Administrative Data and Curricular Support:

The Sum is Greater Than the Parts

NERCOMP 2004

Copyright Bret Ingerman, Daniel Green, and Beth DuPont, 2004. This work is the intellectual property of the author. Permission is granted for this material to be shared for

non-commercial, educational purposes, provided that this copyright statement appears on the reproduced materials and notice is given that the copying is by permission of the author.

To disseminate otherwise or to republish requires written permission from the author.

About us…

• Bret IngermanChief Technology Officer

• Dan GreenSenior Programmer / Analyst – Web Developer

• Beth DuPontDirector, Academic Technologies

• Saratoga Springs, NY• Four year Private

Non-denominational Co-educational• Students: 2,200• Faculty: 148 full time• Staff: 400 full time

• CITS • 36 full time staff• Everything is together:

– Academic Administrative NetworkTelecomm Media Services Web (tech)etc.

• Mix of:– Desktop: PC, Mac (limited Unix)

– Servers: NT, Solaris (limited Mac)

The Basic Infrastructure

• Major ERP Systems: Oracle• Predominant Database: Oracle• Student System: AIMS (now)• Student System: Oracle (soon)• Web Server: Apache and IIS• Web Development: ColdFusion

About the problem…

Conceptually

Conceptually

• We have data

Conceptually

• We have data

Conceptually

• We have lots of data

Conceptually

• Spread across many systems• Not readily linked

– (except by us)• Not readily accessible

– (except by us)• Seldom used beyond initial application

• We have lots of data

But the Data…

• Could be much better used– By us– By them

• Should be much better used– By us– By them

A case in point…

Threaded Discussions

• Had 2 choices• WebCT

– A lot of overhead for just course discussions– Even more for non-academic discussions

• Phorum– Open source– Not scalable– Not easily integrated with existing systems– Not meeting needs of faculty / community

What Did We Really Want?

• What did we really need?• Discussion tool for entire campus• Scalable• Supportable• Ability to pre-populate

– Every academic course, each semester

• Using existing authentication

What We Found

• FuseTalk– Much better suited to campus needs– ColdFusion– Extensible– NERCOMP discount

So What Was the Problem?

• We had the course data– Currently: AIMS– Soon: Oracle

• We had the authentication– Currently: LDAP (Netscape)– Soon: LDAP (Oracle or Microsoft)

• We had the software– Currently: FuseTalk– Soon: FuseTalk, or ???

• Didn’t want to rewrite everything

So, what did we do?

First, need to look more closely at infrastructure…

Technology Background

• Data sources– Multiple Oracle instances and applications– Delimited text files from AIMS student system

• Custom application development– Subsidiary administrative systems– Dynamic web pages

• Programming environment– ColdFusion– Oracle stored procedures and triggers– IIS and Apache

Obstacles

• Primary data source downtime– Application upgrades– Cold backups

• Upcoming data source changes– New student system– Misc. AIMS systems

Obstacles

• Security concerns– Web access to primary data sources– Developer access to primary data sources

• LDAP server changes– New LDAP server– Potential scheme changes

Solutions

• Common development platform (2 years ago)

• Student and staff data repository• Common authentication for custom

applications

Repository

• Student and staff information combined from multiple sources– Current student system– Oracle Human Resources– Housing system– Campus card system

• Availability and efficiency– Close to 24 X 7 uptime– Flat file indexed data for faster retrieval– Easier for developers

Repository

• Updated nightly from primary data sources• Scalable

Authentication

• Common user authentication– One ColdFusion component– Provides common authentication and

returns a common set of data regardless of the data source

– Can be exposed as a web service– Isolates developers from the underlying

data structure and potential changes

What We Found

• Better availability of administrative data• Insulates developers and applications

from underlying data source changes• Platform for future growth

This has led to…

Ability to Support Additional Needs

• On-line campus directories• Health Services client information• Campus Safety ticketing system• On-line grades• On-line course schedules• Portal (soon)• E-Portfolio (soon)

Ability to Support Additional Needs

• Populate WebCT course information– Repository has all necessary data

• “Face-book” of students– Data “hidden” in card system

• “Face-book” for faculty / staff (soon)• Automatic course email lists (soon)

So, what did we learn?

Make Better Use of What You Have

• Large investment in existing data– Time– Effort– Money

• Original databases are silos of information• Most databases only use original application(s)• Most “custom” apps are used to…

– View same data (within one silo)– By same department / users

Make Better Use of What You Have

• Repository cuts across the silos• Once in repository, easy to use / access

– By everyone

• Repository creates ready opportunities for new applications

Growing the Repository?

• Currently fed by other databases• Not authoritative• Perhaps extend it to store user prefs

– Portal– Mailing list preferences– Face book preferences (for faculty & staff)

And the biggest benefit?

The Biggest Benefit(s)

• Opportunity for “academic” and “administrative” IT staff to talk

• Brainstorming about other possibilities• Craft an elegant solution to meet needs

of “both” groups

We Have

• Saved time• Met needs• Allowed for growth• Created opportunities to collaborate

– Across the campus– Within the department

Questions?

Thank you!