters. The
team believes that many clients will continue to request and pick up
documents from their “home” registrarial office while others will choose
online request systems.
3. By acknowledging that the process is, in effect, driven by third parties who
require transcripts and other documents relating to student records (e.g.
other post-secondary institutions, employers, licensing boards, etc.) the new
design has the potential to enhance students’ abilities to achieve their
academic and career goals. The needs of these third parties were carefully
examined and are addressed in the new design.
4. The establishment of an online database of publicly available information
and the issuance of diploma cards will make it easier for students and former
students to verify their participation at the University and degree conferral.
This will also benefit the University by reducing the number of verification
letters produced and issued by the University.1
5. The physical design of documents will be attractive, unique and easy to
understand. In turn, this will benefit students applying to other post-
secondary institutions and those requiring documents for employment
applications.
6. The new process will be less confusing and more efficient than our current
practices. The new design will benefit clients by simplifying the interactions
with the University concerning transcripts and other documents that reflect
their academic records. In turn, because requesting transcripts occurs many
times in some students’ lives, the new design will also enhance the
University’s relationship with alumni/ae.
1
Instead of simply designing a process which streamlines document issuance, the new design results in a
reduction in number of documents produced.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems xiii
INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRITY
7. The new consolidated transcript will be a complete record of a student’s
participation at the University. Third parties receiving these documents will
be assured that the University of Toronto is supplying a complete record
about students.
DIVISIONAL ROLES & IDENTITY
8. Data security and integrity will be preserved. Each faculty, school or campus
will continue to have the responsibility of maintaining complete and
accurate student record data. Divisions will also have the opportunity to
block data output on transcripts and, therefore, continue to be responsible
for the release of record data on transcripts.
9. Divisions will continue to have a prominent and clearly visible identity on
transcripts. While the consolidated transcript will be a University of Toronto
document, divisional logos and banners will precede blocks of academic
results for each faculty, school, or campus.
10. Because many alumni/ae will naturally return to their “home” faculty,
school, college or campus in order to request documents, divisions will
continue to have the opportunity to interact with former students through
this process. In addition, the simplification of the process will also have a
positive effect on how alumni/ae feel about the institution and its divisions.
11. Verification of completeness and accuracy of transcript data is no longer
part of the document production and issuance process. Divisions and the
student record system will undertake this verification in a separate process.
INSTITUTIONAL BENEFITS
12. For most divisions, the new design will be a dramatic and significant change
and improvement compared to current practice. For divisions currently
using the Permanent Record System, the document request, production and
issuance process has essentially been streamlined.
13. An improved and unified document issuance process together with the
diploma card, the online public information database and an impressive
design for hard copy documents will undoubtedly improve the University’s
image with alumni/ae, other post-secondary institutions and with the
community at large.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
xiv Student Information Systems
14. Consolidation of transcript data from multiple divisions, issuance of
diploma cards, making publicly accessible information more available, and
encouraging the use of electronic transcripts and electronic data
interchange will, in combination, result in a dramatic reduction in the
number of documents produced by the University.
15. Having a single, University-wide, approach will be less confusing, more
efficient, and more cost effective.
16. The University of Toronto will be a leader in Canada in the issuance of
transcripts and other documents that reflect students’ academic records.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 1
1. Introduction
The membership of the team represented
a broad range of expertise and experience
1.1 The Team
he Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) Team consisted of 12
members drawn from various areas of the University of Toronto. The membership
of the team represented a broad range of expertise and experience in matters related
to transcripts (both as producers and end-users of transcripts) and other documents
prepared by the University. A list of team members follows:
Jim Delaney, Office of Student Affairs
Barbara Patterson, Faculty of Arts & Science
Peter Leeney, Office of Statistics, Records & Convocation
Barbara Ablett, Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering
Betty Lam-Clarke, Woodsworth College
Maymie Howe, School of Graduate Studies
Tony Ngimat, Admissions & Awards
Silvia Rosatone, Faculty of Medicine
Marcia Beach, Admissions & Awards
Margaret Acquaviva Bell, JM Associates
Agnita Pal, Undergraduate Student, Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering
Steve Kishewitsch, Student Information Systems (scribe)
In addition to the guidance and support provided by Margaret Acquaviva Bell (as a
member of the group), the team also received valuable assistance from John Marrazzo
and his associate Kevin Ciotta from JM Associates. Finally, members of the Student
Information Systems office, including Eva Swenson, David Perry, Kathy Tseu, Teresa
Chan, Mary Binette, Mike Ryall and Baljeet Bhachu were extremely supportive and
helpful throughout the work of the team.
It should be noted that, in addition to the large time commitment to the BPR project,
many members of the team were also doing some or all of their normal duties (during
evenings and weekends) throughout the duration of the project.
T
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 2 Student Information Systems
The team members would also like to acknowledge the support, understanding and
contributions of their respective supervisors and colleagues in their home offices.
Colleagues in each team member’s home office were also asked to take on additional
duties and responsibilities during the project. Without this support, the team would not
have been successful in its work.
1.2 Focus, End Results & Constraints
A) End Results
As approved by the Executive Steering Committee for the Student Record System
project, the following End Results guided the team in its work.
1. Provide a consolidated University transcript that contains the results, including
transfer credits granted, of all programs of study from within the University of
Toronto with which the student has been associated.
2. Transcripts, both official and unofficial, should clearly present a student’s
academic record and be easily understood by all internal and external users of the
transcript.
3. Allow for the provision of transcripts containing detailed information pertaining
to a student’s registration in a specific program of study, provided that such
transcripts also include a concise description or summary of all the programs of
study from within the University of Toronto with which the student has been
associated.
4. Valid requests for transcripts, and transcript data, should be easily obtained in a
secure and efficient manner, in a way that supports the recommendations of the
Access to Student Record Information Team, where appropriate, including an
interface that will support electronic data interchange.
5. Clarify the distinction between, and determine the need for official and unofficial
transcripts, certificates of attendance, letters of verification and diplomas.
6. Provide transcripts (and other documents which reflect students’ academic
records) in a manner which enhances the relationship between the students and
alumni/ae and the divisions and the University.
7. University transcripts should be made available in convenient locations, either
faculty, school, campus, or University office.
B) Constraints
In the determination of the re-design, the Executive Steering Committee also
established the following constraints.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 3
1. The currency and accuracy of student academic records, and the authority to
release them for inclusion in the University transcript will be the responsibility of
the respective faculty, school or campus.
2. The completeness and authenticity of the consolidated University transcript and
the determination of the organizational structures for issuing and distributing the
transcript shall be the responsibility of the University.
3. Integrity and security of data must be maintained.
4. Initial implementation should be focused on instances where electronic data is
available.
5. The new process should relate to the output of student record data only (i.e.
grading practices and degree assessment are not considered part of this business
process).
In effect, the team was also constrained by the recommendations of the three
previous business process re-engineering teams for the Student Record System project
(with particular attention to the recommendations made by Access to Student
Record Information BPR team).
C) SRS Vision
The team was also guided by the established Vision for the new Student Record
System project.
1. The New SRS will be a fully functional and integrated system that enhances the
ability of academic and administrative divisions to provide services of exceptional
value to students.
2. The system will encourage the adoption of streamlining and best practices in
administrative procedures. The system will be built on solid and flexible
technology that will support the highly changing, multidisciplinary nature of the
University environment.
D) Team Goals
Finally, the team set the following goal for its work.
The goal of the Transcripts BPR Team is to design a documents production and
issuance process that will:
1. enhance students’ ability to achieve their academic and career goals;
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 4 Student Information Systems
2. represent a bold and revolutionary improvement to how students’ academic
participation is captured and reflected;
and
3. support the University’s mission and enhance our institutional image and
reputation.
E) Focus
During its work, the team approached the re-design with a definite and determined
client focus. Institutional and administrative needs were considered and had an
important impact on the re-design. Ultimately, however, clients’ needs dominated the
rationale in support of the new design. In all cases, client need and convenience were
the most important assessment criteria for the development and verification of all
elements of the new design.
1.3 Overview of the Re-Design Process
The team began its work on October 14, 1997, and continued until the end of January
1998 in Room 23 at Convocation Hall. Except for one week in November, the December
break, and the final two weeks of the project, the team worked on the project from
Monday to Thursday each week.
The team followed a six step “Business Process Re-engineering” (BPR) methodology
adapted for our use by John Marrazzo and his associates Kevin Ciotta and Margaret
Acquaviva Bell.2
BPR is an approach that allows the team to identify existing processes,
analyze how they work, then re-design them from the ground up using best practices.
The team analyzed the current processes, determined the most appropriate and effective
methods of accomplishing the various tasks, and based the re-design on these methods.
A) Mapping the Current Process
The initial phase of the team’s work was an exercise in understanding the current
processes related to the production of transcripts and other documents that reflect
students’ academic records (e.g. letters of verification of attendance). A detailed
understanding of each process was obtained by defining the inputs and outputs
related to the process, mapping each step, and noting at each step whether forms or
approvals were required, which departments were involved, and recording when
information became available to a client. In addition, the team considered whether or
not the process functioned successfully in terms of service, client feedback, cost of
output, the time for each step to be completed (and backlogs), duplication, delivery of
output and other information made available to the team. The team also listed in
2
The same methodology was used in each of the previous SRS BPR projects.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 5
detail the various fields of student record data which are included on transcripts by
each division of the University. Section 2 (Current Process on page 8) of this report
details the current practices for the request, production and issuance of transcripts and
other documents at the University of Toronto.
B) Brainstorming
During brainstorming, a comprehensive list of all possible options for requesting,
producing and issuing transcripts and other documents was established that might
play a role in the re-design of the processes. At this stage, the aim was to develop a list
of options that the team would explore (exhaustive evaluation and developing a
detailed understanding of the feasibility of the various options was undertaken during
the “re-design” phase of the project). Technologies that the University and clients
could adopt in order to request information and technologies that could be utilized to
deliver information were discussed. Section 4 (see The New Design on page 27) of this
report provides detail on the options that eventually became part of the team’s re-
design. While not all of the options considered are discussed in Section 4, some
significant options, which were not favoured by the team, are analyzed in the text.
C) External Research
The team examined many technologies and processes (related to document request,
production and issuance) used at other institutions, agencies and companies. Section 3
(see Research on page 24) details the team’s findings. The team also examined
transcripts from several dozen North American universities.
D) Re-Design
Based upon the research findings and a set of principles and assumptions developed by
the team, four main components formed the basis of the new design. Several
objective and analytical tools were used to assist the team in determining the best
options for both the clients and the University. Section 4 (see The New Design on
page 27) of this report provides details of the team’s re-design.
E) Walkthrough and Verification
During this period, the team conducted approximately 30 interviews involving over
50 individuals (including administrative staff and faculty, transcript recipients at
other institutions and employers) to determine the accuracy of the initial mapping of
current processes and to test the effectiveness and acceptability of the new processes
as they were designed by the team. The list of walkthrough interviews is included in
Appendix 7.1 on page 63.
In addition to the input provided by the student member of the team, the team
surveyed approximately 250 students to determine the needs of clients with respect to
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 6 Student Information Systems
documents and to test effectiveness and acceptability of the re-designed processes (see
Appendix 7.6 on page 68).
The team also consulted a number of other organizations as end-users of transcripts
and/or other information about students. These organizations provided important
insight about the information and student record data about which they are
interested. See Appendix 7.3 on page 64 for a list of these organizations.
This stage confirmed for the team that they had a sound understanding of the
processes and that the re-design, as it was proposed at this point, was realistic, feasible
and necessary.
F) Development of Team Report and Recommendations
The development of this report and the team recommendations began early in the re-
design phase. As the team progressed through the walkthrough and verification
phase, the report and the recommendations were affirmed or revised to reflect the
additional information gathered.
1.4 Definitions
In this report, the following abbreviations and terms are used.
SRS The University’s Student Record System. When applicable,
current SRS refers to the existing IMS database, and
replacement SRS or new SRS refers to the new system
which is currently in development.
PRS The University’s “Permanent Record System.” An electronic
system first introduced in the late 1980s and used by
Applied Science & Engineering, Arts & Science, the School
of Graduate Studies, and the University of Toronto at
Scarborough to maintain student records and to request,
produce and issue transcripts.
Web World Wide Web.
IVR/STS An Integrated Voice Response system including the
University’s Student Telephone Service.
BPR Business Process Re-engineering (the methodology by
which the team conducted its work).
Transcript An electronic or paper document which summarizes a
student’s (total) academic participation (including grades)
at the University and other relevant data (e.g. transfer
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 7
credits, etc.). At present, each academic division of the
University of Toronto is responsible for the production and
issuance of transcripts for students with current or previous
registrations in that division. Currently, transcripts reflect
participation only in the division which produces the
document.
Verification Letter An electronic or paper document which provides
information about a student’s academic participation or
other student record data. Verification letters are normally
less detailed than transcripts and often include information
which is available to the public. The University also
completes many types of forms (prepared by outside
agencies) which, more or less, provide similar information.
Certificate of Degree A document produced by the University which confirms
conferral of a degree.
Authenticity The University’s guarantee that a document is a true
reflection of student record information and assurance that
the document and/or data has not been altered or tampered
with.
Statement of Results The document issued to students at the end of each
academic session reporting grades and other academic
results for that session (sometimes referred to as “grade
report”).
1.5 Clients
A “client” with respect to this business process refers to any person that requires
verification for a third party (an “end-user” – see below) of his or her participation at the
University of Toronto, academic results (including degree conferral), or other student
record data. Clients include currently registered students, former students and alumni/ae
(including graduates).
1.6 End-Users
An “end-user” refers to a person and/or organization which requires a “client” to provide
verification of his or her participation at the University, academic results, or other student
record data. At present, the University prepares transcripts and other documents, on
behalf of clients, for a diverse group of end-users including employers, academic
institutions, certification boards, government agencies, etc. The University of Toronto,
itself, is also an end-user of transcripts and documents prepared by the University (for a
variety of purposes including admissions, academic evaluation, program and degree
assessment and awarding scholarships).
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 8 Student Information Systems
2. Current Process
The team discovered that the process followed a
similar pattern across the University
2.1 Overview
he team investigated the transcript/letter processes
currently used by the academic divisions of the
University. Depending on the type of document
needed, some requests were very simple and could be
issued without a great deal of interpretation of the data on
the record, while, at present, other versions of the
document require the special knowledge available only in
divisions.
In order to ascertain how document production was
handled in other divisions, team members conducted
interviews on the telephone or in person with those
divisions issuing transcripts who were not represented by
the BPR team membership. A summary of the transcript
process across divisions was compiled and is presented in
the following table.
2.2 The Current Process
Although there was some degree of variation among the
divisions, the team discovered that the transcript/letter
process followed a similar pattern across the University.
A) Step 1: Information
This is the step where information about how to order
a transcript/letter is given to the client. Information is
currently available in calendars, in some cases, on the
Internet, and from the divisional and home offices.
Figure 2-A – Transcriptsand Documents Process
Step 1
PPPPrrrroooovvvviiiiddddeeee IIIInnnnffffoooorrrrmmmmaaaattttiiiioooonnnn
AAAAbbbboooouuuutttt tttthhhheeee PPPPrrrroooocccceeeessssssss
Step 2
EEEEnnnntttteeeerrrr RRRReeeeqqqquuuueeeesssstttt
Step 3
VVVVeeeerrrriiiiffffyyyy IIIInnnnffffoooorrrrmmmmaaaattttiiiioooonnnn aaaannnndddd////oooorrrr
DDDDaaaattttaaaa
Step 4
PPPPrrrroooodddduuuucccceeee DDDDooooccccuuuummmmeeeennnntttt
Step 5
IIIIssssssssuuuueeee DDDDooooccccuuuummmmeeeennnntttt
((((SSSSeeeennnndddd////PPPPiiiicccckkkk uuuupppp))))
Step 6
IIIInnnnffffoooorrrrmmmmaaaattttiiiioooonnnn
((((IIIInnnntttteeeerrrrpppprrrreeeettttaaaattttiiiioooonnnn))))
T
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 9
B) Step 2: Request
In order to receive a transcript/letter the client must make a request. Requests may be
made at divisional or home offices, depending on the nature of the document
specified. For most divisions, these requests are made by completing a form. For some
types of documents this involves the use of a multi-copy form, while for simple
letters, a single sheet is often used.
C) Step 3: Verification of Request and Student Record Data
Personnel in the divisional offices check the request for a number of different factors
including the following:
1. that the client has provided the correct personal information so that the correct
record will be retrieved;
2. that the information provided will ensure that the correct letter will be issued;
3. that the timing of the issuance of the letter/transcript will be correct (e.g. after
grades are available or after degree conferral);
4. that the request has the appropriate signature or authorization;
and,
5. that the request has been submitted to the appropriate office.
D) Step 4: Production
All academic divisions produce transcripts. Some divisions use a computer generated
record in the Permanent Record System (PRS)3
; by photocopying cards to which
sessional results labels have been affixed, or a combination of both, depending on
either the date of first registration or the most recent registrations. Some divisions
also have records on microfilm and microfiche, and produce transcripts for divisions
which no longer exist. It is at this stage that transcripts are “sealed” (if appropriate),
marked “Issued to Student”, etc. Finally, some divisions, including Medicine and Law,
maintain their own student record database from which transcripts are produced on-
site.
Another verification is made of the transcript as it relates to the request, i.e. has the
correct record been retrieved, does the typed address on the PRS transcript match the
address on the request, have the correct number of copies been produced, has the
transcript been produced at the correct time according to the request, is the
3
Applied Science & Engineering, Arts & Science, University of Toronto at Scarborough, and the School of
Graduate Studies
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 10 Student Information Systems
information on the record up-to-date and complete, have all pages of the record been
produced, are the pages complete (i.e. does “Continued on Following Page” or “End of
Transcript” appear at the end of the data on each page of a PRS transcript?).
E) Step 5: Distribution/Issuance (Send/Pick Up)
In addition to mailing documents, divisions enable clients to pick up their
documents. Depending on the type of document, this may mean they are marked
“Issued to Student”, “Copy”, etc.; or, if the document has an ultimate destination
other than the student, the document and the envelope may be treated in such a way
as to inhibit tampering with the contents of the envelope.
F) Step 6: Information
An explanation of the document is provided by the division. This may be explained in
the contents of a letter, or, in the case of a transcript, in a guide to the terms and
symbols used on the record. Occasionally, additional interpretation is provided over
the phone or in person (usually initiated by an end-user).
Table 2-A – Current Process
Step Components Examples of D ivisional Variation(s)
1 Information Information is distributed via phone *, printed
materials *, end-users, word of mouth,
information officers *, Web site *, email,
instructor s, etc. Some students do not know
how to find the info rmation.
Client indicates desired timing of release.
The process is driven by end- users’ needs.
Clients must meet those needs by finding the
correct and accurate information. Clients
sometimes assume that they require
transcripts when other documentation will
satisfy the need(s) of end-users.
