Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
INTRODUCTION
company ready access to improve product and service quality, reduce costs,
company morale.
New Information Technology and its innovations are being discovered and
Not only are computers and information technology changing the way we
products and services. The obvious question is, “If information technology is so
There are three primary reasons. First, Information Technology solutions often
are expensive and time consuming. Second, there is usually an element of risk in
during a typical day, you will probably interact with several information systems,
system. Although the systems are quite old they are still functional as of the
systems. The reasons may be the following: (1.) Marketing opportunities, (2.)
Although it has an existing system for the college Registrar office, several
complaints have been raised by students against the slow processing of their
2
William, Sawyer, Hutchinson. Using Information Technology. Irwin Mcrow-Hill 2nd.
2000
papers. Upon hearing these complaints the researcher as Information Technology
services being rendered by the Registrar office to its clientele, particularly the
students. During the preliminary investigations, the researcher found the
fields on the assessment form such as Handbook fee has been printed twice. It
seen in the other fees and miscellaneous fees. In addition, the Library card fee is
not needed since the college library uses the student’s I.D. as their Library Card
fees, miscellaneous fees, and the tuition fees as well. Only one transaction can be
grading system, security is the problem, which incidentally was discovered by one
of the on-the-job-trainees in the Registrar office when the OJT student tried to
display his grade. It was the OJT student who called the attention of the Registrar
that security of the system needs improvement. Aside from this the course
description (course title) is not printed on the grading sheet. On the part of the
Transcript of Record system, the program does not generate the intended output.
the programmer. The enrollment system was written with FoxPro for DOS while
the latter done in Visual Foxpro. Aside from it other information is missing in the
TOR such as admission status, S.O. number and date issued, grading system
this the Registrar decided to adopt MS-Word by manually typing all grades,
subjects, and semester enrolled by the students which takes longer time to finish a
problems, the Registrar office must wait for the availability of the programmer.
“When the Registrar asked the administrator about the documentation of the
respondents (the users and the administrations) confirm the initial findings of the
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
the Registrar office and integrate this into one system. The process will start with
the past study regarding this system and collated the findings. This findings will
be verified thru a survey questionnaires with the direct users of the system, the
Users and Administrators of St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan. From this, the
researcher will identify all the requirements for the proposed information system
that will be used to develop a design the will serve as a prototype model that will
try to solve the findings of the researcher during the investigation. This model
works best in scenarios where not all of the project requirements are known in
detail ahead of trial-and-error process that takes place between the developers and
the users time4. The prototype model will return the design & development stage
repeatedly until the prototype model achieve its goal, a working system with the
good output.
The Testing/Evaluation is the last stage of this study, where the group of
These groups are the “users” referring to the students, the “Administrators”
referring to the faculty, non-teaching staff and middle administrators, and finally
4
Lantz, Kenneth. The Prototyping Methodology. [http://www.
manageknowldege.com/prototype.html]. March 2005
The system will be tested on the effectiveness of the information systems using
security.
Existing System
Needs Assessment
Requirement
Design
Development
Prototype
Test/Evaluation
Conceptual Paradigm
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM
a. Group Category
b. Years of Stay at SMCM
of : a. Enrolment System
of : a. Enrolment System
b. Maintainability
c. User Friendliness
d. Security
This study will cover only the college department of St. Mary’s College of
Information Systems and it gives emphasis on the major areas of the Registrar
Transcript of Record, and Grade Evaluation Systems that will lead to the
system where identified problem will be solved The Enrollment system for
instance, resolved the wrong computation on the tuition fees and other fees during
assessment. The enhanced system also offers a full automation for Transcript of
Record and Grade Evaluation. In addition, the college faculty will now encode
the grades of their respective classes and will be verified by the Registrar and
hers staff. Additional feature on Report Card Generation has been added such
The target respondents for this study are the Users, the Administrators,
Direct Recipient
This study will benefit the direct recipient of the system such as the
lessen the work of the staff, and provide security of files. This research will try to
put together the advantages and benefits of the proposed information systems for
Organization
This study will also benefit SMCM as an organization, for the attainment
of the vision, mission, quality objectives, quality policy and goals of the College
also generates awareness of the need to assess and improve the student services of
prospective students. A service that will boost the school information technology
capability and will attract future students because of the convenience it will bring
Researcher
This study will also benefit the researcher in such a way of being aware of
all the services offered by Office of College Registrar. It will also open an
researcher who will conduct related study on Information Systems for the
ensure that the system processes only data values that conform to
specified tolerance.
