Critical processes improvement for CCS DLSU-PSI

• Main Author: Bacong, Mary Jane G.
• Format: text
• Language: English
• Published: Animo Repository 2002
• Subjects: Computer programs; Information resources management; De La Salle University-Professional Schools; Inc; Computer managed instruction; Databases and Information Systems
• Online Access: https://animorepository.dlsu.edu.ph/etd_masteral/2925
• Institution: De La Salle University

This research aims to develop a process improvement plan for the Education Design and Education Delivery processes of the College of Computer Studies (CCS) of De La Salle University. The methodology that the proponent used in analyzing the processes of CCS is an adaptation of Harrington's Business Process Improvement (BPI) and Harrison and Pratt's methodologies for reengineering businesses. It is composed of only three phases namely: (1) Direction Setting (2) Understanding the Process and (3) Developing a Plan. Curricular programs can be improved by (1) strengthening the feedback mechanisms, (2) strengthening Academic Assistants (AAs), and (3) involving the alumni, feeder schools, and AAs in the development programs. Among the three, the strengthening of the academic areas should be prioritized. Next would be the strengthening of the feedback mechanisms, and last would be the involvement of the external entities in programs development. These improvements are feasible since they can be supported by the E-College project. The existing student and faculty database of the E-College can be expanded to include the alumni, feeder schools, and other external entities. Modules that will allow encoding and summarizing of data, generation of reports, online surveys and monitoring of research projects and accomplishments of administrators can be added.For co-curricular programs, the following improvements are recommended: (1) an annual review of ORIENT, FRMDEV, SPRINT and SRDP programs (2) separate orientation for DLSU-PSI and (3) feedback mechanisms for the four programs. Priority should be given to the annual review of programs. For the instruction subprocess, the following improvements (ranked from highest to lowest) are recommended: (1) strengthening of academic areas (2) skills assessment and training needs analysis of faculty members (3) early pre-ITEO evaluation (4) implementation of different learning techniques and (5) evaluation of Subject Coordinators. For the academic advising and consultation subprocesses, the recommendations are to hold the Student Forum annually per upperclassmen year level, establish control and feedback mechanisms, and disseminate information through the use of the E-College project. The student assessment subprocess may be improved by providing online versions of the syllabi and policies while the information delivery subprocesses may be improved by having a separate orientation program for CCS, providing online versions of the Student Handbook, and submitting the grades to the Registrar's Office online. For the thesis and practicum programs, a monitoring information system should be developed or added to the E-College project. The co-curricular programs for undergraduate students may be improved by redefining the role of the Freshman Coordinator and the reporting structures and by having a separate CCS orientation program. The programs for new students subprocess may be improved by designing an orientation program for shiftees and transferees, and by redesigning the existing forms. The programs for underachievers subprocess requires an annual review and an institutionalized tutoring program. Finally, the feedback methods subprocess may be improved by conducting the pre-ITEO early and the student surveys online.