(* University has a reasonable assurance of accuracy of this form
of information dissemination )
2 Request Requests are submitted on forms, letters, via
fax, email, and phone *
Authorization ( PIN, student number, and/or
signature ) and consent are required for
issuance.
Payment of transcript fee is usually by cash or
cheque. Some divisions will release transcripts
prior to payment.
Request stage can be very labour intensive
(open ing and processing written request ,
double check ing accuracy and legibility).
Many clients request v erification of issuance.
Time required for this stage is highly variable.
Some transcript requests arrive requiring
completion of other forms (at no additional
charge).
(* in cases of urgent need — requires immediate follow-up with
signature).
General : In some divisions, f orms are available after hours. Letters
requesting transcripts may be transcribed to forms.
A rts & Science : Conditions of release are printed on back of request
form. Forms have pre-printed order numbers. No concern over missing
order numbers.
Applied Science & Engineering : Requests are numbered manually.
Sorted to pre and post PRS.
Nursing : Prepares a list of all students expected to graduate in October.
In March, the Faculty sends back list for revisions. In June , the final list of
graduates is prepared.
OISE/UT (undergraduate) : Student identifies the sessions in which he or
she has been enrolled .
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 11
Step Components Examples of D ivisional Variation(s)
3 Verification Determine type of record (IMS/PRS ,
computer microfilm, microfiche, card
records ).
Determine if data located on more than one
type of medium.
Verify that record is complete.
Determine whether client has made request
at the right location.
Determine timing of release — immediate, end
of session , upon degree conferral, etc.
For old (non-electronic) records, determine if
name and other data is current.
Check for financial holds, etc. (PRS or manual)
General : There may be different personnel assigned to handling Pre- and
post- computerized records
Most divisions exercise some discretion as to what holds are waived
(residence and tuition fees owing). Some divisions will issue transcripts if
total owed to the University is under $100.
Applied Science & Engineering : Immediate verification for financial holds
— (except library fines) . Any account over $2 is flagged.
Medicine : not on IMS. Card records (pre 1978) or computerized system
School of Graduate Studies : Check on holds and incompleteness before
loading requests . Data is uploaded from IMS to PRS 3 times a year. Mid-
June, mid-Feb ruary, and mid-October. Manual additions at other times
(labour intensive). Fall statements issued in mid-Feb ruary, full year
statement issued in mid-June. Grades that come in late go on next
regular statement. Summer grades and amended grades are issued on
the October statement.
Arts & Science : relies on error reports (for PRS processing/printing) for
financial holds, academic holds, no record match, incomplete records.
(It is less labour intensive to wait for error reports than to check records
while requests are loaded). Arts & Science will issue up to two transcripts
without immediate payment. However, failure to pay results in no
issuance of transcripts in future without prepayment.
Phys ical & Health Ed ucation (and several other divisions) : must manually
recalculate averages in the case of amend ed grades — no automatic
procedure, no procedure to produce a new label for record cards.
4a Select Data Data printed on transcripts may include a
variety of information. There is great variation
in practice across the University. (See Section
2.3)
Arts & Science : If a grade is amended the student must inform the
Faculty and request re-issuance of transcripts .
Applied Science & Engineering : Amended grades are marked with an
asterisk. New transcript generated when a mark is re- assessed.
Music : Transcript includes specialties ( instrument, etc.)
Nursing : Notification of graduation typed on after degree is conferred.
Some certification boards require very detailed information about
participation in hospital rotations (number of beds, hours, etc.) .
Scarborough : When a student is writing a deferred exam, a temporary
grade is recorded. After the exam, the grade is amended manually and a
note is added indicating that the student has written a deferred exam.
Exchange programs are recorded manually.
Physical & Health Education : no updated labels — use whiteout and do
manual recalculation.
4b P roduction Retrieve record or load request . Transcripts are
usually produced by the PRS (overnight, in
batch), photocopied from old record s, or
produced by a local database.
Some end-users require different forms of
authenticity (seals, signature, special
envelopes, special treatment of envelopes
etc.).
Once the transcript is printed, each output is
matched to the transcript.
Divisions using the PRS are able to load
common recipient addresses by code.
Some divisions produce transcripts on-site.
Divisions using the PRS use the existing
central production facility (except
Scarborough).
Arts & Science : Uses PRS, cards, etc. Will print rush requests on-site.
Offers regular same day services (in by 11:00 a.m. / out by 2:00 p.m.)
during non-peak periods.
Woodsworth : Photocopy cards (s tick on labels for each session) . Type
recipient ’s address on envelope .
Applied Science & Engineering : Order number entered manually.
Medicine : Separate MD and post graduate medicine transcript s.
Transcripts are printed from a local database.
Law : Transcripts are printed from a local database.
Scarborough : Prints PRS transcripts locally .
School of Graduate Studies : Does not show that degree requirements
have been met. Another office produces that statement, if desired. SGS
issues graduate transcripts for OISE /UT.
Theology : Each college handles its own transcript production and
issuance . Transcripts are signed by college officers. ‘Degree conferred ’ is
added manually.
Nursing : Final labels are placed on top of interim labels.
OISE/UT (undergraduate) : Separate transcripts are issued for additional
qualifications.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 12 Student Information Systems
Step Components Examples of D ivisional Variation(s)
4c Authentication One or more of the following authentication
devices may be used: embossed seal,
signature (manual or printed), special paper.
Some documents may be marked “original”,
“issued to student ”, etc.
Envelopes may be stamped, sealed, or signed
depending upon client/end-user need.
A signature/sealing machine may be used for
transcript and/or envelope.
Applied Science & Engineering : Do not currently initial documents after
putting on seal.
Medicine : no ‘issued to student ’ stamp.
Phys ical & Health Ed ucation : transcript to students has ‘copy ’ printed on
it, no seal. Official transcript has ‘original ’ printed on it, envelope has
sticky seal on flap. No embossing or signature on transcript or envelope.
5 Send / P ick Up Transcripts are mailed, picked up, or sent by
courier *.
Some divisions use TNT Mailfast if destination
is out of country. TNT is less expensive and
faster than Canada Post.
Some end-users want to receive a fax followed
by mail delivery. Some are happy with only a
fax. Hard copies are sometimes sent even if
not required .
Divisions usually know the requirements of
their common end-users.
(* Generally, if the client wants the transcript to be sent via
courier, he or she must make the arrangements.)
PRS Users : Pick up transcripts from PRS production facility and seal
documents at the division. Scarborough prints their own PRS
transcripts.
School of Graduate Studies : Clients picking up transcripts sign a book
and show authorization.
Arts & Science : Sends bulk packages of transcripts to common
recipients .
Nursing : Attaches a confirmation note with transcripts which details
who ordered them, when and to whom they were issued.
6 End-user
Interpretation
End-users sometimes want explanations —
missing data, interpretation of data,
explanations of some notations, value of
degree (3 year vs. 4 year, etc.), status of
student, and comparisons to other
institutions.
An explanatory “ guide” is usually printed on
the back of transcript or attached .
End-user c omprehension depends on division (special understanding of
types of data), thoroughness of the “guide” , etc.
2.3 Transcript Data
Transcript samples were obtained from each division and team members conducted
interviews with divisional registrars. A careful scrutiny was made of these transcripts in
order to summarize specific information recorded on each divisional transcript. Although
many fields were common to a number of divisional transcripts, there were some
significant differences. A table was developed in order to compare the similarities and
differences (see page Table 2-B on page 17).
An explanation of the fields on the table follows.
A) Admission
AAAAddddmmmmiiiitttttttteeeedddd FFFFrrrroooommmm indicates the basis of admission to the division (e.g.
admitted from OAC) and/or previous education
AAAAddddmmmmiiiitttttttteeeedddd TTTToooo indicates the program of study to which the student has
been admitted (e.g. admitted to a Doctor of Philosophy
Program in the Department of Geography)
AAAAddddmmmmiiiitttt DDDDaaaatttteeee is the session or specific start date of the session (i.e.
month and year) to which the student was admitted
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 13
B) Transfer Credit and Credit Elsewhere
AAAA
dddd
mmmm
iiiissssssssiiiioooo
nnnn
NNNN
oooo
ttttaaaattttiiiioooo
nnnn
includes the specific transfer credit awarded and the
institution from which that credit was awarded
CCCC
oooo
nnnn
ccccuuuu
rrrrrrrreeeennnn
tttt SSSSttttuuuu
dddd
iiiieeeessss includes transfer credit for work completed elsewhere/at
another institution while the student was registered in the
division (e.g. Study Elsewhere Program, letters of
permission, Professional Experience Year)
VVVV
iiiissssiiiittttiiiinnnn
gggg
////SSSSpppp
eeeecccciiiiaaaallll SSSSttttuuuu
dddd
eeeennnn
ttttssss who first register as non-degree students but become
degree students and may receive transfer credit for some
or all of their earlier work in the division
C) Individual Grade
AAAA
llllpppp
hhhh
aaaa GGGG
rrrraaaadddd
eeee
refers to final alphabetical grade earned by the student in a
specific course (e.g. B+)
%%%% ((((1111----111100000000)))) refers to the final mark earned by the student in a specific
course expressed as a percentage
PPPPaaaassssssss////FFFFaaaaiiiillll or CCCCrrrreeeeddddiiiitttt////NNNNoooonnnn----CCCCrrrreeeeddddiiiitttt refers to courses offered by the division for which students
do not receive a specific mark or grade, but merely
pass/fail or credit/non-credit
NNNNoooonnnn----GGGGrrrraaaaddddeeee refers to the use by the division of non-numeric and non-
alphabetical course results (e.g. incomplete — INC,
standing deferred — SDF, withdrawn — WDR)
MMMMiiiisssscccceeeellllllllaaaannnneeeeoooouuuussss notes are used to indicate special situations, particularly
supplemental examinations
D) Individual Average
SSSSGGGGPPPPAAAA is the sessional grade point average for the student, based
on a 4.3 scale
CCCCGGGGPPPPAAAA is the cumulative grade point average for the student,
based on a 4.3 scale
SSSS----%%%% ((((1111----111100000000)))) is the sessional average of the student, expressed as a
percentage
CCCC----%%%% ((((1111----111100000000)))) is the cumulative average of the student, expressed as a
percentage
SSSS----AAAAllllpppphhhhaaaa AAAAvvvveeeerrrraaaaggggeeee is the sessional average of the student, expressed as an
alphabetical result
CCCC----AAAAllllpppphhhhaaaa AAAAvvvveeeerrrraaaaggggeeee is the cumulative average of the student, expressed as an
alphabetical result
AAAAllllpppphhhhaaaa CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee GGGGrrrroooouuuupppp AAAAvvvveeeerrrraaaaggggeeee refers to the grouping of courses into specific areas (e.g.
activity average, academic average) and determining an
alphabetical average grade for these courses
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 14 Student Information Systems
%%%%
((((1111
----1111
0000
0000
)))) CCCC
oooo
uuuu
rrrrsssseeee GGGG
rrrroooo
uuuu
pppp
AAAA
vvvveeeerrrraaaagggg
eeee refers to the grouping of courses into specific areas (as
above) and determining a percentage average for these
courses
E) Course Average
AAAA
llllpppp
hhhh
aaaa GGGG
rrrraaaadddd
eeee
refers to the average grade for the course (not class or
section) given as an alphabetical grade (e.g. B-)
%%%%
((((1111
----1111
0000
0000
))))
refers to the average for the course (not class or section)
expressed as a percentage
F) Course Information
CCCC
oooo
dddd
eeee ((((WWWW
eeeeiiiigggg
hhhh
tttt,,,, TTTTeeeerrrrmmmm
)))) refers to the departmental designator, number, and suffix
indicating weight/term of the course (e.g. ANT100Y)
TTTTiiiittttlllleeee refers to the descriptive course title, often limited to
twenty characters
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee SSSSiiiizzzzeeee refers to the total number of students enrolled in the
course (i.e. not the specific section in which the student is
enrolled)
LLLLeeeeccccttttuuuurrrreeee HHHHoooouuuurrrrssss refers to the number of hours of lectures in the course
LLLLaaaabbbb HHHHoooouuuurrrrssss refers to the number of laboratory hours in the course
WWWWeeeeiiiigggghhhhtttt refers to a field (separate from the course suffix) indicating
the weight/number of units of the course
IIIInnnnssssttttrrrruuuuccccttttoooorrrr ’ssss NNNNaaaammmmeeee indicates if the instructor of the course is identified on the
transcript
CCCCaaaammmmppppuuuussss indicates that the campus on which the course was taken
has been noted
FFFFuuuunnnnccccttttiiiioooonnnn CCCCooooddddeeee refers to an additional notation which may appear beside a
course which explains its relationship to the student’s
program (e.g. extra — XTR or X)
OOOOtttthhhheeeerrrr DDDDeeeeggggrrrreeeeeeee RRRReeeeqqqquuuuiiiirrrreeeemmmmeeeennnnttttssss refers to notes which may be included on a record to
indicate the completion of other non-course aspects of the
requirements (e.g. language requirement)
G) End of Session Data
RRRRaaaannnnkkkk refers to the academic rank of the individual student in
relation to other students in the program
SSSSttttaaaannnnddddiiiinnnngggg////SSSSttttaaaattttuuuussss refers to the student’ s status based on academic
performance at the end of a session (e.g. On Probation)
SSSSeeeessssssssiiiioooonnnnaaaallll CCCCrrrreeeeddddiiiittttssss indicates the number of credits taken/passed in the session
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 15
FFFFuuuu
llllllll----ttttiiiimmmm
eeee////PPPPaaaarrrrtttt----ttttiiiimmmm
eeee refers to the specific mention of the full-time or part-time
status of the student
H) Degree Information
RRRReeeeqqqq
uuuu
iiiirrrreeeemmmm
eeeennnn
ttttssss MMMM
eeeetttt is a specific line on a transcript at the end of the sessional
results indicating that the degree requirements have been
met
DDDD
eeeegggg
rrrreeeeeeee CCCC
oooo
nnnn
ffffeeeerrrrrrrreeeedddd
is the line on the transcript which indicates the name of
the degree conferred
DDDD
aaaatttteeee CCCC
oooo
nnnn
ffffeeeerrrrrrrreeeedddd
refers to the line on the transcript which indicates the date
of degree conferral
DDDD
iiiissssttttiiiinnnn
ccccttttiiiioooo
nnnn
,,,, eeeettttcccc.... refers to specific academic recognition granted at the time
of graduation
TTTThhhheeeessssiiiissss TTTTiiiittttlllleeee is the title of the thesis completed by the student
TTTThhhheeeessssiiiissss SSSSuuuuppppeeeerrrrvvvviiiissssoooorrrr is the name of the faculty member who supervised the
student while preparing his or her thesis
I) Miscellaneous
SSSScccchhhhoooollllaaaarrrrsssshhhhiiiippppssss,,,, AAAAwwwwaaaarrrrddddssss,,,, DDDDeeeeaaaannnn’ssss LLLLiiiisssstttt,,,, eeeettttcccc.... refers to the notation of scholarships and academic awards
on the transcript
SSSSppppeeeecccciiiiaaaallll NNNNoooottttaaaattttiiiioooonnnnssss refers to the listing of participation in special programs,
joint programs, exchanges, work terms etc.
WWWWiiiitttthhhhddddrrrraaaawwwwaaaallll////TTTTeeeerrrrmmmmiiiinnnnaaaattttiiiioooonnnn refers to the notation of the date of withdrawal from a
session/program by a student
SSSSttttuuuuddddeeeennnntttt IIIIddddeeeennnnttttiiiiffffiiiiccccaaaattttiiiioooonnnn name and student number
OOOOtttthhhheeeerrrr PPPPeeeerrrrssssoooonnnnaaaallll DDDDaaaattttaaaa (current practice only) refers to the inclusion of other
personal data on the transcript, e.g. social insurance
number
J) Production Information
DDDDaaaatttteeee IIIIssssssssuuuueeeedddd is the date of the production of the transcript
OOOOrrrrddddeeeerrrr NNNNuuuummmmbbbbeeeerrrr is the number given to the transcript order for PRS
transcripts
SSSSiiiiggggnnnnaaaattttuuuurrrreeee refers to a full signature of a divisional officer on the
transcript
SSSSeeeeaaaallll is the embossed or printed seal of the division
SSSSppppeeeecccciiiiaaaallll PPPPaaaappppeeeerrrr////LLLLeeeetttttttteeeerrrrhhhheeeeaaaadddd indicates whether special paper is used by the division in
the production of a transcript
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 16 Student Information Systems
NNNN
uuuu
mmmm
bbbb
eeeerrrr oooo
ffff PPPPaaaagggg
eeeessss refers to the notation on the transcript of the total number
of pages in the transcript
DDDD
iiiissssttttrrrriiiibbbb
uuuu
ttttiiiioooo
nnnn
MMMM
eeeetttthhhh
oooo
dddd
refers to the “mail” and “pick up” codes (P, M) used on
PRS transcripts
EEEEnnnn
dddd
oooo
ffff TTTTrrrraaaannnn
ssssccccrrrriiiipppp
tttt
line refers to a line at the bottom on the transcript data
indicating that the record ends at that point
CCCC
oooo
nnnn
ttttiiiinnnn
uuuu
eeeedddd
oooo
nnnn
FFFFoooo
lllllllloooo
wwww
iiiinnnn
gggg
PPPPaaaagggg
eeee line refers to a line at the bottom of the transcript data on
any page of a PRS transcript that is not the final page of
the transcript.