Design: A system analysis process in which new or revised system are generated.
being built.
Report Card Management System: It refers to the printing of report card of the
User Friendliness: System must be easy to use and easy to follow the procedures
or instructions.
CHAPTER 2
REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE & STUDIES
world wide web. The researcher tries to find out the relevant issues and
A. RELATED LITERATURE
Local Literature
System. Ms. Sherin Eugion, TRACE’s Marketing and Quality Control Manager
enrollment. It will organize and secure all student records. Students will be
assured that all relevant information about them will not be prone to tampering or
any loss since these will be monitored by authorized people in the administration.
The school can also generate these records with much ease, should a student
request for them.”5 Likewise, the researcher of this study would also like to
develop a system the will organize and secure all records SMCM clientele, the
students.
5
Tumlos, Dee (2002) Trace College: Living its Advocacy Through The Implementation
of An Automated Enrollment System Article [online available:
http://sqlwizard.com/main14.html. January 09,2006]
In one of the speaking engagement of Sangalang, “he stressed, that today’s
benefits but also creates the potential for misuse of information technology.” 6
The researcher believe that the higher educational institutions are concerned about
the ethical behavior of their employees and the security of their information
would be followed. Although a lot of research format is available not only on the
textbook as well on the internet. Upon attending the 3rd Students Assembly for
Information Technology Education, one of the speaker said, “The problem with
format for IT. No specific written research format for the Information
Technology study are available at the market today.”7 Thru the speaker
its competitors. The researcher also believe that this research study will help St.
firm specializing in education software and other applications.9 At the recent list
is belong to top 4 among The Best Performance school in Bulacan. This inspired
the researcher to go on with this study to help school to improved the information
cannot remain as they are but must respond to the forces of change. Information
Foreign Literature
the researcher to adopt the ideas behind the success of information systems that
Marketing is the process of putting the right product before the right
audience at the right price (the four P’s; Place, Product, Price, Promotion). In
education, the product is the curriculum. Research shows that most students
leave school during their first year so it is important to “front load” enrollment
system11. With newly revised curriculum for the College department together
with the proposed enhanced system for St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan, the
school is on the right track in putting the right product before the right audience at
different offices and services of the school. An effective enrollment system plan
can only succeed with support from school administrators. 12 Furthermore, for an
implementation..
school’s function and culture.14 Every school during the enrollment period
always expects high turnover of enrollees, this will not happen if the enrollment
clientele, the students. Chances, next semester unsatisfied students will the leave
the school.
13
Matthew Townsley. “A Strategic Model for Enrollment Driven Private School”. Journal for Higher Education
Management (Winter/Spring, 1993). S(2), pp. 57-66
14
Daniel John Hossler. “Creating Effective Enrollment Management System”. New York: College Entrance
Examination board, 1986
15
Bernard Konsynski. “Globalization of Information Management Strategies”.Journal of Management of
Information System 7. (Spring 1991),7.
B. REVIEW OF RELATED STUDY
Local Studies
Analyn Alan, et.al16., in their undergraduate feasibility study entitled A
Mary’s College of Meycauayan (2001) designed a system that would make the
enrolment system of the said department of the school faster, organized and
accurate. They proposed a paradigm that would show how the registration,
transaction, master files and utilities of the Registrar’s Office more effective and
efficient.
Unfortunately the study does not materialize, the are some problems that
time that system encountered problems the registrar always waiting for the
Similar study was done by Reyes17, The study was designed for St.
