Course Scheduling as a Strategic Initiative: Using Technology Tools and Timetable Data to Enhance Student Success

In zoio, the University of Tennessee, Knoxville (υτ) ad- opted a new strategic plan focused on becoming a top-25 public research university (see www.utk.edu/volvision- top25/). The plan, called Vol Vision, focuses on five key areas: undergraduate students, graduate students, faculty and staff, research, and infrastructure. This article summa- rizes a series of efforts that target retention and gradua- tion goals for undergraduate students. When the strategic plan was first discussed, the first-to-second year retention rate at υτ was 84 percent (http://oira.utk.edu/factbook/ outcome)-well below the goal of 90 percent for full-time first-time freshmen. At 60 percent in 2010, UTs six-year graduation rate was significantly below the 84 percent av- erage of the top-25 comparison group.In just two years, υ τ has already seen progress on these two metrics: Retention rates have increased by one per- centage point, and six-year graduation rates have increased by three points (www.utk.edu/volvision-top25/). These successes can be attributed at least in part to a series of action plans that focused on course data analysis, policy changes, enhanced course scheduling tools, and curricu- lum analysis. Additional changes scheduled for fall 2013 will further support students as they explore options and register for classes in their chosen fields of study.Even before the Vol Vision plan was finalized, the chan- cellor charged a task force to develop strategies for enhanc- ing the efficiency and effectiveness of academic policies, procedures, and resource allocation (httpi//chancellor. utk.edu/newsletter/academic-efficiency-and-effective- ness.php). A key focus was on removing bottlenecks that impeded student progress to timely graduation. Class- room scheduling also was targeted in order to determine the validity of complaints about scheduling procedures; complaints frequently were expressed in the student newspaper (see, for example, http://utdailybeacon.com/ opinion/columns/off-the-deep-end/2010/nov/ 17/ut- creates-unnecessary-classroom-issues/). Following is a brief chronology that outlines actions designed to remove bottlenecks and enable students to persist to graduation.In fall 2009, the timetable office at the University of Tennessee consisted of two full-time employees in the Of- fice of the University Registrar. The decentralized timeta- bling system allowed representatives in every department to input their course schedules directly into a legacy stu- dent information system (sis) and also to assign class- rooms of certain categories to their sections. The timetable staff members were primarily responsible for ensuring that timetable functions occurred according to the proper timeline and for troubleshooting technical problems. In addition, the staff monitored the overall integrity of the timetable and attempted to eliminate gross inefficiencies in classroom utilization.Each semester the same problems recurred: Conflicts arose among departments requesting the same classrooms at the same times, and the timetable office was empowered neither to make determinations of priority nor to require a department to make changes to eliminate the conflict. Courses were held on the opposite side of campus from their home department because classrooms in nearby buildings were already assigned. The large number of courses offered by departments at prime class times often resulted in more courses than classrooms, but even then the timetable office had no authority to compel depart- ments to change the times of their offerings.These problems needed to be addressed, but gathering data that would clearly communicate the need to those who could empower the timetable staff with decision- making authority proved difficult. Documentation was limited to relaying complaints and requests submitted via phone or email. Examples of such feedback included students who couldn't register for a class because it was taught at the same time as another required class, new requests for accessible classrooms after the semester had already begun, or faculty members wanting to teach three back-to-back sections in the same classroom. …