IIIIssssssssuuuu
eeeedddd
TTTToooo
is the field for the recipient of the transcript
OOOO
ffffffffiiiicccciiiiaaaallll////OOOO
rrrriiiigggg
iiiinnnn
aaaallll refers to the practice of marking the transcript with a
stamp
DDDDeeeeffffiiiinnnniiiittttiiiioooonnnn ooooffff OOOOffffffffiiiicccciiiiaaaallll refers to a note on the transcript itself as to what is an
official transcript
GGGGuuuuiiiiddddeeee refers to an explanation as to how to interpret the
transcript (i.e. a legend)
“IIIIssssssssuuuueeeedddd ttttoooo SSSSttttuuuuddddeeeennnntttt” ((((oooonnnn ttttrrrraaaannnnssssccccrrrriiiipppptttt)))) refers to when transcripts are so stamped when they are
sent or given to the students and are not in special security
envelopes
SSSSppppeeeecccciiiiaaaallll TTTTrrrreeeeaaaattttmmmmeeeennnntttt ooooffff EEEEnnnnvvvveeeellllooooppppeeee refers to special steps taken with the envelope to prevent
the contents from being altered
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 17
Table 2-B – Transcript Data
A
R
T
S
&
S
C
I
E
N
C
E
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
U
A
T
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
M
E
D
I
C
I
N
E
N
U
R
S
I
N
G
W
O
O
D
S
W
O
R
T
H
P
I
P
4
L
A
W
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
D
E
N
T
I
S
T
R
Y
O
I
S
E
/
U
T
5
M
U
S
I
C
O
C
C
U
P
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
P
H
A
R
M
A
C
Y
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
&
H
E
A
L
T
H
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
S
C
A
R
B
O
R
O
U
G
H
T
H
E
O
L
O
G
Y
ADMISSION
Admitted From ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Admitted To ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Admit Date ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
TRANSFER CREDIT & CREDIT ELSEWHERE
Admission Notation ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
C oncurrent S tudies ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Visiting /Special S tudents ✓ ✓ ✓
COURSE AVERAGE
Alpha Grade ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
% (1-100) ✓
INDIVIDUAL GRADE
Alpha Grade ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
% (1-100) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Pass/Fail or Credit/Non-Credit ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Non-G rade ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Miscellaneous ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
INDIVIDUAL AVERAGE
SGPA ✓ ✓ ✓
CGPA ✓ ✓ ✓
S-% (1-100) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
C-% (1-100) ✓ ✓
S-Alpha Average ✓
C-Alpha Average ✓
Alpha Course Group Average ✓ ✓ ✓
% (1-100) Course Group Average ✓ ✓ ✓
COURSE INFO
Code (Weight, Term) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Title ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Course Size ✓ ✓
Lecture H ours ✓
Lab Hours ✓
Weight ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Instructor’ s Name ✓
C ampus ✓ ✓
Function Code ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Other Degree Requirements ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
4
Professional and International Programs
5
Undergraduate Education
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 18 Student Information Systems
A
R
T
S
&
S
C
I
E
N
C
E
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
U
A
T
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
M
E
D
I
C
I
N
E
N
U
R
S
I
N
G
W
O
O
D
S
W
O
R
T
H
P
I
P
6
L
A
W
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
D
E
N
T
I
S
T
R
Y
O
I
S
E
/
U
T
7
M
U
S
I
C
O
C
C
U
P
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
P
H
A
R
M
A
C
Y
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
&
H
E
A
L
T
H
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
S
C
A
R
B
O
R
O
U
G
H
T
H
E
O
L
O
G
Y
END OF SESSION DATA
Rank ✓ ✓✘
Standing / Status ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✙
✓
Sessional Credits ✓ ✓ ✓
Full-time/Part-time ✓
DEGREE INFO
Requirements Met ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Degree Conferred ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Date Conferred ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Detail (Specialist, Major/Minor, Program Name, etc.) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Distinction, etc. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Thesis Title ✓ ✓
Thesis Supervisor ✓ ✓
MISCELLANEOUS
Scholarships, Awards, Dean ’s List etc. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Special Notations ✓ ? ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Withdrawal/Termination ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✑✐
Student Identification ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Other Personal Data ✓ ✓ ✓
PRODUCTION INFORMATION
Date Issued ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Order Number ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Signature ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Seal ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Special Paper/Letterhead ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Number of Pages ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Distribution Method ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
End of Transcript ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Continued on Following Page ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Issued To ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Official/Original ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Definition of Official ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Guide ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Issued to Student/Copy (on transcript) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Special Treatment of Envelope ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
6
Professional and International Programs
7
Undergraduate Education
8
Upon Graduation
9
Only if Not Passed
10
Termination Only
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 19
2.4 Other Credentials and Documents
In addition to transcripts, the University provides a variety of documents for clients and
third parties.
Divisional offices and the Office of Statistics, Records and Convocation often receive
inquiries concerning clients and information about degree conferral. Other questions are
often put forward but may not be answered as the University’s policy on access to student
records is very specific about information available to third parties.
Clients themselves request a wide variety of letters. These include, but are not limited to
confirmation of dates of attendance, confirmation of current courses, confirmation of
degree conferral, confirmation of current registration, confirmation of full-time/part-time
status, statement of fees paid, confirmation of admission/acceptance into the program,
confirmation of withdrawal from a session, confirmation that the degree requirements
have been met, confirmation that a degree has been requested at the end of the current
session, confirmation that upon successful completion of current courses the degree
requirements will be met, etc. A list of the standard letters requested by clients from a
large undergraduate division appears in the Appendices (see Verification Letters on page
65).
Although many individual letters are written for clients, fewer than ten seem to be
requested frequently. Often these letters concern “public” information (i.e. dates of
attendance, name and date of degree conferred). The other letters in high demand
pertain to confirmation of full-time/part-time status, confirmation of current course
enrolments, confirmation that degree requirements have been completed/will have been
completed at the end of the session, and confirmation that a degree has been requested.
Frequently clients submit forms which must accompany the transcripts and are to be
completed by the division. These forms often require a summary of information already
provided on the transcript (e.g. degree, date of degree conferral, grade point averages,
etc.). In other cases, interpretation of the information on the record is required.
2.5 Fees
The team discovered that there are a number of different fee structures for transcripts and
verification letters at the University. While many divisions charge the standard $6.00 per
document (as set out in the University’s schedule of non-compulsory incidental fees),
some do not charge any fee (which is more common with the preparation of verification
letters than with the issuance of transcripts), others charge different fees and/or provide
discounts for additional copies.
The team also discovered that more or less similar documents could be obtained by clients
for free from some departments while other offices charge a fee (e.g. a Certificate of Degree
is provided free of cost by the Office of Statistics, Records & Convocation while a
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 20 Student Information Systems
“verification letter” including the same basic information prepared for the same student
by some divisions would not be free).
2.6 Analysis of the Current Process
A) Problems
About two hundred and fifty clients were surveyed (see Appendix 7.6 on page 68) in
connection with transcript/letter requests. (Unfortunately this survey was conducted
during the recent strike by Canada Post and, apart from just under a dozen individuals
who responded via electronic means, only those clients able to come in person could
be questioned.)
Although there was general satisfaction with the time required to process a transcript
request, some students believed that the time should be shorter than the usual two to
three days, and in some cases, that their transcripts should be produced on the spot,
while they waited. Other clients were concerned about the hours of operation and
wished that there were other means of requesting transcripts. Our surveys indicated
that students were interested in being able to request transcripts by fax, email,
telephone and over the Web, as well as in person.
In general, clients frequently raised concerns about two specific issues: the time it
takes for transcript production and the ordering process. Approximately a third of
respondents also made comments about the transcript fees.
Clients also wished for some changes as far as the method of payment for
transcripts/letters was concerned. While some divisions required that the fee for these
requests be paid in full in the form of cash, cheque or money order before issuance,
other divisions were more flexible. None, however, was able to offer all the methods
of payment suggested by our clients which included by credit card, over the Internet,
and by debit card, among others.
Many clients expressed a desire to receive confirmation of the sending of the
transcript. Clients frequently inquire as to whether or not a transcript request (which
has not been submitted in person) has been received, what date the transcript was
sent to various recipients, and/or if a transcript is ready to be picked up.
Some clients who have been registered in multiple divisions were confused about the
information on the transcript and assume that it included their entire record at the
University. Even where students move from one arts and science division to another
(e.g. from the University of Toronto at Scarborough, to the Faculty of Arts & Science),
two transcripts are required.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 21
Figure 2-B – PRS Transcript
Figure 2-C – Local Database Transcript
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 22 Student Information Systems
As far as transcript production itself is concerned, the current system has many
difficulties, since most divisions do not have a fully computerized record system.
Divisions with records which are kept on cards to which adhesive labels with sessional
results are attached have many problems when it comes to producing a transcript.
Retrieving the record, photocopying it, stamping, sealing and then returning it to
files is a very labour-intensive process. The record itself deteriorates over time as the
glue discolours (making the reading of the copy more difficult) and dries out. If
changes have been made to the record (e.g. a mark is amended) frequently there are
several labels for the same session, or there will be “white-outs”/erasures on the record.
Information which is added to the record is not in the same type face as the original
labels and leads to an unattractive presentation of the record. Divisions using the
Permanent Record System for the production of their transcripts no longer face these
problems as a result of moving to an automated process.
Although the PRS has non-release indicators to prevent the release of transcripts for
students with financial obligations or incomplete records, these indicators are not
always used. Clients’ names are still being checked against a list of those individuals
with “holds” on their record.
Figure 2-D – Card Record/Label Transcript
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 23
B) What is Right with the Current Process
In order to ensure that the team retained desirable aspects of the current process in
the new design, a detailed understanding of the effective and useful features of the
process was undertaken.
Many clients indicated general satisfaction with the procedures in place to order
letters and transcripts. Most appreciated the ability of the division to show some
flexibility concerning the manner in which requests were received and payment
made. Although there was some concern about the processing time, clients generally
believed the time to be reasonable, particularly where divisions were able to
accommodate rush and on-the-spot orders.
Clients, including the end-users with whom the team had contact, believed there to
be a high level of accuracy currently exhibited on the transcripts. They appreciated
the steps taken by the University to ensure the authenticity of the document,
particularly as it applied to documentation to be enclosed with self-administered
applications. Our survey also elicited many positive comments about the staff at the
divisions involved in these procedures.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 24 Student Information Systems
3. Research
External research provided the team with
confirmation that our design of a consolidated
transcript should focus on the needs of clients and
end-users, the University and the divisions
3.1 Other Institutions
fter reviewing the transcript process of divisions within the University of Toronto
the team looked at other post-secondary institutions in terms of: information
about ordering transcripts, including fee charges (if any) and method of payment;
transcript information/details; and transcript production (specifically, method of
delivery).
Canadian universities examined include Alberta, British Columbia, Concordia, Dalhousie,
Guelph, McGill, McMaster, Memorial, New Brunswick, Queen’s, Ryerson, Simon Fraser,
Waterloo, Western Ontario, Windsor, and York.
American universities examined include Arizona State†
, University of California (San
Diego), Columbia, Colorado, Delaware, Florida (ISIS), Harvard, Indiana, Maryland,
Michigan†
, Minnesota†
, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), University of
Pennsylvania, Rochester, Wisconsin, and Yale.
The team found that most institutions use the Web to disseminate information about
definitions of official vs. unofficial transcripts, holds and sanctions on release of
transcripts, fee charges, and instructions on how to order transcripts. Some institutions
provide a request form on the Web. Few institutions enable students to view their
transcripts. For security reasons, it was not possible to access information on actual
transcripts.
†
These institutions are considered “peer” institutions of the U of T.
A
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 25
In mapping the transcript process, the team found that our practices did not vary greatly
from other institutions. The team found that the consolidated transcript was an
established practice at many institutions including Delaware, McGill, Memorial,
Wisconsin, and Waterloo.
3.2 Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)
Electronic Data Interchange (EDI), with respect to student record data, is a means by
which transcript information can be transmitted between institutions electronically.
In this province, the Ontario Universities Electronic Transcript Service (OUETS) makes
EDI transmissions possible through a number of the Ontario university application
centres. At present, however, only a handful of institutions are fully capable of sending
and receiving EDI transmissions. Some institutions will only send information in the EDI
format while other institutions will receive information only. The University of Toronto
has varying participation in EDI transmissions with respect to undergraduate admissions
processes.
Currently, the most prominent and popular EDI standard for transferring portions of a
student’s permanent academic record is SPEEDE ( S tandardization of P ost-Secondary
E ducation E lectronic D ata E xchange). Information in a student’s record that can be sent
by EDI ranges from verification of enrolment or registration to his or her course
inventory to the delivery of a transcript.
Some of the advantages that have been cited for using EDI are:
1. automatic computer transfer of information thus ensuring reliable and consistent
interpretation of student records;
2. cost-effective practices: savings in resources of paper, labour and postage;
3. faster transfer of student records;
and
4. better service to students in timing and delivery of relevant portions of students’
academic records.
The major steps involved in Electronic Data Interchange are:
1. extracting the data from the institution’s files;
2. translating the data into a common or standard format;
3. sending the data in acceptable forms of transmission (e.g. via File Transfer
Protocol (FTP) or by email via MIME);
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 26 Student Information Systems
and,
4. receiving the information by other institutions.
There are disadvantages to Electronic Data Interchange with its emphasis on a consistent,
standard and uniform translation of information into a universal and agreed-upon
format.
From an institutional perspective:
1. EDI will require a very high level of cooperation and consistency in grading
practices within the institution. It will also require an equally high level of
agreement and cooperation among post-secondary institutions in order to make
the practice a viable and effective means of transmitting student record data.
2. While EDI is an effective means of transmitting information, it limits the
institution’s control over the presentation of student record data.
3. The emerging reliance on the “self-administered application”11
process for some
post-secondary institutions (including the U of T) has placed new importance on
the production of hard copies of transcripts. Many academic end-users of
transcripts will be reluctant to accept one portion of an application on paper and
then retrieve transcript information in an additional step (which, in turn, could
disadvantage our students applying for admission at other institutions).
Notwithstanding these challenges, EDI is still relatively new and will undoubtedly figure
prominently in the future admissions processes carried out by post-secondary institutions
in North America. With this in mind, the team has made several recommendations
concerning institution to institution EDI in the re-design (see Electronic Data
Interchange (EDI) on page 45).
In particular, because the Applications BPR team recommended that the University
move towards the provision of an electronic application system, EDI transcripts will
undoubtedly become important piece of the online application system.
3.3 Kiosks
The team examined the establishment of “kiosks” on campus which, in a single step,
might handle the request, production and issuance of transcripts on the spot. In effect,
these kiosks would handle document requests and issuance in the same manner that an
automated teller machine (ATM) handles bank transactions. Although the team
continues to have an interest in pursuing this technology further, because of the cost of
developing such a system, the team does not have a specific recommendation.
11
A means by which an applicant is responsible for the gathering and submission of all documentation related
to an application for admission together in a single package.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 27
4. The New Design
All documents produced by the University are
“official.” It is the authenticity of the document that
is critical to the University and our end-users.
4.1 The Foundation
A) The Report of the Commission on Grading
n part, the team was guided by the Report of the Commission on Grading. The team
acknowledged that an agreement with respect to grading scales and related
processes will facilitate the production of a “consolidated transcript.” Moreover, a
number of University community members told the team that it was their opinion
that an agreement on grading scales is necessary before a consolidated transcript can
be produced.
While a number of issues raised by the commission were important factors in
determining the new design, the team took specific direction from the commission’s
recommendations with respect to transcripts:
The commission endorses the proposal to provide a consolidated University transcript that
contains the results, including transfer credits granted, of all programs of study from within
the University of Toronto with which the student has been associated.12
The commission recommends that the “grade point average” be included on student
transcripts.13
The commission recommends that all divisions adopt the practice of including the average
grade for the course expressed using the refined letter grade scale, along with individual
student grades on transcripts. While the commission recommends that the calculations be
12
Recommendation #1.
13
Recommendation #3(iv)
I
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 28 Student Information Systems
restricted to courses of a specific size, it does not recommend that course size also be
displayed.14
The commission recommends that grade reports and transcripts include both the numeric
mark and its letter grade equivalent, where possible, for all courses.15
The commission recommends the adoption of a uniform system of assigning weight values to
courses and other academic units of study to be used by all divisions of the University. The
system adopted must allow for the relative values needed by all divisions. The commission
recommends that course weights for each course always be included on grade reports and
transcripts.16
The commission recommends that all divisions adopt a uniform practice of listing academic
honours, scholarships and awards sanctioned by the University on transcripts.17
B) Assumptions
In the course of working together, the team formulated the following working
assumptions (some of which are based upon end results and constraints approved by
the Executive Steering Committee):
1. It is the responsibility of the division, faculty, school or campus to ensure that
student record data is accurate and reflects all clients’ current standing.
2. Once data has been made available in the system (and after all necessary approvals
and related processes have ceased), academic results data is “frozen” in the system.
Subsequent changes in grading scales and program requirements do not
necessitate changes in historical data.
3. The “rules” (i.e. degree and program requirements) of the faculty, school or
campus have been captured in the SRS and are applied correctly and that these
rules and policies will be continually upgraded by the faculty, school or campus.
4. All student record data available in the system will be accurate and current.
5. The system design is sound and that the development of the system will take into
account the various divisional differences with respect to degree and/or program
requirements.
6. The system will be dependable and reliable with respect to the capture and output
of data.
14
Recommendation #4
15
Recommendation #6
16
Recommendation #7
17
Recommendation #8
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 29
7. The number of documents (transcripts and letters) produced by the University will
decrease dramatically. This assumption is based upon the following factors:
a) The need for verification letters and certificates of attendance will be reduced
by several elements of the team’s own re-design: publicly accessible
information (e.g. degree conferral) will be more readily accessible by end-users
on the Web (see Public Domain Information on page 35); and a new
“diploma card” will be issued to all graduates (see The “Diploma Card” on
page 35).
b) The need for hard copies of transcripts will be reduced for a number of reasons.
Students will have electronic access to their grades (see the Access to Student
Record Information BPR report) and may print unauthenticated copies of
transcripts on their own (see Unauthenticated Printing on page 42).
Students who choose to communicate with the University via Canada Post
(see the Access to Student Record Information BPR report) will receive the
“consolidated transcript” instead of a statement of results at the end of each
session (see the Collecting & Reporting Grades BPR report). University of
Toronto end-users (i.e. those processing applications from students currently
or previously enrolled at the University) will have access to an electronic
transcript in the re-design (see The “Electronic Transcript” for Internal End-
Users on page 43).
c) The consolidated transcript as designed by the team (see Physical Design &
Output on page 45) will decrease the total number of documents currently
produced by various divisions if a client has had multiple registrations (e.g. a
student that has been enrolled in Arts & Science, OISE/UT and then School of
Graduate Studies will require only one transcript instead of three).
C) Principles
The team also developed a set of principles upon which the design was based.
1. All documents produced by the University are “official.” It is the authenticity (see
Authenticity on page 30) of the document that is critical to the University and
our end-users.
2. It is the University’s duty to take reasonable precautions to assure that the
integrity and authenticity of documents produced by the University (including
any department or division) are protected.
3. The vast majority of our clients are honest and have integrity.
4. The organizational structure of the University should not hinder service to clients
and end-users.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 30 Student Information Systems
5. The end-users’ needs drive the process. It is the needs of the end-user that
determine the layers of data reflected on the document requested by the client as
well as the method of delivery and the timing. End-users also determine the level
of authenticity required (e.g. while one end-user might be satisfied with an
unauthenticated transcript printed by a client, another might require a higher
level of authenticity).
6. There should be no need for paper exchange within the University itself. The
transactions within the new SRS should be easy to use, fast, convenient and secure
in order to encourage University end-users to access the information directly.
7. The “Document” (see The “Document” on page 33) can reflect only the currently
available academic data and status of the client. The system cannot anticipate
outcomes (e.g. the system cannot anticipate grades or predict that a student will
be “in good standing” at the end of the current session).
8. Clients (based upon the needs of end-users) decide whether or not a document
should be issued immediately, at the end of the current session, once grades are
available, or after degree conferral.
9. While processes that affect students’ “standing” result in the creation of student
record data, these processes are separate and independent from the process of
requesting, producing and issuing transcripts and letters.
10. An on-going collaboration and partnership between the academic divisions and
the central administration (including senior academic administrators, Student
Information Systems and the University Registrar) is essential to the success of the
re-design.