Mary’s College of Meycauayan to find out the strengths and weaknesses of the
current enrollment system. This will serve as basis of the researcher to develop a
new system using Standard Systems, after it has been evaluated. The evaluation
will determine whether the new system is better than the existing system with
regard to its effectiveness, timeliness and over-all quality. The author identified
the following problems during data gathering. The problem started on the
schedule and acceptance of the payment. During the enrollment if the officer-in-
16
Analyn Alan, et.al. “A Proposed Computerized Enrolment System for the College
Department of Saint Mary’s College of Meycauayan”(Project Paper, St. Mary’s College of
Meycauayan, Bulacan, 2001)
17
Joseph Bernard Reyes. “Analysis & Design of a Computer-Based Enrollment
Information System for St. Mary’s College of Meycauayan”. (Project Paper, De La Salle
University.(pp2-3), Manila, 2002)
charge does not accurately keep track of the number of students enrolling in a
specific subject, chances are that the students will have a hard time finding the
right combination of subjects to enroll. If the class will not reach the specified
number of students per class, eventually it will be dissolved and merge with the
same class description and chances are the student will either drop or take the
new schedule of the subject and the students are advised to make a reassessment.
The following are the recommendations of the researcher: First, complete revamp
is not necessary but immediate enhancements for better service and efficiency is
the resources. Finally, the new system will enhance the enrollment and system of
payment.
at all. Nevertheless, Reyes study is a great help for this research. The researcher
The researcher went through a detailed and thorough investigation that consists
of observing the existing system. In addition, the researcher states that numerous
interviews were conducted not only with the potential users but also with other
18
Maria Gloria C. Abad. “Applicability of the Developed Computerized Enrollment
System for Selected Private Basic Education Schools in Tanza, Cavite”.(Research Project in MIT,
Adamson University, Manila, March 2004)
schools registrar and accounting clerk to collect different enrollment practices and
The researcher went through the same process. A lot of interviews have
been conducted, a lot of books and references have been read, and a lot of surveys
have been conducted in order to get the feedback from the respondents.
In the study conducted by Rollan 19, the researcher assessed the existing
Student Information system for the Graduate School of Education, Arts & Science
new system with the following recommendations from the respondents: On-line
viewing of student records, class schedules, and tuition fees balances, on-line
registration and enrollment, on-line forms (e.g. Request for Student Evaluation,
the grades of students, adaptation of the database from the Registrar Office for
Among the related study conducted by the researcher, it was found out, the
study of Rollan is the closest to this research. Student Information System is the
integral parts of the this study and like Rollan research the current system was
enrollment system in making decisions. Dr. Tan assessed the enrollment system
system that SMCM administration can also used to make a better decision
Foreign Studies
In the study of Lucas and Spitler21, the researcher explores the relevance of
investment in technology. Data were collected at two points in time to assess user
acceptance of the workstations. The results provide some support for the models
and the unanticipated findings that perceptions of the system quality and system
20
Ronaldo A. Tan. “An Assessment of the Enrollment System of a Private University”.
(Dissertation, Adamson University, Manila, 2001)
21
Henry C. Lucan & Valerie Spitler.”Implementation in a World of Workstation and
Networks”. A Research Paper in Information Technology, USA.may 2000
In the case study conducted in Australia,22 the new developed enrolment
university system centralizes all relevant information about courses, units and
student grades. It is the responsibility of the faculties to provide the system with
information (course code and unit code) about the courses and units they offer.
For each course, the name of the course coordinator must be communicated. The
enrolment system in turn keeps the faculties informed of the numbers and names
of students enrolled in the units. At the end of each semester the faculties will also
from the introduction of an Electronic Enrolment system and much has been
learned on the way. The Institution has come to expect the provision of
information on enrolments in real time, its planning cycle and operation rely on it.
Students expect the systems provided to be slick, available longer and to have no
queues associated with them. While new systems will provide institutions with
exciting new opportunities , the first and biggest step has already been taken with
the handing over of the data and input to the student. The operation of the
Electronic Enrolment system has paved the way for the implementation of Web
22
“Case Study 1: The University enrollment Information Systems”.