D) Authenticity
Many (if not all) end-users are concerned about authenticity of documents. End-users
need to be satisfied that a document is an accurate and complete representation of a
student’s academic record. End-users also want to be assured that the data printed on a
document produced by the University has not been tampered with.
After extensive research on our diverse group of end-users, it became evident that
several features of the document are essential to ensure authenticity.
These include:
♦ seals;
♦ signatures;
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 31
♦ special paper (or letterhead);
and,
♦ the means of delivery.
SSSSeeeeaaaallllssss
The University should maintain the current practice of placing a seal on transcripts
and other documentation verifying a client’s status and/or record. The majority of
end-users do not consider transcripts and other documents to be authentic without a
University of Toronto seal of some sort. End-users report that they feel that the seal
adds assurance that the document was indeed issued directly by the institution—
leaving little opportunity for tampering with the document or the data printed on it.
The team recommends that authenticated documents display a “printed seal”18
as
opposed to an “embossed seal” (which is currently used by various divisions within
the University of Toronto).
After evaluating approximately three dozen transcripts
from North American universities and colleges, the team
observed that some institutions’ transcripts include seals
which are actually part of the special transcript paper
while others include a message that indicates that “no seal
is required” on their transcripts. A growing number of
institutions, and a majority of those examined by the
team currently use a printed seal.
The team also noted that the embossed seals in use can
sometimes be difficult to see. A printed seal would be
easier to locate and identify on authenticated documents. Printed seals are less costly
and less of an impediment to the document production process.
The team recommends that the official University seal be printed only on documents
produced and issued through the institutional production facilities (see Institutional
Production Facilities on page 41).
SSSSiiiiggggnnnnaaaattttuuuurrrreeeessss
For many end-users, a signature of an appropriate University official on a transcript,
even one that is printed rather than original, is perceived to have great value with
respect to the authentication of record data. Various letters of confirmation also
require signatures.
18
The seal would be printed along with and at the same time as the document data.
Figure 4-A – Seal
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 32 Student Information Systems
The team recommends that documents produced in an institutional production
facility (see Institutional Production Facilities on page 41) include a printed
signature of one senior University officer (even though recipients of a transcript are
rarely in a position to confirm its authenticity).
The presence of a signature implies some legal authority and helps to reinforce the
perception that a senior administrator within the University has faith in the reliability
of the student record system and in the process of document production. While a
signature on a transcript does not make the document more difficult to falsify (given
modern scanning and printing technologies), it does make the consequences of
falsification more serious.
PPPPaaaappppeeeerrrr
The paper on which the document is printed is an indicator to end-users that a
document is authentic. It also can enhance the University’s image and reputation.
The team recommends that the paper adopted for production be tamper-proof (i.e. in
a way that assures end-users that the document has not been altered). As well, the
paper should be unique to the University and of high quality so as to allow for quick
recognition and identification by end-users. The paper should also help enhance the
image of the University.
The team noted that, when photocopied, the paper currently used by the PRS and a
number of other North American institutions reveal the word “copy” (in order to
indicate to the end-user that the document was not produced by the institution).
Some institutions use paper which reveals the word “void” when photocopied. At the
same time, the team noted that many end-users are happy to accept copies of
documents (even if they know that they are simple photocopies). With that in mind,
the team feels that the word “void” and/or “copy” appearing on a photocopied
document might disadvantage our students when an end-user is happy to accept
simple photocopies of documents.
While the team does not have a specific recommendation with respect to the practice
of producing “security” paper which reveals “copy” when photocopied, the team does
recommend that at no time should the word “void” be revealed on a photocopy of a
transcript. If “copy” is included, it should appear only once when photocopied.
MMMMeeeeaaaannnnssss ooooffff DDDDeeeelllliiiivvvveeeerrrryyyy
End-users can be satisfied that a document is authentic when it is sent to the end-user
directly by the University. Many academic end-users require this. In fact, many end-
users may accept a document printed on plain white paper without a seal or signature
if they are certain that the data has not been tampered with (i.e. the means of
delivery is secure).
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 33
When end-users prefer to receive credentials via the client (e.g. “self-administered
applications”), end-users can be satisfied that a document is authentic if there is
special treatment of the envelope (e.g. signatures, seals, and labels over the flap of an
envelope).
Electronic data interchange via a secure transmission mechanism is another method
to distribute record data in a way in which end-users can be satisfied that the data is
authentic and tamper-proof.
E) Data & Document Integrity
Because the academic divisions will continue to have responsibility for the data
concerning students registered in those divisions, data integrity continues to be a
responsibility of the divisions. The re-design of document request, production and
issuance is an entirely independent process.
The output of that data (whether it is done by an office within the University or the
client) is a simple matter of reflecting information which originates from a division
on a screen or printer. Document integrity, therefore, depends upon the divisions
maintaining accurate and up-to-date student record data.
However, for a variety of reasons, divisions may choose not to release particular
portions of a record and will continue to have authority to withhold data for output.
The team recommends that the SRS include a provision for divisions to “flag” student
record data for “non-release.” This might be a manual operation in less frequent cases
or an automatic operation in situations which are much more common.
4.2 The “Document”
After examining the various transcripts, verification letters, diplomas, certificates of
attendance and other documents issued by the University which reflect students’
participation and records, the team concluded that, in general, they are slightly different
forms of output of the same data.
While traditionally referred to as “transcripts” and “letters of verification”, the team
adopted the concept of the “document” as the product of the re-designed process. Each
document includes various “layers” of data:
A. Admission Information
B. Enrolment History (sessions and divisions)
C. Grades and Results
D. Degree Conferral
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 34 Student Information Systems
E. Program Detail
The document is merely a spectrum of student record data that includes a range of
information from simple confirmation of enrolment (at one end) to complete and
detailed academic results from all programs of study at the University (at the other end).
Any layer of detail in the document spectrum can be easily and efficiently produced. The
level of detail required on the document is determined by the end-user and requested by
the client.
Figure 4-B – The Document Spectrum
Public
Domain
Threshold
↓
Academic
Results
Threshold
↓Client Consent Not Required Release Requires Client Consent
Public Domain Information Enrolment Information Results Information
↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑ ↑Sessional
enrolment
history
Diploma
card *
Diploma Certificate of
attendance,
confirmation
of degree
conferral
Fees
account
(expenses
incurred,
expected
expenses,
information
for visa
students)
List of
courses
taken and/or
courses in
progress
Misc.
enrolment
information
(e.g.
instructors,
thesis
supervisor)
Misc.
verification
letters
(e.g.
“student
has asked
to
graduate ”,
confirmation
of
enrolment
changes,
etc.)
“Traditional ”
U of T
divisional
transcript (no
information
on other
U of T
participa-
tion)
New
transcript
reporting
results
related to
participation
in one (or
more)
division(s)
with
minimal
detail about
other
divisional
participa-
tion *
New
consolidated
transcript
reporting
results
related to all
programs of
study in all
divisions *
All
student
record
data
* Proposed in the new design (see below)
4.3 Design Elements
There are four main components of the new design;
A. issuance of “Diploma Cards” to graduating students;
B. publishing public domain information;
C. request, production and issuance of documents;
and,
D. the “Electronic Transcript” for internal end-users
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 35
A) The “Diploma Card”
At present, the University issues a diploma (10
x 13 inches) to each graduate which has three
or four signatures and the embossed seal of the
University.
The Office of Statistics, Records and
Convocation also issues a “certification of
degree.” This is a 5.5 x 8.5 inch form issued to
graduates to confirm that a particular degree
was awarded. This form is embossed with the
Office seal and carries the signature of the
Director or Records Supervisor.
University graduates entering the United
States on temporary work assignments are
often required to provide immigration officials
with evidence of their academic qualifications.
People do not generally carry a diploma with
them, nor, without some foresight, will they
have a certification of degree.
The team recommends that the University
issue a wallet sized Diploma Card bearing the usual signatures and University seal on
the back. The card should be a good quality durable document which includes features
which make it difficult to produce counterfeit copies.19
The production and issuance of these documents should reduce requirements for
other academic documents such as transcripts and letters of confirmation.
B) Public Domain Information
The University of Toronto Policy on Access to Student Academic Records (1991) states,
“By the act of registration, a student gives implicit consent for a minimal amount of
information to be made freely available to all inquiries: the academic division(s),
degree program(s) and the session(s) in which a student is or has been registered,
degree(s) received and date(s) of convocation.”20
19
If there is concern over issuing a second “official” diploma to each graduate, a reasonable alternative would be
a wallet sized Certification of Degree (which could be produced in essentially the same format as the current
document).
20
Section 4(e) of the Policy on Access to Student Academic Records (1991)
Figure 4-C – Diploma CardMock-up
Front
Back
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 36 Student Information Systems
The Policy does not permit access by
others to lists of students registered in
a program nor to lists of students
enrolled in a course.
The team recommends that “public
domain” information be made
available on the World Wide Web in a
searchable database. If student name
and other relevant data (e.g. degree
conferred or year of graduation) were
entered in an online form, registration
and degree information should be
made freely available. (again, reducing
the need for particular individual
documents). It is acknowledged that,
in some cases, additional assistance
might be required to help end-users
determine the identity of individuals
with common names.
Notwithstanding the above, the team
has some hesitation or reluctance in
allowing enterprising inquirers using
Web access to compile lists of students
in particular disciplines such as Law or
Management. This also appears to be a
grey area in the Policy. Therefore, in
developing the online searchable database, the design should prevent the possibility
that the information could be exploited for inappropriate uses (e.g. it should not be
possible for a user to compile a complete list of graduates for a particular discipline
and/or year). The focus of an online search should be on a person, not a program or
year of study.
C) Request, Production & Issuance of Hard Copy Documents
RRRReeeeqqqquuuueeeessssttttiiiinnnngggg DDDDooooccccuuuummmmeeeennnnttttssss
The team recommends taking an “anytime-anywhere” approach to allowing clients to
request documents. Students and alumni should be able to make requests in person,
by mail, over the phone, via fax, via email, and through the World Wide Web.
Web Requests
In accordance with the recommendations made by the Access to Student Record
Information BPR Team, clients should be able to request any type of document via a
Figure 4-D – Online DegreeVerification Mock-up
m
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 37
Web interface. As the use of the
Internet grows, it is expected that
this may become the most utilized
method by which documents will be
ordered.
In this scenario, a client would
access the system via the Web and
enter his or her student number and
personal identification number (a
former student could use his or her
old student number and PIN if
remembered by them) to identify
himself or herself to the system. In
cases when these numbers are
forgotten, the system could ask for
the client’s name and birth date
and/or other verification data.
Once a client has successfully logged
on to the system, he or she would
be presented with a list of options
corresponding to the various types
of information that could be
included in the document. A set of
templates of commonly produced
documents (including traditional
transcripts and common verification
letters) should be available to assist
the client in determining which
layers of information are required by
the end-user for which the
document is being prepared.
Once the client has selected the type
of document to be produced, an
online rendering of the final output
should be displayed to the client.
The client should then have the
option of proceeding or going back
to change his or her options.
After the client has confirmed that
he or she has requested the right
type of document, the system
should ask the client for other
Figure 4-E – Web Request Mock-up
m
✄--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
m(Continued on Page 38)
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 38 Student Information Systems
relevant details concerning the
request.
The system should provide a table
or series of pop-up menus with
address information for common
recipients of documents. The client
should be able to select the recipient
of the document, or by means of a
postal code database search, the
system could assist the client in
entering the recipient data. Manual
entry of recipient information
should also be possible.
Having entered the recipient
information, the system should first
ask for the number of copies
required by this end-user and then
ask the client if there are other
recipients of the document in
question. If so, the system would
return the client to the recipient
data entry page.
For each recipient, the client should
have the choice of picking up the
document (in which case, the
document should be addressed to
the end-user care of the client21
) at
any one of the available pick up
locations (see below), sending the
document through the mail, or, at
an additional charge, sending the
document via courier.
The system should then provide the
client with the option of ordering other types of documents. If the client chooses to
do so, the system would bring the client back to the document options selection page.
Clients should also select the point in time that the document(s) should be sent (e.g.
immediately, after degree conferral, etc.). The system should be context sensitive to
the timing of requests and remind clients that there are certain pieces of information
that may be missing (e.g. grades for courses in progress, degree conferral, etc.).
21
Eliminating the need to indicate on these documents that it was “issued to student.”
Figure 4-E (Continued from Page 37)
m
m(Continued on Page 39)
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 39
In order to assist the University in
issuing documents to common end-
users, the system could recommend
to the client that he or she should
wait to have the document sent
along with batches of other
documents destined for particular
end-users on specific dates. The
client should always have the choice
of not taking this option.
The system should check the status
of the client’s fees account (in order
to confirm that there are no
financial holds) and provide the
client with the cost of producing
and sending the document(s) in the
same way as an online store sells
products.
If there is a financial hold on the
client’s account, he or she should be
given the option of clearing their
fees account by paying the balance
online with a credit card, cancelling
the order, or parking the order
pending payment. It is anticipated
that other Web-enabled access for
students to the SRS will provide
similar options for students to clear
debts when they log on to the
system (see the Access to Student
Record Information and Student
Accounts Receivable BPR reports).
Currently enrolled students should
be able to charge document requests
to their fees account (as
recommended by the Student
Accounts Receivable BPR Team) or
pay for the services online with a
credit card, bank debit card (or with
a campus “smart card” if one is introduced by the University). If it is desired, the
University could allow clients to pay by cash—in which case, the student would be
limited to the option of picking up the document at the Fees Department (the
Figure 4-E (Continued from Page 38)
✄--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
m
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 40 Student Information Systems
Student Accounts Receivable BPR Team also recommended that only the Fees
Department should be handling cash).
Former students (i.e. those who no longer have active fees accounts) would not have
the option of charging the fee to their account.
Once the payment is validated, the client should be presented with a confirmation of
the order along with a transaction number. The client should also receive an
automatic verification (via email or fax) that the document has been sent or is ready
for pick up. Clients should also have the option of logging back into the system to
check on the status of his or her order.
Online request systems must be available 24 hours a day.
In Person Requests
A client should be able to make a request for a document at any office which performs
registrarial functions at the University. The team recommends that a public access
computer running a Web browser should be available in as many of these locations as
possible in order to permit clients to load their own requests for documents. In cases
when a computer is not available or when a client is unable to use a computer,
registrarial staff should load the request for the client (preferably while the client is
present).
IVR (STS) Requests
Clients should be able to make a request for pick up or delivery to a common recipient
via the University’s Student Telephone Service. The request system on the STS should
be similar to the Web-enabled request system. However, because of the limitations of
the IVR technology, the client will likely have fewer options to choose from and
might be limited to pick up or delivery to a common recipient. The technology
currently in use by the University should be able to handle less complex requests for
documents made via IVR.
Fax, Email, Telephone and Mail Requests
The team recommends that one office be established to handle written, telephone
and email requests for documents. This would not preclude the possibility that any
office which performs registrarial functions could also handle these requests (if they
are sent directly to those offices). However, from a client perspective, it would be
preferable to have a single mailing address, telephone number, fax number and
electronic mail address (e.g. <[email protected]>) to which requests should be
sent.
This “credentials” office should not be required to prepare and distribute request forms
for documents—but they may be a convenient way to ensure that all the necessary
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 41
information is obtained from the client. The team noted, however, that at present,
forms provide a convenient and relatively quick means of tracking specific orders.
The following information must be provided in order to process the request: student
number, name, birth date, dates of attendance/graduation, former name (if
applicable) recipient(s) of documents, number of copies, when the document should
be sent (e.g. wait for degree conferral), method of delivery, type(s) of documents, and
other contact information (in case the University needs to contact the client
concerning the order, etc.).
The team noted that while we generally have a practice of requiring signatures for
transcript requests at present, there is never (or rarely) an occasion when signatures
are verified. The team recommends that a signature or Personal Identification Number
(PIN)22
be required from the client in order to authorize release of record data.
This office would load written requests. The system would then send confirmation of
the orders to clients. Staff in this office would interact with the clients in a manner
which parallels the Web request system.
Hard copies of written requests and forms should be retained for a short period of time
(in order to assist in tracking document production and issuance if necessary).
Written requests should be scanned (or downloaded in the case of email requests) and
retained in the system for a specified period of time in order to provide an auditable
log when tracking down problems.
When a request for a document is loaded on the system, it should be immediately
queued for production. Clients should be provided with an estimate of the time when
a document will be ready for distribution or pick up.
PPPPrrrroooodddduuuucccciiiinnnngggg DDDDooooccccuuuummmmeeeennnnttttssss
Institutional Production Facilities
After considering an array of options for the production of documents, the team
recommends that one production facility be established on each of the three main
campuses where the fully “authenticated” (see above) document is produced.
After agreeing that there should be at least one production facility on each of the
three main campuses, the team considered and analyzed four options for production
facilities on the St. George Campus: one central production facility, regional facilities
(approximately 2 or 3), divisional production facilities (approximately 18), and
“home” registrarial offices (i.e. the offices in which students perform registrarial
activities and/or receive academic advising—approximately 30 to over 100 if graduate
departments are included).
22
The Access to Student Record Information BPR team established that the PIN is equivalent to a signature.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 42 Student Information Systems
The criteria used to evaluate the options included start-up costs (amount of space
needed and the cost of equipment required), operating costs (staffing and space
costs—on an overall institutional level), security concerns, administrative
convenience, and ensuring document integrity. Client convenience was not an
evaluation criterion at this stage because clients are not concerned about where
documents are produced, only how and where documents are requested and
distributed.
The establishment of one office on the St. George Campus to carry out production of
documents was the most favoured option (followed, in order of preference, by the
establishment of regional facilities and then divisional facilities). Establishing
production facilities in “home” offices was considered impractical for each evaluation
criterion.23
Unauthenticated Printing
In addition to the production of fully authenticated documents in the three campus
production facilities, the team recommends that clients and University staff be given
the option of producing these documents locally on their own printers without any
of the institutional authentication devices (i.e. special paper and seal).
For many end-users, a “fully authenticated” (see above) document is not necessary.
For example one employer might be satisfied with any document produced with a
summary of academic participation and/or results while another might insist upon
receiving a sealed document printed on special paper.
If an end-user has any doubt about the authenticity of the data printed, he or she can
simply ask the student or former student to obtain an authenticated document from
the University. Since end-users determine the authenticity that they require, it is up
to the client to satisfy that need.
IIIIssssssssuuuuiiiinnnngggg DDDDooooccccuuuummmmeeeennnnttttssss
The team also used a number of objective evaluation criteria to determine how
documents should be issued and distributed: client convenience (i.e. ease of pick up),
security, administrative convenience (organizing the work, coordination of
distribution for pick up, etc.), start-up costs, and operating costs.
The team evaluated client pick up separately from distribution by mail or courier.24
23
The team noted that using these criteria, the evaluation method affirmed the decision to establish a single
production facility for the current Permanent Record System (which serves several divisions).
24
While “pick up” is a very important issue for clients, mail and courier distribution should be transparent to
the client.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 43
The team recommends that when a client requests documents for pick up, he or she
should have the choice of picking it up at any campus, in any divisional office, or in
the case of cash payment, at the Student Accounts Receivable Office.
Each day, the campus production facility would produce and sort documents for pick
up and then deliver them to the appropriate offices along with a check-list of all
clients that made the requests for pick up orders at those offices. The divisional offices
need only to confirm that the client identifies himself or herself in order to obtain
the document(s).
When a client requires a fully authenticated document on a rush basis, he or she could
load the request at any location on campus (or at the campus production facility) and
then contact the production facility for pick up. Staff in the production facility
should have the option of changing the queue order for production of particular
documents for rush requests.
Although allowing pick up at any “home” registrarial office was clearly the most
convenient for clients, the other evaluation criteria, especially cost and coordination
of a distribution network between the production facility and these offices, made the
option impractical from an administrative point of view.
For documents issued through the mail or by courier, the team recommends that the
campus production facility handle issuance and distribution of these documents.
Because client convenience is not a factor affecting mail and courier distribution, the
cost and administrative convenience of dealing with a minimum number of offices
was preferred by the team.
D) The “Electronic Transcript” for Internal End-Users
Portions of student academic records are required at various stages of students’
participation in the University ( e.g. admission, transfer credit assessment, scholarship
consideration, admission to programs, academic counselling and degree assessment).
The current practice of requesting transcripts in various formats (official transcripts,
transcript facsimile, Student Academic Records (SARS)) should be simplified.
Moreover, direct access to the student database, including printing facility, should be
provided to administrative and academic staff in their official capacity.
The team recommends that a special SRS screen and/or Web-enabled “electronic
transcript” be designed for internal University of Toronto end-users of documents.
The electronic transcript should include all of the information that is included in hard
copies of the new consolidated transcript. The output should be as simple to read and
interpret as a hard copy transcript. It should also be extremely easy to access (i.e. as
simple as entering a student’s identification number and pressing an F-key).
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 44 Student Information Systems
Figure 4-F – Electronic Transcript Mock-up
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 45
While a number of internal end-users of transcripts indicated that this type of output
would be useful, they cautioned that unless it is easy to access, they would be reluctant
to use it. In addition, with many divisions adopting a “self-administered application”
process for people applying for admission, there may be some unwillingness among
some internal end-users to accept part of an application on paper and then do the
work necessary to access an online transcript. Finally, the team discovered that a
number of departments depend upon the ability to physically transfer hard copies of
applications and supporting documentation from person to person as part of the
admission process.
Notwithstanding this, the team believes that the electronic transcript will gain
acceptance over time. Moreover, when the University begins accepting applications
via a Web-enabled interface (see the Applications BPR report) the electronic
transcript for internal end users will become a natural and necessary component of
the applications process.
In order to overcome the limitations of managing and assessing electronic data, it was
suggested that in cases when committees are involved in processing applications, it
would be conceivable that all of the application and transcript data might simply be
projected on a screen in front of the committee while decisions are being made—thus
reducing the need for hard copies of these documents.
4.4 Electronic Data Interchange (EDI)
Two key elements will provide the University greater flexibility in utilizing EDI as a viable
means of transferring information of student academic records:
1. The new SRS will enable all divisions to have access to the system thus ensuring
responsibility in maintaining academic records/history on the database. Universal
involvement is key to ensuring data integrity (which is crucial with respect to the
provision of complete and accurate information).
2. A consolidated transcript, based upon a common set of grading practices, is a
prime requisite in providing students’ academic records in a standard, consistent
and uniform format for all programs of study at the University. Common features
reflecting transcript details such as admission information, registration history,
course titles, weights, grades and/or marks, grading scale establish the basic
requirements required in EDI.
The team recommends that the University continue to work with other Ontario post-
secondary institutions to agree upon and develop a single standard for EDI in Ontario.
Because SPEEDE (see Electronic Data Interchange (EDI) on page 25) is the most
common standard among institutions in North America, the team recommends that the
EDI system adopted, at the very least, should provide an interface with which the
University might exchange data with universities and colleges using the SPEEDE system.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 46 Student Information Systems
4.5 Physical Design & Output
A) Data
Although there are significant differences between divisional transcripts, as evident to
the team during the “current mapping” exercises, there is much in common in the
types of data found on transcripts across the University. The high frequency of
occurrence of particular types of data across the University indicates the significance
of such data for inclusion in the consolidated transcript. Questions posed to end-user,
both internally and externally, during walkthrough interviews have confirmed the
usefulness of such data.
The types of data the team recommends for inclusion in a comprehensive
consolidated transcript is summarized in the following table. Descriptions of the data
fields appear after the table.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 47
Table 4-A – Data on the New Consolidated Transcript
CURRENT PRACTICE
A
R
T
S
&
S
C
I
E
N
C
E
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
U
A
T
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
M
E
D
I
C
I
N
E
N
U
R
S
I
N
G
W
O
O
D
S
W
O
R
T
H
P
I
P
25
L
A
W
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
D
E
N
T
I
S
T
R
Y
O
I
S
E
/
U
T
26
M
U
S
I
C
O
C
C
U
P
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
P
H
A
R
M
A
C
Y
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
&
H
E
A
L
T
H
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
S
C
A
R
B
O
R
O
U
G
H
T
H
E
O
L
O
G
Y
NEW
DESIGN
ADMISSION
Admitted From ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Admitted To ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Admit Date ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
TRANSFER CREDIT & CREDIT ELSEWHERE
Admission Notation ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
C oncurrent S tudies ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Visiting /Special S tudents ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
COURSE AVERAGE
Alpha Grade ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
% (1-100) ✓
INDIVIDUAL GRADE
Alpha Grade ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
% (1-100) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Pass/Fail or Credit/Non-Credit ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Non-G rade ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Miscellaneous ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
INDIVIDUAL AVERAGE
SGPA ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
CGPA ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
S-% (1-100) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
C-% (1-100) ✓ ✓
S-Alpha Average ✓
C-Alpha Average ✓
Alpha Course Group Average ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
% (1-100) Course Group Average ✓ ✓ ✓
COURSE INFO
Code (Weight, Term) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Title ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Course Size ✓ ✓
Lecture H ours ✓
Lab Hours ✓
Weight ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Instructor’ s Name ✓
C ampus ✓ ✓
Function Code ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Other Degree Requirements ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
25
Professional and International Programs
26
Undergraduate Education
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 48 Student Information Systems
CURRENT PRACTICE
A
R
T
S
&
S
C
I
E
N
C
E
E
N
G
I
N
E
E
R
I
N
G
G
R
A
D
U
A
T
E
S
T
U
D
I
E
S
M
E
D
I
C
I
N
E
N
U
R
S
I
N
G
W
O
O
D
S
W
O
R
T
H
P
I
P
27
L
A
W
A
R
C
H
I
T
E
C
T
U
R
E
D
E
N
T
I
S
T
R
Y
O
I
S
E
/
U
T
28
M
U
S
I
C
O
C
C
U
P
A
T
I
O
N
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
P
H
A
R
M
A
C
Y
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
&
H
E
A
L
T
H
P
H
Y
S
I
C
A
L
T
H
E
R
A
P
Y
S
C
A
R
B
O
R
O
U
G
H
T
H
E
O
L
O
G
Y
NEW
DESIGN
END OF SESSION DATA
Rank ✓ ✓✒✙
Standing / Status ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓✐
✓ ★
Sessional Credits ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Full-time/Part-time ✓
DEGREE INFO
Requirements Met ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Degree Conferred ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Date Conferred ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Detail (Specialist, Major/Minor, Program Name, etc.) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Distinction, etc. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Thesis Title ✓ ✓ ★
Thesis Supervisor ✓ ✓ ★
MISCELLANEOUS
Scholarships, Awards, Dean ’s List etc. ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Special Notations ✓ ? ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Withdrawal/Termination ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓✓✑
★
Student Identification ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Other Personal Data ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
PRODUCTION INFORMATION
Date Issued ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Order Number ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Signature ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Seal ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Special Paper/Letterhead ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Number of Pages ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Distribution Method ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
End of Transcript ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Continued on Following Page ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Issued To ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Official/Original ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Definition of Official ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Guide ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
Issued to Student/Copy (on transcript) ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓
Special Treatment of Envelope ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ✓ ★
27
Professional and International Programs
28
Undergraduate Education
29
Upon Graduation
30
Only if Not Passed
31
Termination Only
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 49
SSSSttttuuuuddddeeeennnntttt IIIIddddeeeennnnttttiiiiffffiiiiccccaaaattttiiiioooonnnn
NNNN
aaaammmm
eeee,,,, SSSSttttuuuu
dddd
eeeennnn
tttt NNNN
uuuu
mmmm
bbbb
eeeerrrr &&&&
BBBB
iiiirrrrtttthhhh
DDDD
aaaatttteeee The transcript, of course, should carry the student’s name
and number. As an additional identifier, the team suggests
that the birth day and month (but not year) also be
included.
32
DDDDiiiivvvviiiissssiiiioooonnnnaaaallll LLLLooooggggoooo aaaannnndddd NNNNaaaammmmeeee
DDDD
iiiivvvviiiissssiiiioooo
nnnn
aaaallll BBBB
aaaannnn
nnnn
eeeerrrr
The divisional logo and the name of the faculty, school or
campus should be printed at the beginning of the block of
data pertaining to that particular division.
AAAAddddmmmmiiiissssssssiiiioooonnnn
BBBB
aaaassssiiiissss oooo
ffff AAAA
dddd
mmmm
iiiissssssssiiiioooo
nnnn
Notation indicating the bbbb
aaaassssiiiissss oooo
ffff aaaadddd
mmmm
iiiissssssssiiiioooo
nnnn
to the division.
PPPPrrrrooooggggrrrraaaammmm ooooffff SSSSttttuuuuddddyyyy Notation indicating the pppprrrrooooggggrrrraaaammmm ooooffff ssssttttuuuuddddyyyy to which the
student has been admitted.
DDDDaaaatttteeee ooooffff AAAAddddmmmmiiiissssssssiiiioooonnnn Statement indicating the aaaaccccttttuuuuaaaallll ddddaaaatttteeee ooooffff aaaaddddmmmmiiiissssssssiiiioooonnnn or the
date of first registration in the division (month/year or
session/year).
TTTTrrrraaaannnnssssffffeeeerrrr CCCCrrrreeeeddddiiiitttt aaaannnndddd CCCCrrrreeeeddddiiiitttt EEEEllllsssseeeewwwwhhhheeeerrrreeee
TTTTrrrraaaannnnssssffffeeeerrrr CCCCrrrreeeeddddiiiittttssss List of ttttrrrraaaannnnssssffffeeeerrrr ccccrrrreeeeddddiiiittttssss aaaawwwwaaaarrrrddddeeeedddd on admission.
SSSSttttuuuuddddyyyy EEEEllllsssseeeewwwwhhhheeeerrrreeee List of ccccrrrreeeeddddiiiittttssss eeeeaaaarrrrnnnneeeedddd tttthhhhrrrroooouuuugggghhhh ssssttttuuuuddddiiiieeeessss eeeellllsssseeeewwwwhhhheeeerrrreeee while
registered in the division.
SSSSppppeeeecccciiiiaaaallll////VVVViiiissssiiiittttiiiinnnngggg SSSSttttuuuuddddeeeennnnttttssss List of actual UUUUnnnniiiivvvveeeerrrrssssiiiittttyyyy ooooffff TTTToooorrrroooonnnnttttoooo ccccoooouuuurrrrsssseeeessss ttttaaaakkkkeeeennnn aaaassss aaaa
ssssppppeeeecccciiiiaaaallll oooorrrr vvvviiiissssiiiittttiiiinnnngggg ssssttttuuuuddddeeeennnntttt, subsequently awarded as
degree credits. Courses taken in the division in this
manner but, for one reason or another, are not awarded
as degree credits should be appropriately noted as such
(under the course “ function code”).
UUUUnnnniiiiffffoooorrrrmmmm PPPPrrrraaaaccccttttiiiicccceeee ooooffff RRRReeeeppppoooorrrrttttiiiinnnngggg As recommended by the Commiss ion on Grading, a
uniform practice of reporting such credits should be
adopted by all divisions.
IIIInnnnddddiiiivvvviiiidddduuuuaaaallll GGGGrrrraaaaddddeeee
AAAAllllpppphhhhaaaa GGGGrrrraaaaddddeeee The final grade earned by the student in a specific course,
expressed as an alphabetical grade.
%%%% ((((1111----111100000000)))) The final grade earned by the student in a specific course,
expressed in percentage.
32
This can be very helpful to end-users like admissions staff if they receive applications from students with the
same name.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 50 Student Information Systems
PPPPaaaassssssss////FFFFaaaaiiiillll or
CCCC
rrrreeeedddd
iiiitttt////NNNN
oooo
nnnn
----CCCC
rrrreeeedddd
iiiitttt
The final standing obtained in a course offered for which
no actual mark, but pass/fail or credit/non-credit standing
is awarded.
NNNN
oooo
nnnn
----GGGG
rrrraaaadddd
eeee
An indicator in the place of an alphabetical or a numerical
grade portraying either the final or current standing in a
specific course (e.g. INC for incomplete, SDF for standing
deferred, NGA for no grade available or WDR for
withdrawn).
IIIInnnnddddiiiivvvviiiidddduuuuaaaallll AAAAvvvveeeerrrraaaaggggeeee
SSSSGGGG
PPPP
AAAA
The sessional grade point average based on the grading
scale used; which will be based on the 0-4 scale when the
new standardized grading scale is adopted by all
divisions.
33
CCCC
GGGG
PPPPAAAA
The cumulative grade point average based on the grading
scale used; which will be based on the 0-4 scale when the
new standardized grading scale is adopted by all divisions.
The Commission on Grading recommends that this be
made optional.
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee GGGGrrrroooouuuupppp AAAAvvvveeeerrrraaaaggggeeee An alpha grade expression of the student’s average in a
group of courses. The groupings are determined by the
division. The new SRS has made provisions for the
recording of such information for participating divisions.
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee AAAAvvvveeeerrrraaaaggggeeee
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee AAAAvvvveeeerrrraaaaggggeeee An average grade for a course expressed as alpha grade,
calculated only for courses with a minimum size of 12
students.
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee IIIInnnnffffoooorrrrmmmmaaaattttiiiioooonnnn
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee CCCCooooddddeeee A departmental code which begins as a series of letters
(identifying the department) and numbers (indicating the
level of the course), followed by a letter (indicating
weight) and ends with a number (indicating the campus).
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee TTTTiiiittttlllleeee A full-text, though brief descriptive title.
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeee WWWWeeeeiiiigggghhhhtttt A field independent of the course code indicating the
weight of the course expressed in some form of numerical
value (see the report of the CCCCoooolllllllleeeeccccttttiiiinnnngggg &&&& RRRReeeeppppoooorrrrttttiiiinnnngggg
GGGGrrrraaaaddddeeeessss BPR team)
OOOOtttthhhheeeerrrr DDDDeeeeggggrrrreeeeeeee RRRReeeeqqqquuuuiiiirrrreeeemmmmeeeennnnttttssss A notation indicating the completion of other non-course
aspects of the program requirements (e.g. language
requirements).
33
The new SRS provides for three sessions per year. Sessional GPA, in this case, refers to the GPA for courses
taken in both terms (e.g. fall and spring, first and second) in what the University currently refers to as a
“session.” If data is available for the calculation of GPAs at the end of the first and second terms, these averages
should be included on the transcript. In the new system, “annual GPA” is the terminology used to describe the
GPA for all courses taken in the first and second terms of each session.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 51
EEEEnnnndddd ooooffff SSSSeeeessssssssiiiioooonnnn DDDDaaaattttaaaa
SSSSttttaaaannnn
dddd
iiiinnnn
gggg
////SSSSttttaaaattttuuuu
ssss
A notation citing the student’s status, as a reflection of
academic performance, at the end of the session, e.g. “On
Probation” , “In Good Standing.”
SSSSeeeessssssssiiiioooo
nnnn
aaaallll CCCC
rrrreeeedddd
iiiittttssss The number of credits earned in the session
DDDDeeeeggggrrrreeeeeeee IIIInnnnffffoooorrrrmmmmaaaattttiiiioooonnnn
RRRReeeeqqqq
uuuu
iiiirrrreeeemmmm
eeeennnn
ttttssss MMMM
eeeetttt
A statement at the end of the appropriate session verifying
that the dddd
eeeegggg
rrrreeeeeeee rrrreeeeqqqq
uuuu
iiiirrrreeeemmmm
eeeennnn
ttttssss hhhh
aaaavvvveeee bbbb
eeeeeeeennnn
mmmm
eeeetttt.
DDDD
eeeegggg
rrrreeeeeeee CCCC
oooo
nnnn
ffffeeeerrrrrrrreeeedddd
A statement declaring that a dddd
eeeegggg
rrrreeeeeeee hhhh
aaaassss bbbb
eeeeeeeennnn
ccccoooo
nnnn
ffffeeeerrrrrrrreeeedddd
,
including the conferral date, the program detail and as to
whether the student graduated with “Distinction.” The
team recommends that all degree conferral statements
appear at the beginning of the transcript (i.e. before
divisional results sections).
TTTThhhheeeessssiiiissss IIIInnnnffffoooorrrrmmmmaaaattttiiiioooonnnn Where appropriate, the tttthhhheeeessssiiiissss ttttiiiittttlllleeee aaaannnndddd ssssuuuuppppeeeerrrrvvvviiiissssoooorrrr.
MMMMiiiisssscccceeeellllllllaaaannnneeeeoooouuuussss
SSSScccchhhhoooollllaaaarrrrsssshhhhiiiippppssss aaaannnndddd AAAAccccaaaaddddeeeemmmmiiiicccc AAAAwwwwaaaarrrrddddssss Notations referring to University-sanctioned sssscccchhhhoooollllaaaarrrrsssshhhhiiiippppssss
aaaannnndddd aaaaccccaaaaddddeeeemmmmiiiicccc aaaawwwwaaaarrrrddddssss , including academic mentions such
as “Dean’ s Honours List.”
SSSSppppeeeecccciiiiaaaallll NNNNoooottttaaaattttiiiioooonnnnssss Reference to participation in ssssppppeeeecccciiiiaaaallll pppprrrrooooggggrrrraaaammmmssss such as
student exchanges, clinical practices, comprehensive
examinations, electives (or any other special divisional
notations) , etc.
EEEEnnnnrrrroooollllmmmmeeeennnntttt HHHHiiiissssttttoooorrrryyyy
EEEEnnnnrrrroooollllmmmmeeeennnntttt HHHHiiiissssttttoooorrrryyyy Students often move from one division to another in the
middle of programs, or enrol simultaneously in more than
one division. Academic end-users often need to have clear
understanding of students’ chronological enrolment
activities.