[http://www.cs.ntu.edu.au/ homepage/paule/sit_101/reportnode139.html]. January 2006
23
Russell Roberts. “Student Self enrollment – A System in Practice”.(A JISC Funded
Case Study, University of Derby, United Kingdom).[http://www.jisc.ac.uk/cis_focus/]. January
2006
The accessibility of the Internet makes it an obvious method for delivering a
range of services but any institution considering this approach will need to
schools to use vie the web. The project aims to reduce the administrative burden
for schools and improve the overall enrolment management process.24 The
for intermediate and secondary schools that will replace the current, paper-based
non-enrolled students (those absent from school more than 20 consecutive days)
intermediate and secondary schools provided input into the design of the new
system, which authorized intermediate and secondary school personnel will use
via the web to enroll students. The electronic system will: (1.)facilitate immediate
process; (2.) reduce the paperwork and monitoring effort for schools; (3.)
automate a number of activities, e.g. monitoring the 20 days from leaving one
24
“Enrollment Management System Project - Ministry of Education”. New Zealand
Government. [HTTP://www.minedu.govt.nz/goto/enroll]. January 2006
school to enrolling at another; and (4.) reduce the number of inaccurate non-
enrolment notifications and the time taken to identify and respond to non-enrolled
students.
A new online module enrolment system was piloted during May and June
2004 by five Schools within the University of Leeds: Biology; Electronic and
September 2004, Learning and Teaching Board considered a report on the key
findings of the pilot exercise and endorsed a recommendation that all returning
system during May and June 2005 for registering their optional and elective
modules for academic year 2005/06.25 At its meeting in January 2005, Learning
timeline for online module enrolment and related processes: (a.) that an
institutional date should be set before which no module enrolments can take place
on the system (b.) that the date before which no module enrolments can take place
on the system should be two weeks preceding the summer examination period.
For session 2004/05 this would be 3 May 2005; (c.) that all new and amended
re-iteration of the deadline that is already in existence); the web module and
program catalogues for the forthcoming year should be published on the first
working day in May in line with the opening up of the system for online module
enrolment.
25
“On-line Module Enrollment – Guide for School Staff”.
[http://www.leeds.ac.uk/students /office/online/staffguide.doc]. January 2006
RELEVANCE TO THE PRESENT STUDY
The theories presented by the local and foreign authors give insight on the
convenience and security of maintaining the important records and files of the
System used in school or university setting. They also include the benefit of
their competitive edge. Finally, The Local and foreign authors give moral
This chapter presents the methods of research used, the respondents of the
study, data gathering procedure, research instrument and techniques used, and
Method of Research
The method of research that was adopted in this study is descriptive and
the current Registrar Information Systems in the College department of St. Mary’s
practices, beliefs, processes, points of view and trends of the current system and
the problems generated by the existing system. The researcher also used
The researcher of this study conducted two separate survey. The first one
was conducted to assess the status of the existing Registrar Information Systems
for the college department. It has two types of respondents, the Users which is
System. This time it has three types of respondents; the Users, the Administrators
and the IT Experts referring to programmers and I.T. professors and instructors.
Purposive Sampling was used in the study using the following criteria:
Administration
c. Computer Literate
a. Programmer
1. Questionnaire
The main instrument used in gathering data was the questionnaire. It was
designed such that multiple choices were presented in order for the respondents
Management Systems.
2. Unstructured Interview
were flexible and less structured than the questionnaire. These will be
reinforce the responses that were gathered and determine the various
3. Document Analysis
Registrar office were gathered and analyzed to support the findings derived from
this study.
4. Library Research
study were examined for a better understanding of the topic under study.
5. Internet Research
for this study. For related literature and related study, Internet is the most up-to-
Systems evaluation, the Percentage, Weighted Means and ANOVA are the
The data gathered in this study were collated, tallied and presented in
1. Percentage
This is a ration of a part to a whole. This was used to present the profile
P( % ) = (n / N ) * 100 %
Where: P ( % ) = Percentage
2. Weighted Mean
weighted mean gives the point of composite rating of the groups. The formula is:
WM = Σfx
N
Where:
WM = Weighted Mean
Σ = Symbol of Summation
f = Frequency of Responses
x = Scale Value
The mean values obtained were interpreted using a Likert Scale. The
3. ANOVA
ANOVA – or Analysis of Variance comes from the fact that the technique
compares two variances: The variance among the means of the different
categories (also called groups or treatments) and the variance among the
individual values in the group. It is also advisable to use if you have three groups
of respondents. The researcher will used the case 2 of the ANOVA, the unequal
number of respondents
ANOVA TABLE
Total SST nk -1
The respondents of this study are “Users” referring to the SMCM college
and middle administrators and the “IT Experts” the IT professionals such as
Shown in the following Tables are the findings on the profile of the
respondents. Based on the retrieved data, sixty (60) users, twenty six (26)
administrators and twenty (20) IT experts participated in the study for a total of
Table 1 shows that among the group of respondents sixty (60) are users
representing 56.60 % of the total respondents, twenty six (26) are administrations
representing 24.53 % and twenty (20) are IT experts representing 18.87 % of the
Table 1
Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Group
Total
Group
f %
Users 60 56.60
Administrations 26 24.53
IT Experts 20 18.87
Total 106 100 %
As to years of stay in SMCM, Table 2 shows that among users group of
respondents ten (10) representing 16.67 % are within 1-2 years of stay bracket and
fifty (50) representing 83.33 % are within 3-4 years of stay bracket. No users
shows that seven (7) representing 26.92 % are within the 1-2 years of stay
bracket, nine (9) representing 34.62 % are within the 3-4 years of stay bracket and
ten (10) representing 38.46 % are within the 5 year and above bracket. The IT
Expert group of respondents is not included in this table since they are considered
Table 2
Frequency Distribution of Respondents’ Years of Stay in SMCM
current Registrar Information Systems involved four (4) areas namely enrollement
system, report card generation system, transcript of record system, and grade
evaluation system.
A. Enrollment System
Table 3 shows that the status of the existing system or current enrollment
“Always” based on the calculated mean of 4.95, 5.00 and 4.93 respectively. As to
“Always” based on the calculated mean of 4.77, 4.69, and 4.77 respectively. As
to the “Accurate room assignment”, the users and the IT experts group of
Table 3
Status of the Existing Registrar Information System in
Terms of Assessment & Payment of Enrollment System
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Date 4.95 A 4.77 A 5.00 A 4.93 A
Assessment &
Enrollment 4.77 A 4.69 A 4.85 A 4.77 A
2. Accurate
Subject Schedules 4.82 A 4.31 O 4.75 A 4.72 A
3. Accurate
Room Assignment 4.90 A 4.42 O 4.75 A 4.80 A
4. Class Size 4.91 A 4.77 A 4.90 A 4.88 A
Control
5. Accurate 4.92 A 4.58 A 4.65 A 4.82 A
number of units
per subject
6. Accurate 4.92 A 4.69 A 4.65 A 4.84 A
computation for
tuition fee
7. Accurate 4.92 A 4.58 A 4.65 A 4.82 A
computation for
other fees
8. Accurate 5.00 A 5.00 A 5.00 A 5.00 A
computation for
miscellaneous fees 4.85 A 4.08 O 4.65 A 4.69 A
9. Different types
of payment scheme 4.88 A 5.00 A 4.75 A 4.88 A
10. Student
account for 4.29 O 4.19 O 4.80 A 4.34 O
transaction
11. Actual 4.57 A 4.08 O 4.85 A 4.52 A
transaction date is
noted
12. Possible
discount for each 5.00 A 4.12 O 4.90 A 4.84 A
student
13. Students
records are
accurately updated
after every
transaction.
14. Collection
program is
convenient and
easy to use.