The team recommends that an “EEEEnnnnrrrroooollllmmmmeeeennnntttt HHHHiiiissssttttoooorrrryyyy” ,
which traces chronologically the student’s entire
participation at the University of Toronto, be included on a
transcript.
An entry is added to the summary when a student enrols
in a another division and/or when there is concurrent
registration in two or more divisions. Continuous
enrolment in a division need only be depicted by a single
summary remark.
PPPPrrrroooodddduuuuccccttttiiiioooonnnn IIIInnnnffffoooorrrrmmmmaaaattttiiiioooonnnn
PPPPaaaaggggeeee NNNNuuuummmmbbbbeeeerrrr An indication of the page number as a reflection of the
total number of transcript pages.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 52 Student Information Systems
DDDD
aaaatttteeee IIIIssssssssuuuu
eeeedddd
The date on which the transcript has been issued should
also be included on the transcript.
IIIIssssssssuuuu
eeeedddd
TTTToooo
The name and full address of the recipient of the transcript
to be printed on the page so as to allow for the use of a
window envelope. When a document is picked up by the
client for ultimate delivery to an end-user, the recipient
will be listed “care of” of the client.
EEEEnnnn
dddd
oooo
ffff EEEEnnnn
ttttrrrryyyy
Notations to indicate the end of data on each page and
the end of the transcript, should there be more than one
page.
OOOO
rrrrdddd
eeeerrrr NNNN
uuuu
mmmm
bbbb
eeeerrrr
A number assigned by the system to each document
order.
B) Layout
Every effort should be made to produce a transcript that is easy to read and visually
attractive. Documents produced should help enhance the image and reputation of the
University. Although the team feels that the final design of the transcript should be
left in the hands of professional designers, it recommends that certain directions be
observed with respect to the organization of the data blocks and features of the
transcript paper. See Appendix 7.7 on page 79 for “mock-ups” of documents
incorporating the recommendations of the team.
DDDDaaaattttaaaa BBBBlllloooocccckkkk OOOOrrrrggggaaaannnniiiizzzzaaaattttiiiioooonnnn
The “Enrolment History” should be distinct from the main body of the document
data; ideally as brief notes down the left margin of the document. The enrolment
history is always present and complete (whether or not a client has requested a
transcript which omits detailed results from a particular division).
“Admission Notes”, “Transfer Credit and Credit Elsewhere”, “Course Information”,
“Grades”, “End of Session Data”, “Degree Requirements Met”, “Honours, Scholarships
and Awards” and “Special Notes” data blocks should be organized by division. The
divisions should be arranged in the chronological order of first registration34
. To
promote divisional identity, the team recommends that divisional logos and banners
be used to highlight the beginning of each divisional section.
The “Student Identification” data block should begin the main body of the transcript.
This should then be followed by the “Issued To” data block, which should be printed
on the page so as to allow for the use of a window envelope.
All degree conferral information (including date conferred and, if applicable, the level
of achievement, e.g. Distinction) should appear at the beginning of the transcript
data (above any and all divisional results detail).
34
When a student begins his or her enrolment in two divisions at the same time, the divisions should be
ordered alphabetically.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 53
Additional degree information such as program, thesis title and supervisor, should
appear at the beginning of divisional data.
The “Order Number” and “Page Number” should not be visually perceived as part of
the transcript data.
DDDDooooccccuuuummmmeeeennnntttt PPPPaaaappppeeeerrrr
To promote the uniqueness of the transcript to the University, the team recommends:
1. that the paper used be unique (in order to reduce
the possibility that counterfeit documents could
be produced) and of very high quality;
2. that a blue tint field be part of the paper design
(the blue tint should be light enough so as not
to overwhelm the text when printed and when
the transcript is photocopied);
3. that the text of verification letters and divisional
transcript data be printed on the blue field;
4. that an institutionally significant and
recognizable image (which is not division-
specific) be embedded in the blue field (e.g.
Convocation Hall, Hart House, etc.);
5. that the University crest, name and address be
pre-printed on the paper on a white field across the top of the paper;
and
6. that the Enrolment History be printed on a white field to the left of the blue field
and below the University crest.
C) The Guide
The team, in its deliberation, was mindful of the fact that good design reduces the
demand for explanation. Towards that end, it recommends that full text, as opposed
to codes and abbreviations, be used on transcripts as much as possible. A guide will still
be necessary for the purpose of interpreting unavoidable use of codes, abbreviations
and grading scales. Confidence in the authenticity of transcripts can be promoted by
the inclusion of pertinent information in the guide.
Figure 4-G – Paper
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 54 Student Information Systems
Converting the record of a student whose academic participation involves more than
one grading scale to a common scale is impractical. The guide should be designed to
explain such records.
CCCCoooonnnntttteeeexxxxtttt----SSSSeeeennnnssssiiiittttiiiivvvveeee GGGGuuuuiiiiddddeeee
Because of the existence of numerous grading scales, abbreviations and codes in the
University system, the production of a standardized guide would be complex and
cumbersome. The team, therefore, recommends that a context-sensitive guide be
designed. The guide should include information relevant only to the data printed on
the document (e.g. there is no need to provide information about grading and
programs in the School of Graduate Studies, when the document includes
information only about a student’s participation in an undergraduate program in
Physical & Health Education).
In addition, a more comprehensive guide should be made available on-line.
The system should be programmed to produce a guide only when a document
consisting of course grades (i.e. traditional transcript data) is requested. Other
documents, such as verification letters, would not normally require the production of
a guide.
To promote confidence in the authenticity of a transcript, the guide should include a
description of the seal. It should also describe the envelope and its treatment;
indicating the distinction between those sent directly to end-users from those sent
through the hands of the clients (students). A portrayal of the treatment of self-
addressed envelopes provided by students or end-users should also be included.
The team recommends that a single phone number be established for end-users in
order to assist them with interpretation of document data. This phone number (or
hotline) which end-users can call for clarification or verification, if they so choose
after receiving the document, should be printed on the document.
4.6 Fees
The team considered a number of options related to fees and the cost of producing
document
On one end of the spectrum, the team considered not charging any fee for documents.
Here, the primary concern was that this might lead to frivolous requests for documents.
With this in mind, the team examined the experiences of two institutions (Memorial
University of Newfoundland and the University of Wisconsin) that recently eliminated a
fee for transcripts. Both institutions reported that the change did not result in an increase
in the number of requests.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 55
Memorial University, at one time, charged a fee and decided that the cost of collecting
the fee, plus the goodwill bestowed by issuing free transcripts, outweighed the revenue
from a transcript fee.
The University of Wisconsin reported that transcript requests averaged 3 to 4 per student.
However, they do require students to provide an addressed and stamped envelope.
Wisconsin operates a centralized transcript office and issues a consolidated transcript.
Our research indicated that at many institutions the transcript fee is discounted for
additional copies ordered at the same time. However, the team concluded there is little or
no saving in producing additional copies of documents if all copies are produced from a
computerized record system as originals. (i.e. as opposed to photocopies of a master
document).
If a fee is to be charged it might be a specific fee for each transcript (the University’s
current practice), or a per student flat fee might be part of a general incidental fee and
transcripts themselves are issued without charge.
With respect to charging an incidental fee to students and eliminating the per document
fee, several concerns were raised. In particular, the team noted that introduction of this
sort of fee would be politically sensitive among student leaders and might lead to
concerns about how equitable the system would be between students and alumni (i.e.
why would students pay for document production for alumni?). In addition, while this
would probably have a positive effect on alumni relations, the opposite question of
whether graduates (who are more likely to be able to afford paying the per document fee)
should be supporting the cost of student transcripts would also be raised. Finally, the team
also noted that there are practical difficulties in determining exactly when a student
becomes an alumnus/a.
If a fee is to be charged, we believe all of the following methods of payment should be
acceptable: charge to student fee account as recommended by the Student Accounts
Receivable (StAR) BPR team (this would be the most convenient method for all current
students), credit cards, debit cards, as well as cheques, money orders, and cash (the latter
only if the client chooses to pick up his or her transcript at the StAR office (see Issuing
Documents on page 42).
Because the team anticipates that the need for transcripts and production costs will go
down with the new system, a financial analysis may be necessary to determine an
appropriate transcript fee.
We examined different payment options on the basis of the following criteria:
A. the cost of collecting the fee;
B. equity among current and former students;
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 56 Student Information Systems
C. meeting operating costs (including predictability of cost vs. revenue);
D. student relations;
and
E. alumni/ae relations.
In the end, the team concluded that a per document fee (as in current practice) is the
most viable option for the University. The other options considered ranged from
providing free documents to charging a sessional incidental fee to students or a
“graduation” (or “exit”) fee.
Therefore, the team recommends that the University continue charging for document
issuance and production on a per document basis.
A decision on the level of the fee should be left to the implementation phase, including
the first-copy cost, with a recommendation to do a cost analysis. Additional copies could
be offered at a lower price if the cost analysis supports it. The team noted that while some
clients complained about paying anything for a transcript (i.e. transcripts should be free),
among others, there was general acceptance that some sort of fee would be charged.
Notwithstanding this, the team recommends that the fee charged should cover the costs
of document request, production and distribution only (i.e. document production, on an
institutional level, should be revenue neutral).
The team also recommends that there not be an additional fee for rush service. It is much
better to simply provide premium service in those instances where it is required.
Nonetheless, if special delivery service is requested, the client should pay that cost.
Similarly, when specialized letters are required the client should expect to pay a suitable
fee, similar to that for a transcript.
4.7 Old Paper Records
At present, the Permanent Record System, which is used by Arts & Science, the School of
Graduate Studies, Applied Science & Engineering and the U of T at Scarborough has
complete machine readable data for years since 1987.
The School of Graduate Studies has transcribed data from paper records for students who
were registered when the PRS was introduced in 1987 or subsequently. Data is also
transcribed for students who were registered before 1987 and are now resuming their
studies.
It is our conclusion that there should be no general undertaking to transcribe
information on paper records, microfilm or microfiche, into an automated transcript
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 57
system. The format of earlier academic standing information is often quite different from
current course and grade data.
When a transcript request received by the central office requires the production of a
document based upon archival data (held by the division) the transcript should be routed
to the division which holds the paper records. The transcript can be produced on
divisional forms and issued by the division. This practice will wither away as time passes.
If a client requires a transcript based on paper records from more than one division, we
suggest that the central office co-ordinate issuance of the document.
In some cases, it may be desirable for a division to simply move all old archival records to
the central production facility. In these cases, the divisions must acknowledge that their
special knowledge and expertise about the archival records must also be transferred and
that there must be an ongoing commitment to provide relevant historical program and
grading practices information when necessary.
Therefore, the team recommends that divisions be given the option of:
1. retaining archival records and continuing to issue transcripts based on those
records (on the understanding that in some cases, the institutional production
facility may coordinate the request if multiple registrations are involved);
or,
2. transferring old archival records to the central production facility (with the
understanding that their special knowledge and expertise about the archival
records must also be transferred).
We believe that the number of document requests is dramatically higher for current
students and recently-enrolled students and recent alumni. See the graph in Appendix 7.5
(page 67) which summarizes certifications of degree issued in 1997 by the Office of
Statistics, Records and Convocation.
The team noted that some divisions continue to issue transcripts for programs that are no
longer offered at the University of Toronto (e.g. undergraduate forestry, bachelor of social
work, diploma programs in business, etc.). The team recommends that records for
programs no longer offered by the University, along with all relevant program and
grading practices information, expertise and special knowledge should be transferred to
the relevant campus production facility and transcripts based upon those records should
be issued from that office.
4.8 Old Electronic Records
While a great deal of older electronic data will be available in the new student record
system, it will remain in its current state—grade values will not be converted to be
comparable to current practice and program requirements are time sensitive. In effect,
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 58 Student Information Systems
end-of-term student record data is frozen and is never changed except in rare
circumstances.
The team recommends that the output of older electronic records be accompanied by a
context sensitive guide (see The Guide on page 52) for the older data. For example, while
the academic record of some students might be subject to a single set of program
requirements and grading scales, other students’ records might span many years and a
number of changes in program requirements and grading practices. In the case of the
second set of students, a guide printed with a document would help the end-user make
sense of the data with respect to the time at which the data was created.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 59
5. Implementation
The University is a community defined
by the individual characteristics of each
division and its environment
5.1 Institutional Culture
he team, throughout its work, frequently returned to issues related to institutional
culture and divisional identity and autonomy within the University of Toronto.
The University is a community defined by the individual characteristics of each
division and its environment. Implementing the new design will require attention to the
institutional culture.
The team discussed several issues that reflect varying degrees of change to time-honoured
practices in the transcript process from the point of view of students ordering transcripts
and their issuance.
For the divisions currently using the Permanent Record System (Faculty of Arts & Science,
Applied Science & Engineering, School of Graduate Studies and the University of Toronto
at Scarborough), minimal changes will be made. Transcript production will not change
drastically since transcripts for the most part are printed at the facility in the McLennan
Physical Laboratories building. The proposal to have three centres for transcript
production: St. George, Scarborough and Mississauga will have some impact.
The issuance of transcripts will undergo some changes depending on the method of
delivery: mail, courier, fax, pick up, email, Web access, EDI. Students’ preferences will be
the driving force in how transcripts will be delivered to the recipients.
For many divisions, automation will have a major impact in both the production and
issuance of transcripts. Several divisions (including the Faculty of Medicine and Faculty of
Law) that already have their own internal databases which produce transcripts will need
to adjust to a new system. The remaining divisions currently provide either the “patchy”
transcript which is composed of affixing transcript labels to cardboard stock then
photocopying the “transcript card” or “typing” a transcript on letterhead from
T
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 60 Student Information Systems
information in student records maintained at the division. The transcript process will be
greatly streamlined and efficient for those divisions currently involved in the “manual”
production of transcripts.
The team recognizes the importance of divisional representation on the consolidated
transcript. With this in mind, the re-design provides for the following:
1. Context-sensitive divisional output (including divisional banners and logos) on
the transcript will reflect students’ participation in divisions.
2. Allowing for variations on transcript detail for each division while defining key
and consistent elements across all divisions. At present, there are many details that
are common to all divisional transcripts (e.g. course titles and grades). However,
there are other details that are currently entered “manually”, or not recorded at all
(e.g., scholarships and awards).
3. The transcript is a portion of the academic record which is ultimately forwarded to
end-users for their use. Transcripts are also requested by students for their own use.
The academic record (stored on the student database or maintained in paper files)
reflects the total academic history. It is crucial that the transcript display this
information in a manner which, while being complete and accurate, does not
disadvantage clients.
and,
4. The provision of enrolment history will offer a brief synopsis of students’
complete participation in any division at the University. Information about
detailed participation and academic results in each division will provide a complete
record of students’ involvement.
5.2 Focus on Client Need
The team recognizes the importance of the transcript as an assessment of academic
performance. Completeness, accuracy and data integrity are crucial to the document’s
integrity and, in turn, affect the image and reputation of the University. As an historical
record of students’ participation in the University, these documents play an important
role for clients in gaining employment and admission to second entry and graduate
programs, and in obtaining professional certification. By offering many options to
request documents, a variety of delivery mechanisms, and a number of locations at which
documents may be picked up, the University will be responsive to clients’ and end-users’
needs. Consistency in the presentation of transcript details will provide a comprehensive
and complete academic reflection of performance that is easy to read and interpret by
recipients of the document.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 61
5.3 Impact on the Community
The transcript is viewed as an important document that could “make or break”
relationships, and possibly, future plans and career development. Clients will request
transcripts for admission purposes, scholarship assessment, and confirmation of degree
conferral (either for employment or for professional certification). End-users expect to
receive a complete and accurate student record. Clients expect a variety of methods to
order transcripts and fast, efficient delivery of their transcripts to the required recipients.
Requests for other documents in the spectrum provide clients with confirmation to end-
users that will assist students in continuing the pursuit of their academic and career goals.
The “document” is more than a piece of paper that reports a student’s academic grades—it
is a statement about the student, his or her instructors, the quality of life as a student at
the University of Toronto, and the institution itself.
With this in mind, the team has re-designed the documents request and issuance process
at the University of Toronto—always focusing on the client and the institution’s role and
importance to the community.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 62 Student Information Systems
6. Other Issues
uring the course of the team’s work, it was determined that a number of other
issues should be examined by the University. In addition to the
recommendations made above, the following are recommendations which are
outside the explicit scope of the team. However, because they in some way relate to issues
directly examined by the team, it is strongly felt that they are equally deserving of
attention in this report.
6.1 Other Recommendations
1. Given that University sanctioned academic honours, scholarships and awards (i.e.
merit based awards) are to be included on transcripts, the team recommends that
the University review the list of awards to ensure that those that are merit based
are clearly identified as such (i.e. the names of some scholarships and academic
honours may give the impression that they are awards based solely on financial
need).
2. The team noted that several divisions report on transcripts the fact that a
student’s academic results in a course are deferred (e.g. pending a deferred exam)
and then later record the result without amending the earlier entry. In other
cases, the team noted that some divisions mark grades with an asterisk when the
grade has been amended.
It was the general feeling of the team that these practices might give an end-user
a wrong perception about the student which, in turn, might affect how the
student’s application is judged. The team recommends that when a student’s grade
is amended as a result of a review or resolution of a deferral, there should be no
special mention of these facts on a transcript.
3. Documents, artwork, portfolio submissions, letters of recommendation and other
hard copy information provided to the University which ultimately become part
of a student’s academic record should be scanned and stored within the SRS. In
turn, any or all of this record data could be output as part of documentation issued
by the University.
4. For the convenience of both clients and University staff members, when a
University of Toronto student’s academic record and/or degrees from another
institution are assessed by the Comparative Education Service, this data should be
included in the student’s University academic record.
D
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 63
7. Appendices
7.1 Walkthrough Interviews
Name(s) Department/Division/Organization Date
Hung Sun Chan
Rosemary Cameron
Admissions & Awards January 21, 1998
Bev Nicholson
Carol Allen
Wendy Loat
Admissions & Awards January 14, 1998
Barbara McCann
†
Applied Science & Engineering January 20, 1998
Pat Telford Architecture January 22, 1998
George Altmeyer Arts & Science January 22, 1998
Elaine Ishibashi Arts & Science January 9, 1998
Mona Fanous
Kirstin Cirulis
Arts & Science January 8, 1998
Donna Crossan
Lynda Sellars
Dentistry January 12, 1998
Molly Schneeberg Dupont Canada Inc. January 27, 1998
Sarah Cherian Electrical & Computer Engineering
(Graduate)
January 6, 1998
Margaret Grisdale
Wanda Chin
Iona Mitchell
Emmanuel College / Theology January 16, 1998
Sharon Walton English (Graduate) January 7, 1998
Carolyn Johnston
†
Graduate Studies January 22, 1998
Joanne Jones Institute of Chartered Accountants January 22, 1998
Bonnie Croll
Celia Genua
Law January 15, 1998
Chris Wilhelm Management Studies January 7, 1998
Elmira Mun Management Studies January 15, 1998
Judy Irvine
Bill Gregg
Medicine January 21, 1998
Jeannie Wang
Nalayini Maheswaran
Music January 20, 1998
Paul Russell
Ruth Norton
Norma Bliss
New College January 15, 1998
†
Full team interview
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 64 Student Information Systems
Jamie Jones
*
Northern Telecom January 29, 1998
Sue Tripathi
Gail Donner
Nursing January 14.1998
Angie Jovanovic OISE/UT (Undergraduate) January 20, 1998
Merrylee Greenan
Sandra Parna
Vivien Hwang
Dorothy Hall
Sylvia Beilin
Pharmacy January 15, 1998
Merrily Stratten
Eleonora Agustino
Physical Education & Health January 15, 1998
Sherilyn Biason
Shelley MacLarty
Political Science (Graduate) January 14, 1998
Nancy Haggerty Ryerson Polytechnic University (Admissions) January 21, 1998
Karen McLeister
†
U of T at Scarborough January 26, 1998
Angie Ferrando Statistics, Records & Convocation January 19, 1998
Karel Swift University Registrar January 19, 1998
Susan MacDonald
Anna Warchulska
Victoria College January 21, 1998
Susan Salusbury
Kathryn Massey
York University (Admissions) January 23, 1998
7.2 Special Guests
Name(s) Topic Date
Mary Giamos Needs of Corporate End-users November 25, 1997
David Perry
Marie Gerrard
Overview of the new SRS November 25, 1997
7.3 Other End-Users Consulted
Organization
Federation Credentials Verification Service (FCVS) — a credentialing agency in the U.S.
Massachusetts Board of Medicine
Medical Board of California (Licensing Program)
Ontario Law School Application Service (OLSAS)
Ontario Medical School Application Service (OMSAS)
Ontario Secondary School Teachers Federation (OSSTF)
Ontario University Application Centre (OUAC)
Professional Engineers of Ontario (PEO)
Qualifications Evaluation Council of Ontario (QECO)
*
Interview conducted by telephone
†
Full team interview
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 65
7.4 Verification Letters
The University of Toronto produces an enormous number of verification letters each year
(in fact, it is probably not possible to compile reliable data about numbers). In addition to
this, various University offices complete a huge number of forms from third parties on
behalf of students (e.g. GO, Via Rail, Travel Cuts, insurance companies, scholarship fund
providers, Canada pension plan documents, varsity athletics authorizations, banks, credit
rating services, etc.).
The following is a catalog of frequently requested letters which are prepared and issued by
one large division. While different divisions around the University produce a wide array
of letters (many which are similar to those listed below as well as other types of letters),
this list is a good illustration of the number of types of letters that are currently produced,
in large numbers, by the University. The Colleges within the Faculty of Arts & Science
also produce a number of different types of letters.
1. Projected Expenses – Non-Visa Students
2. Projected Expenses – Visa Students
3. Confirmation of Acceptance and Pre-Registration
4. Confirmation of Pre-Registration
5. Confirmation of Current Registration for Full-Time Students (All Years)
6. Confirmation of Current Registration for Part-Time Students (First Year)
7. Confirmation of Current Registration for Part-Time Students (2nd, 3rd, and 4th Year)
8. Confirmation of Current Registration and Fee Payment – Visa Student
9. Confirmation of Current Registration and Fee Payment – Non-Visa Student
10. Confirmation of Registration in a Past Session
11. Confirmation of Past Registration and Fee Payment
12. Confirmation of Past Registration and Expenses Incurred – Non-Visa Student
13. Confirmation of Past Registration and Expenses Incurred – Visa Student
14. Confirmation of Current Registration and Expected Expenses – Visa Student
15. Confirmation of Pre-Registration – First Year Visa Student
16. Confirmation of Current Registration and Expected Expenses – Non-Visa Student
17. Confirmation of Past Registration, Expected Registration in Next Session, & Expected
Expenses – Visa Student
18. Confirmation of Past Registration, Expected Registration in Next Session, & Expected
Expenses – Non-Visa Student
19. Confirmation of Past Registration, Pre-Registration. & Expected Expenses for the Next
Session – Visa Student
20. Confirmation of Past Registration, Pre-Registration. & Expected Expenses for the Next
Session – Non-Visa Student
21. Confirmation of Current Registration & Eligibility for Registration in Next Session,
Pending Results of Exams
22. Confirmation of Current Registration, Pre-Registration, Eligibility to Proceed on
Successful Completion of Current Year
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 66 Student Information Systems
23. Confirmation of Past Registration, Pre-Registration, Eligibility to Proceed Pending
Successful Completion of Current Year
24. Confirmation of Past Registration, Pre-Registration, Eligibility to Proceed to the Next
Session
25. Confirmation of Past Registration and Expected Registration in the Next Session
26. Confirmation of Admission – First Year Student
27. Successful Completion of Past Session, Pre-Registration, Eligibility to Proceed to the
Next Session
28. Confirmation of Past Registration, Current Summer Registration, and Pre-Registration
in the Coming Session
29. Confirmation of Current Registration and Expected Graduation for U.S. Visa
Application
30. Confirmation of Registration in Past Session and Expected Graduation
31. Successful Completion of Degree Requirements & Expected Graduation
32. Confirmation of Graduation and Dates of Attendance
33. Confirmation of Graduation
34. Confirmation of Withdrawal – With or Without Penalty
35. Hours of Practical Experience
36. Confirmation of Past Sessions and Present Registration
37. Special Student Letter
38. Jury Duty Letter
39. Greek Letter
40. Iran Letter
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 67
7.5 Number of Degree Certifications by Year of Graduation
In 1997 the Office of Statistics, Records & Convocation issued about 550 “degree
certification” forms to University of Toronto graduates. The graph shows the cumulative
per cent of confirmations issued for graduates from a particular year or earlier. For
example, about 8% of certifications issued in 1997 were to confirm graduations in 1966 or
earlier; about 27% were for graduations in 1980 or earlier. Or, looking at it from the
opposite perspective, 73% of certifications were for 1980 or later, 40% were for 1992 or
later.
The graph reflects only actual degree certification forms issued. It does not include the
many degree certifications that are indicated directly on forms supplied by employers.
Figure 7-A – Degree Certifications (1997)
DDDDeeeeggggrrrreeeeeeee CCCCeeeerrrrttttiiiiffffiiiiccccaaaattttiiiioooonnnnssss IIIIssssssssuuuueeeedddd iiiinnnn 1111999999997777
((((bbbbyyyy tttthhhheeee OOOOffffffffiiiicccceeee ooooffff SSSSttttaaaattttiiiissssttttiiiiccccssss,,,, RRRReeeeccccoooorrrrddddssss &&&& CCCCoooonnnnvvvvooooccccaaaattttiiiioooonnnn))))
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
19
26
19
28
19
30
19
32
19
34
19
36
19
38
19
40
19
42
19
44
19
46
19
48
19
50
19
52
19
54
19
56
19
58
19
60
19
62
19
64
19
66
19
68
19
70
19
72
19
74
19
76
19
78
19
80
19
82
19
84
19
86
19
88
19
90
19
92
19
94
19
96
YYYYeeeeaaaarrrr
CCCCuuuu
mmmmuuuu
llllaaaattttiiiivvvveeee PPPP
eeeerrrrcccceeeennnn
tttt
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 68 Student Information Systems
7.6 Client Surveys
Three different surveys were distributed to clients: one survey for those who have recently
participated in the transcript request process (distributed by mail), a second survey for
those who were currently in the process of ordering transcripts (distributed at the time a
request was made), and one general survey (distributed electronically). As an incentive to
improve response rates on the surveys, several divisions offered free transcripts in return
for a client’s participation in the survey. Unfortunately this survey was conducted during
the recent strike by Canada Post and, apart from just under a dozen individuals who
responded via electronic means, only those clients able to come in person could be
questioned.
Although the responses are not summarized here, the comments and advice received
from clients were incorporated into the team’s re-design.
The questions asked in each survey are listed here.
Survey 1 – Recent Participants in the Process
55 Arts & Science Respondents (A&S)
30 Applied Science & Engineering Respondents (APSC)
3 Medicine Respondents (MED)
45 School of Graduate Studies Respondents (SGS)
133 Total Respondents
How did you know where to place your transcript / letter request?
AAAA&&&&SSSS AAAAPPPPSSSSCCCC MMMMEEEEDDDD SSSSGGGGSSSS
Home office / “registrar” 11115555 6666 0000 11113333
Told by another office or general info line 7777 2222 1111 7777
Posted information 4444 0000 0000 0000
Asked a student / friend / Word of mouth 7777 7777 0000 3333
Told by professor 0000 1111 0000 0000
Info desk off campus 0000 1111 0000 0000
“Asked” 0000 0000 0000 1111
Experience 11113333 6666 2222 8888
Calendar / handbook / directory 1111 1111 0000 5555
Earlier visit to office 0000 0000 0000 2222
Assumed / guessed 1111 0000 0000 2222
Miscellaneous 2222 1111 0000 3333
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 69
Why did you order the transcript / letter?
AAAA
&&&&
SSSS
AAAA
PPPPSSSSCCCC
MMMM
EEEEDDDD
SSSSGGGG
SSSS
Scholarship / grant / fellowship application 2222
0000
1111
11115555
Non-specific application 3333
2222
0000
4444
Application to professional / another school / further studies 44440000
11110000
2222
11113333
work exchange / internship 0000
7777
0000
0000
‘To update copy in department file ’ 0000
0000
0000
1111
Personal / R sum 1111
1111
0000
2222
Employment 4444
8888
0000
11110000
professional certification 4444
0000
0000
2222
international student card 0000
1111
0000
0000
visa for immigration elsewhere 0000
1111
0000
0000
exemption in another program 1111
0000
0000
0000
other 1111 0000 0000 0000
When ordering, did you have any questions or concerns?
YYYYEEEESSSS NNNNOOOO ((((bbbbllllaaaannnnkkkk))))
A&S 11115555 44440000 0000
APSC 5555 22225555 0000
MED 0000 3333 0000
SGS 11112222 33332222 1111
If yes, please comment
AAAA&&&&SSSS AAAAPPPPSSSSCCCC MMMMEEEEDDDD SSSSGGGGSSSS
Processing or delivery time 6666 2222 0000 5555
Charges for extra copies 2222 0000 0000 1111
Wanted courier option 0000 0000 0000 1111
Wanted transcript in a sealed envelope 0000 0000 0000 3333
Needed a letter confirming graduation, before convocation 0000 0000 0000 1111
Wants non-official transcripts for personal records 0000 0000 0000 1111
Inconvenience of getting downtown to order 0000 1111 0000 0000
Is hand delivery to PEO
35
OK? 0000 1111 0000 0000
Type of info included on transcript 0000 1111 0000 0000
Postal strike 3333 1111 0000 0000
How are grade updates handled? 1111 0000 0000 0000
Uncertain if documents are delivered sealed 3333 0000 0000 0000
Is SES
36
accepted by other universities? 1111 0000 0000 0000
35
Professional Engineers of Ontario
36
Sealed Envelope with Stamp
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 70 Student Information Systems
Did the transcript or letter provide all the information needed?
YYYYEEEESSSS
NNNN
OOOO
((((bbbb
llllaaaannnn
kkkk))))
A&S 44447777
6666
2222
APSC 22226666
1111
3333
MED 3333
0000
0000
SGS 44441111
2222
2222
Comments:
• Wants Instructors ’ names, comprehensives
• All courses taken as a grad student were included in one. Would have preferred separate sections for different programs
• End-user wanted additional info
• Did not include current courses / complete history
• Needed addressing to a particular institution
• Needed courses and grades only
• More detailed course titles / course descriptions
Was the method of ordering convenient for you?
YYYYEEEESSSS NNNNOOOO ((((bbbbllllaaaannnnkkkk))))
A&S 44443333 11112222 0000
APSC 22225555 5555 0000
MED 2222 1111 0000
SGS 33334444 7777 4444
Comments:
• Usual processing time is too long
• Prefer ordering by other means (see below)
• Prefer payment by visa, etc.
• Would like office to open earlier
• Getting request forms
• Coming in from a distance to order (coming in again to pick up)
• Misplaced order
• Favourable comments
Note: simple preferences for other means of ordering, expressed in the next question,
have not been included here.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 71
What other means of ordering would you like to see? Please check all that apply
AAAA
&&&&
SSSS
AAAA
PPPPSSSSCCCC
MMMM
EEEEDDDD
SSSSGGGG
SSSS
Web 33331111
11118888
3333
22225555
Fax 33337777
9999
2222
22224444
Email 33336666
22224444
3333
33333333
Phone 33335555
11116666
3333
22222222
From other campus locations 11113333
4444
1111
7777
other (please specify)
(credit card; one or more offices for all transcripts from any department )
1111
1111
0000
0000
Was the fee reasonable?
YYYYEEEESSSS
NNNN
OOOO
((((bbbb
llllaaaannnn
kkkk))))
A&S 33339999
11116666
0000
APSC 11114444 11114444 2222
MED 1111 1111 1111
SGS 22227777 11110000 8888
Was the time required to process your request reasonable?
YYYYEEEESSSS NNNNOOOO ((((bbbbllllaaaannnnkkkk))))
A&S 55551111 4444 0000
APSC 11118888 9999 3333
MED 2222 0000 1111
SGS 33334444 4444 7777
Do you believe our service to students or alumni with respect to transcripts or
letters could be improved?
YYYYEEEESSSS NNNNOOOO ((((bbbbllllaaaannnnkkkk))))
A&S 22222222 22226666 7777
APSC 11117777 9999 4444
MED 1111 0000 2222
SGS 22221111 11113333 11111111
Please comment:
(General concerns already indicated above – phone orders, timeliness, cost etc. are not
repeated here)
SGS
• Use just the name and year of graduation. After a few years people forget student numbers.
• For my purposes it was immaterial whether a course was required or optional. But instructors ’ names and possibly ‘number of
units ’ corresponding to each course would not harm. Also comprehensive exams.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 72 Student Information Systems
• If close to NSERC application it takes about 10 days which is too much.
• Pay by credit card. (2 )
• Print transcript on the spot.
• Reduced rate for additional copies. (3)
• McGill no longer charges for transcripts.
• Make yourselves known more — Internet, printed matter etc.
• Free access to what is in the transcripts sent out.
• The service is fine as it is. Please don’t change it in any way. I only wish that the entire University was run as efficiently.
APSC
• Fax to end-user
• Pay by credit card
• Pay by Internet
• Reduced rate for multiple orders
• Reduced rate for subsequent orders
• Particular concern over timeliness related to job application deadlines (2)
• Waive the fee for graduate school application
• If order form is lost it ’s hard to get the transcript.
• Would be prepared to pay a rush charge
• Favourable comments (3)
• System is lacking
• Make students aware that unofficial transcripts are available and may be acceptable
A&S
• Processing time (3)
• Favourable comments (9)
• Free transcripts for personal use
• Special rates to those applying to graduate school
• Provide some number of transcripts free
• Smaller charge for pickup
• Fax to end-users
• Immediate access to other divisions
• Advertise in U of T magazine for alumni
• Eliminate special request form
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 73
Survey 2 – Current Participants in the Process
50 Arts & Science Respondents (A&S)
14 Applied Science & Engineering Respondents (APSC)
44 School of Graduate Studies Respondents (SGS)
108 Total Respondents
Have you ever ordered a transcript before?
YYYYEEEESSSS
NNNN
OOOO
A&S 33331111
11119999
APSC 11110000 4444
SGS 33332222 11112222
Are you a currently registered student?
YYYYEEEESSSS NNNNOOOO
A&S 22229999 22221111
APSC 11110000 4444
SGS 22220000 22224444
What do you expect to see on a transcript?
CCCCoooouuuurrrrsssseeeessss &&&&
GGGGrrrraaaaddddeeeessss
RRRReeeeccccoooorrrrdddd ooooffff
RRRReeeeggggiiiissssttttrrrraaaattttiiiioooonnnn
MMMMiiiisssscccc.... ////
BBBBllllaaaannnnkkkk
A&S 44447777 2222 1111
APSC 11111111 1111 2222
SGS 44442222 2222 0000
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 74 Student Information Systems
What is the transcript needed for?
AAAA
&&&&
SSSS
AAAA
PPPPSSSSCCCC
SSSSGGGG
SSSS
Scholarship / grant / fellowship application 1111
1111
6666
Non-specific application 0000
1111
0000
Application to professional / another / grad school 33335555
5555
22223333
work exchange / internship 0000
2222
0000
visiting student, send to home institution 3333
0000
0000
Personal / resume 1111
0000
3333
Employment (incl. academic employment) 7777
6666
11114444
Professional certification (e.g. CPA exam) 1111
0000
2222
Visa for immigration elsewhere 0000
1111
0000
Ontario university application centre 0000
1111
0000
Othe r 1111
0000
1111
How did you find out where to come?
AAAA&&&&SSSS AAAAPPPPSSSSCCCC SSSSGGGGSSSS
Home office / “registrar” 11118888 2222 11110000
Told by another office or general info line 7777 1111 7777
Posted information 1111 0000 1111
Word of mouth 9999 2222 5555
Professor 1111 0000 0000
Trial & error 0000 0000 1111
Experience 2222 1111 8888
Calendar / handbook / directory 3333 2222 5555
Internet 1111 1111 0000
Assumed / guessed / observation / ‘common knowledge’ 1111 2222 5555
How much time have you allowed for delivery of the transcript?
AAAA&&&&SSSS AAAAPPPPSSSSCCCC SSSSGGGGSSSS
“ASAP” 0000 2222 1111
1 day 1111 1111 1111
2 days 2222 0000 4444
3 — 4 days 9999 3333 9999
1 week / 5 days 22224444 4444 11114444
>1 — 2 weeks 9999 1111 8888
> 2 weeks (up to 4 weeks) 3333 1111 6666
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 75
In your opinion what is the best way to order a transcript?
AAAA
&&&&
SSSS
AAAA
PPPPSSSSCCCC
SSSSGGGG
SSSS
Pre-Pay 1111
0000
0000
In Person 11115555
1111
11115555
‘By Form’ 0000
1111
0000
Mail 0000
1111
4444
Phone 11110000
2222
11113333
Fax 2222
0000
2222
As Is 11110000
3333
6666
Internet 4444
3333
8888
From Home Division 2222
1111
0000
Ontario Application Centr e 3333
0000
0000
Send Out Automatically 1111
0000
0000
“By Computer” (Kiosk?) 1111 0000 1111
Pick Up 2222 0000 0000
How important is it for you to see your transcript information before deciding to
order it?
AAAA&&&&SSSS AAAAPPPPSSSSCCCC SSSSGGGGSSSS
Not 22220000 8888 22225555
(because marks are already known, e.g. on statement) 4444 2222 4444
Slight / not very 11115555 1111 8888
Somewhat (or some desired detail mentioned) 4444 1111 2222
“important” / very 8888 3333 9999
Want to access unofficial grades anytime, free 1111 0000 0000
When a transcript has been requested for a party other than yourself, do you want
to have confirmation it was sent?
YYYYEEEESSSS NNNNOOOO
A&S 44446666 4444
APSC 11113333 1111
SGS 33339999 5555
Do you think the charge for the transcript reasonable?
YYYYEEEESSSS NNNNOOOO
A&S 33333333 11117777
APSC 4444 11110000
SGS 22226666 11118888
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 76 Student Information Systems
How would you prefer to pay for the transcript(s)?
AAAA
&&&&
SSSS
AAAA
PPPPSSSSCCCC
SSSSGGGG
SSSS
Cash 22226666
8888
22221111
Cheque 4444
2222
4444
Credit Card 11116666
1111
11112222
Debit Card 3333
0000
1111
Interac 3333
0000
3333
Internet 0000
0000
1111
After Confirmation Of Timely Delivery 0000
0000
1111
How much detail would you like to see? (Courses, Courses and grades, Special
credits, Full or part-time status, Progress towards your degree, Non-academic
information of some kind, Other (please specify).
AAAA&&&&SSSS AAAAPPPPSSSSCCCC SSSSGGGGSSSS
Courses 11119999 8888 11112222
Courses and grades 44447777 11113333 44441111
Special credits 11119999 5555 11119999
Full or part-time status 22229999 9999 22221111
Progress towards your degree 22221111 4444 11113333
Non-academic information of some kind 8888 4444 5555
Other (please specify) 2222 0000 3333
A&S
• Final exam mark for each course so we don ’t have to order a copy of final.
• Course description.
SGS
• In the PhD program, whether I have passed the general and special field exams and if that was with distinction. Also, name of
supervisor, standing in dept.
• Courses in progress. (2)
• Prefer to have a choice between detail on last degree only and on all degrees.
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 77
Survey 3 –General Distribution
(Posted Electronically and Forwarded to Alumni37
)
12 Respondents
Have you ever ordered a letter or transcript? If so, why?
• Scholarships, Awards, etc. 3
• Graduate S chool, etc. 2
• Internship 1
• Employment 5
• R sum 1
What do you expect to get?
• A one page summary of the courses I have taken and the grades I received in each. Basically a listing of my academic history at
U of T up to the date of request. A document very similar to the transcript sent at the end of each semester (if applicable), or
year, with some form of authenticity, (e.g., seal, registrar ’s signature, etc.)
• An official document showing courses taken, letter and/or numerical grades, class averages, dates courses were taken (so that
the reader can tell how many courses were taken in each year) and awards received from the University / college). (This is what
I wish I would get when I order a transcript, not what I expect to get.)
• A listing of all academic marks for courses taken at U of T
• Some places require that the transcript be directly sent to them, so I get nothing. Otherwise, I get (constantly) a most
up -to -date transcript for myself. This way, I can photocopy them and sent them in with applications which allow this.
• Transcript: a piece of paper that lists courses with letter and numeric grades and class average. Letter: not sure what it is.
• Gee, I ’d like to get my transcript in a brief period of time.
• Prompt service.
• For a transcript, I expect to get a piece of paper with a listing of my grades and courses.
• A record of my work completed and current status.
Would you like to see it before it goes out?
• Yes 12
• No 0
Do you know how to get a transcript?
• Divisional office 9
• Will ask someone 1
37
Unfortunately, we did not receive any responses from alumni/ae to this particular survey. However, a large
number of respondents to the other 2 surveys are alumni/ae.
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 78 Student Information Systems
How would you like to order these documents?
• In person 4
• Phone 4
• Fax 3
• Internet 7
At what points in your life do you think you will need a transcript?
• Scholarship, awards etc. 2
• Application to another school / program 5
• Employment 8
Do you have any comments about the process?
• Cost (including cost for extra copies) 3
• Speed 3
• Produce an automatic transcript faster/easier 2
• Automatic transcripts 1
• Dropped courses due to petitions remain
on the record 1
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 79
7.7 Document Mock-ups
Figure 7-B – Consolidated Transcript (2 divisions)
Page 1 of 5
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12Issued to: The University of Unknown
123 Real Street, Rm. 45Toronto, ON A1A 1A1
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE THREE YEAR CONFERRED – JUNE 1992GRADUATED WITH DISTINCTIONHONOURS BACHELOR OF SCIENCE COMPLETED – WINTER 1996
1989 Fall – University of Toronto Scholars Program – National Scholarship
Faculty of Arts and Science
1992 Winter – Major Program in Chemistry completed1996 Winter – Specialist Program in Chemistry completed1996 Winter – Minor Program in Biology completed
1990 Winter – Dean’s Honours List1992 Winter – Dean’s Honours List1992 Winter – Dupont Chemistry Award1996 Winter – Dean’s Honours List1996 Winter – Graduation Prize in Chemistry
BASIS OF ADMISSION: ONTARIO UNIVERSITYCRS CODE TITLE WGT GRD FNCTBIO1**Y Transfer Credit
McMaster University1.00 CR
HIS1**Y Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
HUM2**Y Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
PHL2**Y Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
SOC101Y5 Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
Credits earned: 5.00
1989 FALL – ERINDALE COLLEGECRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTANT100Y5 Introduction to Anthropology 1.00 IPRBIO250Y5 Cell and Molecular 1.00 IPRPHL200Y5 Ancient Philosophy 1.00 IPRPSY100Y5 Introductory Psychology 1.00 IPRSOC200Y5 Introduction to Social Research 1.00 IPR
Credits earned: 0.00
------------------------------------------------------ end of page --------------------------------------------------------
ENROLMENT HISTORY
1989-90 Faculty of Arts andScience (Degree)
1990-91 Faculty of AppliedScience and Engineering (Degree)
1991-92 Faculty of Arts andScience (Degree), B.SC. 3-YearConferred, June 1992
1994-96 Faculty of Arts andScience (Degree), B.SC. 4-YearRequirements Met
1997-98 Faculty of AppliedScience and Engineering (Degree)
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 80 Student Information Systems
Page 2 of 5
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12
1990 WINTER – ERINDALE COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.88 ANNUAL GPA: 3.88 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.88STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTANT100Y5 Introduction to Anthropology 1.00 8 5 A CBIO250Y5 Cell and Molecular 1.00 8 9 A C-PHL200Y5 Ancient Philosophy 1.00 8 0 A- B-PSY100Y5 Introductory Psychology 1.00 9 0 A+ C+SOC200Y5 Introduction to Social Research 1.00 8 4 A D+
Credits earned: 5.00
1990 SUMMER – ERINDALE COLLEGECRS CODE TITLE WGT GRD FNCTANT203Y5 Letter of permission
University of Western Ontario1.00 CR
Credits earned: 1.00
1991 FALL – NEW COLLEGECRS CODE TITLE WGT GRD FNCTCHM1**Y Transfer credit
Faculty of Applied Science andEngineering
1.00 CR
MAT1**Y Transfer creditFaculty of Applied Science andEngineeringCalculus
1.00 XTR
Credits earned: 1.00
1991 FALL – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: N/A CUMULATIVE GPA: N/ACRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTBIO260H1 Genetics 0.50 8 0 A- C-BIO301H1 Marine Biology 0.50 8 5 A DCHM217H1 Analytical Chemistry 0.50 9 2 A+ CCHM238Y1 Introduction to Inorganic 1.00 IPRCHM240Y1 Introduction to Organic 1.00 IPRCSC148H1 Introduction to Computer Science 0.50 IPR XTR
Credits earned: 1.50
------------------------------------------------------ end of page --------------------------------------------------------
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 81
Page 3 of 5
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12
1992 WINTER – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.88 ANNUAL GPA 3.87 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.87STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTBIO306H1 Inter-University Field Course 0.50 8 5 A DCHM229H1 Quantum Mechanics 0.50 8 1 A- D+CHM238Y1 Introduction to Inorganic 1.00 8 4 A- B-CHM240Y1 Introduction to Organic 1.00 8 9 A B-CSC148H1 Introduction to Computer Science 0.50 9 5 A+ B XTR
Credits earned: 3.00
1994 SUMMER – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.70 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.86STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTBIO320Y1 Introductory Biochemistry 1.00 8 0 A- BCHM338H1 Intermediate Organic Chemistry 0.50 WDR
Credits earned: 1.00
1995 FALL – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: N/A CUMULATIVE GPA: N/ACRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTCHM314Y1 Instrumental Methods of Analysis 1.00 IPRCHM327Y1 Thermodynamics & Mechanics 1.00 IPR XTRCHM338H1 Intermediate Inorganic Chemistry 0.50 7 9 B+ B-CHM348H1 Organic Reaction Mechanism 0.50 9 0 A+ DCHM428Y1 Research in Physical Chemistry 1.00 IPR
Credits earned: 1.00
1996 WINTER – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.95 ANNUAL GPA 3.88 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.86STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVGFNCTCHM314Y1 Instrumental Methods of Analysis 1.00 8 5 A CCHM327Y1 Thermodynamics & Mechanics 1.00 8 3 A- C- XTRCHM379H1 Biomolecular Chemistry 0.50 8 9 A+ D-CHM428Y1 Research in Physical Chemistry 1.00 8 8 A+ BCHM441H1 Applications of Spectroscopy 0.50 8 0 A- B+
Credits earned: 3.00
------------------------------------------------------ end of page --------------------------------------------------------
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 82 Student Information Systems
Page 4 of 5
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12
Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering
1990 Winter – Dean’s Honours List
BASIS OF ADMISSION: FACULTY OF ARTS AND SCIENCE
RETAINED GPA: 4.0SESSION CRS CODE TITLE WGT GRD FNCT1990 WinterPSY100Y5 Introductory Psychology
Faculty of Arts and Science1.00 CR
Credits earned: 1.00
1990 FALL – BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE –MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.80 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.86STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVGFNCTAPS100H1 Computer Programming 0.50 8 0 A- D-CIV100H1 Applied Mechanics 0.50 9 5 A+ DHPS182H1 History of Technology & Engineering 0.50 9 0 A+ CMAT186H1 Calculus I 0.50 8 6 A DCHE111H1 Chemistry I 0.50 7 9 B+ D-ENGLISH Facility 0.00 CR
Credits earned: 2.50
1991 WINTER – BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE –MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.80 ANNUAL GPA 3.80 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.83STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVGFNCTAPS181H1 Writing as Effective Communication 0.50 9 0 A+ CCHE112H1 Chemistry II 0.50 9 4 A+ C-ELE110H1 Electricity Fundamentals 0.50 8 1 A- D+MAT187H1 Calculus II 0.50 7 8 B+ DMEC100H1 Dynamics 0.50 8 5 A D-ENGLISH1 Facility 0.00 CR
Credits earned: 2.50
------------------------------------------------------ end of page --------------------------------------------------------
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 83
Page 5 of 5
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12
1997 FALL- BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE –MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.60 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.76STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVGFNCTMIE210H1 Thermodynamics 0.50 7 5 B DMIE231H1 Probability & Statistics 0.50 8 5 A B-MIE230H1 Engineering Analysis I 0.50 8 8 A+ BMIE240H1 Human Centred Systems Design 0.50 7 7 B+ CMMS270H1 Materials Science 0.50 8 1 A- C+
Credits earned: 2.50
1998 WINTER – BACHELOR OF APPLIED SCIENCE –MECHANICAL ENGINEERINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVGFNCTMIE232H1 Differential Equation 0.50 IPRMIE233H1 Applied Science 0.50 IPRMIE241H1 Engineering Design and Graphics 0.50 IPRMIE234H1 Numerical Methods 0.50 IPRMIE265H1 Modelling Integrated Systems 0.50 IPR
------------------------------------------------------ end of record --------------------------------------------------------
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 84 Student Information Systems
Figure 7-C – Transcript Including Detail from 1 Division
Page 1 of 4
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12Issued to: The University of Unknown
123 Real Street, Rm. 45Toronto, ON A1A 1A1
BACHELOR OF SCIENCE THREE YEAR CONFERRED – JUNE 1992GRADUATED WITH DISTINCTIONHONOURS BACHELOR OF SCIENCE COMPLETED – WINTER 1996
1989 Fall – University of Toronto Scholars Program – National Scholarship
Faculty of Arts and Science
1992 Winter – Major Program in Chemistry completed1996 Winter – Specialist Program in Chemistry completed1996 Winter – Minor Program in Biology completed
1990 Winter – Dean’s Honours List1992 Winter – Dean’s Honours List1992 Winter – Dupont Chemistry Award1996 Winter – Dean’s Honours List1996 Winter – Graduation Prize in Chemistry
BASIS OF ADMISSION: ONTARIO UNIVERSITYCRS CODE TITLE WGT GRD FNCTBIO1**Y Transfer Credit
McMaster University1.00 CR
HIS1**Y Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
HUM2**Y Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
PHL2**Y Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
SOC101Y5 Transfer CreditMcMaster University
1.00 CR
Credits earned: 5.00
1989 FALL – ERINDALE COLLEGECRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTANT100Y5 Introduction to Anthropology 1.00 IPRBIO250Y5 Cell and Molecular 1.00 IPRPHL200Y5 Ancient Philosophy 1.00 IPRPSY100Y5 Introductory Psychology 1.00 IPRSOC200Y5 Introduction to Social Research 1.00 IPR
Credits earned: 0.00
------------------------------------------------------ end of page --------------------------------------------------------
ENROLMENT HISTORY
1989-90 Faculty of Arts andScience (Degree)
1990-91 Faculty of AppliedScience and Engineering (Degree)
1991-92 Faculty of Arts andScience (Degree), B.SC. 3-YearConferred, June 1992
1994-96 Faculty of Arts andScience (Degree), B.SC. 4-YearRequirements Met
1997-98 Faculty of AppliedScience and Engineering (Degree)
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 85
Page 2 of 4
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12
1990 WINTER – ERINDALE COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.88 ANNUAL GPA: 3.88 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.88STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTANT100Y5 Introduction to Anthropology 1.00 8 5 A CBIO250Y5 Cell and Molecular 1.00 8 9 A C-PHL200Y5 Ancient Philosophy 1.00 8 0 A- B-PSY100Y5 Introductory Psychology 1.00 9 0 A+ C+SOC200Y5 Introduction to Social Research 1.00 8 4 A D+
Credits earned: 5.00
1990 SUMMER – ERINDALE COLLEGECRS CODE TITLE WGT GRD FNCTANT203Y5 Letter of permission
University of Western Ontario1.00 CR
Credits earned: 1.00
1991 FALL – NEW COLLEGECRS CODE TITLE WGT GRD FNCTCHM1**Y Transfer credit
Faculty of Applied Science andEngineering
1.00 CR
MAT1**Y Transfer creditFaculty of Applied Science andEngineeringCalculus
1.00 XTR
Credits earned: 1.00
1991 FALL – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: N/A CUMULATIVE GPA: N/ACRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTBIO260H1 Genetics 0.50 8 0 A- C-BIO301H1 Marine Biology 0.50 8 5 A DCHM217H1 Analytical Chemistry 0.50 9 2 A+ CCHM238Y1 Introduction to Inorganic 1.00 IPRCHM240Y1 Introduction to Organic 1.00 IPRCSC148H1 Introduction to Computer Science 0.50 IPR XTR
Credits earned: 1.50
------------------------------------------------------ end of page --------------------------------------------------------
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 86 Student Information Systems
Page 3 of 4
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12
1992 WINTER – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.88 ANNUAL GPA 3.87 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.87STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTBIO306H1 Inter-University Field Course 0.50 8 5 A DCHM229H1 Quantum Mechanics 0.50 8 1 A- D+CHM238Y1 Introduction to Inorganic 1.00 8 4 A- B-CHM240Y1 Introduction to Organic 1.00 8 9 A B-CSC148H1 Introduction to Computer Science 0.50 9 5 A+ B XTR
Credits earned: 3.00
1994 SUMMER – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.70 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.86STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTBIO320Y1 Introductory Biochemistry 1.00 8 0 A- BCHM338H1 Intermediate Organic Chemistry 0.50 WDR
Credits earned: 1.00
1995 FALL – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: N/A CUMULATIVE GPA: N/ACRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVG FNCTCHM314Y1 Instrumental Methods of Analysis 1.00 IPRCHM327Y1 Thermodynamics & Mechanics 1.00 IPR XTRCHM338H1 Intermediate Inorganic Chemistry 0.50 7 9 B+ B-CHM348H1 Organic Reaction Mechanism 0.50 9 0 A+ DCHM428Y1 Research in Physical Chemistry 1.00 IPR
Credits earned: 1.00
1996 WINTER – NEW COLLEGE
SESSIONAL GPA: 3.95 ANNUAL GPA 3.88 CUMULATIVE GPA: 3.86STATUS: GOOD STANDINGCRS CODE TITLE WGT MRK GRD CRS AVGFNCTCHM314Y1 Instrumental Methods of Analysis 1.00 8 5 A CCHM327Y1 Thermodynamics & Mechanics 1.00 8 3 A- C- XTRCHM379H1 Biomolecular Chemistry 0.50 8 9 A+ D-CHM428Y1 Research in Physical Chemistry 1.00 8 8 A+ BCHM441H1 Applications of Spectroscopy 0.50 8 0 A- B+
Credits earned: 3.00
------------------------------------------------------ end of page --------------------------------------------------------
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 87
Page 4 of 4
Name: SMITH, John Record as of: 15/01/1998Student Number 890000000 Birth Day/Month: 06/12
Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering
1990-91 Degree Studies, Mechanical Engineering, Year I
1997-98 Degree Studies, Mechanical Engineering, Year II
------------------------------------------------------ end of record --------------------------------------------------------
Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering Final Report
Page 88 Student Information Systems
Figure 7-D – Confirmation of Registration
January 16, 1995
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
This confirms that John SMITH is registered for the 1995-96 WinterSession, September 1995 to June 1996, in the Faculty of Arts and Science.The registration record is a follows:
College: NewDegree: Bachelor of ScienceStatus: Full-time
His tuition fee, based on the number of courses he has registered in for theperiod, is $8,000.00.
John DoeShadow Registrar, Transcript DepotPhone: (416) 978-1234Fax: (416) 978-4321Email: <[email protected]>
Final Report Transcripts Business Process Re-engineering
Student Information Systems Page 89
Figure 7-E – Confirmation of Admission
August 29, 1990
RE: Student: JOHN SMITH Student Number: 890000000
This is to certify that Mr. John Smith has been admitted as a full-timestudent to the first year of the four year B.A.Sc. degree program inMechanical Engineering in the Faculty of Applied Science and Engineeringfor the 1990-91 academic session.
Mr. Smith has completed pre-registration for the session whichcommences on September 4, 1990, and must now pay fees to complete theregistration process.
Please do not hesitate to contact this office should you have furtherquestions.
John DoeShadow Registrar, Transcript DepotPhone: (416) 978-1234Fax: (416) 978-4321Email: <[email protected]>