Composite Mean 4.83 4.52 4.80 4.78
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD),
1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 4
Status of the Existing Registrar Information System in
Terms of Report Card Generation
Table 5
Status of the Existing Registrar Information System in
Terms of Transcript of Records
Table 6
Status of the Existing Registrar Information System in
Terms of Grades Evaluation
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Accurate student 1.58 SD 1.77 SD 1.00 N 1.53 SD
name & number
2. Course Title/Degree 1.58 SD 1.00 N 1.00 N 1.40 N
3. Accurate course 4.71 A 4.31 O 5.00 A 4.68 A
number & course
descriptive title
4. Accurate subjects 1.25 N 2.77 ST 1.00 N 1.47 N
enrolled per
semester
5. Accurate grades and 2.75 ST 2.69 ST 1.00 N 2.51 ST
course units
6. Student subjects & 2.18 SD 2.65 ST 1.00 N 2.11 SD
grades history for
transferee
Composite Mean 2.34 2.53 1.67 2.28
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD),
1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 7
Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in
Terms of Assessment & Payment of Enrollment System
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Date Assessment 4.95 A 4.92 A 5.00 A 4.95 A
& Enrollment
2. Accurate Subject 4.93 A 4.88 A 5.00 A 4.93 A
Schedules
3. Accurate Room 4.97 A 4.92 A 5.00 A 4.97 A
Assignment
4. Class Size Control 4.95 A 4.96 A 4.95 A 4.95 A
5. Accurate number 4.98 A 5.00 A 4.95 A 4.98 A
of units per
subject
6. Accurate 4.95 A 4.92 A 4.90 A 4.94 A
computation for
tuition fee
7. Accurate 4.95 A 4.88 A 4.90 A 4.93 A
computation for
other fees
8. Accurate 4.95 A 4.85 A 4.90 A 4.93 A
computation for
miscellaneous
fees
9. Different types of 5.00 A 5.00 A 5.00 A 5.00 A
payment scheme
10. Student account 4.71 A 4.96 A 4.85 A 4.77 A
for transaction
11. Actual transaction 4.85 A 4.92 A 5.00 A 4.88 A
date is noted
12. Possible discount 4.75 A 4.92 A 4.95 A 4.81 A
for each student
13. Students records 4.71 A 5.00 A 4.95 A 4.79 A
are accurately
updated after
every transaction.
14. Collection 4.75 A 5.00 A 4.95 A 4.82 A
program is
convenient and
easy to use.
Composite Mean 4.89 4.94 4.95 4.90
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Always (A), 3.51-4.50 Often (O), 2.51-3.50 Sometimes (ST), 1.51-2.50 Seldom (SD),
1.00-1.50 Never (N)
Table 8
Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in
Terms of Report Card Generation
Table 9
Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in
Terms of Transcript of Records
Table 10
Status of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in
Terms of Grades Evaluation
Table 11
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of Accuracy
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Date Assessment 4.70 E 5.00 VE 4.50 E 4.72 VE
& Enrollment
2. Accurate Subject 4.01 E 4.08 E 4.15 E 4.04 E
Schedules
3. Accurate Room 3.96 E 4.38 E 4.10 E 4.05 E
Assignment
4. Class Size Control 4.11 E 4.25 E 4.10 E 4.13 E
5. Number of Units 4.29 E 5.00 VE 4.20 E 4.40 E
per subject
6. Computation for 4.85 VE 4.92 VE 4.15 E 4.77 VE
tuition fee
7. Computation for 4.85 VE 4.88 VE 4.15 E 4.76 VE
other fees
8. Computation for 4.85 VE 4.88 VE 4.15 E 4.76 VE
miscellaneous
fees
9. Different types of 5.00 VE 5.00 VE 4.90 VE 4.99 VE
Payment scheme
10. Student account 4.15 E 4.77 VE 4.10 E 4.25 E
for transaction
11. Actual transaction 4.04 E 5.00 VE 4.85 VE 4.31 E
date is noted
12. Possible discounts 3.99 E 5.00 VE 4.05 E 4.17 E
for each student
13. Student records 4.04 E 4.69 VE 3.95 E 4.14 E
are actually
updated after
every transaction
14. Collection 4.20 E 4.77 VE 4.10 E 4.28 E
program is
convenient and
easy to use.
Composite Mean 4.36 4.76 4.25 4.41
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 12
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of Maintainability
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Database for 4.12 E 4.19 E 4.00 E 4.12 E
enrollment
2. Database for 4.08 E 4.77 VE 3.95 E 4.18 E
assessment
3. Database for 4.03 E 4.73 VE 4.05 E 4.15 E
subject available
4. Database for 4.18 E 4.69 VE 3.95 E 4.24 E
course code
5. Database for 4.27 E 4.81 VE 4.00 E 4.33 E
tuition fee
6. Database for 4.12 E 4.88 VE 3.95 E 4.23 E
payment
7. Database for 4.25 E 4.92 VE 4.10 E 4.35 E
master file
Composite Mean 4.15 4.71 4.00 4.23
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 13
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of User Friendliness
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Ease of use 3.96 E 4.62 VE 3.95 E 4.07 E
2. Navigating the 3.96 E 4.50 E 4.05 E 4.07 E
system
3. Instructions for 3.96 E 4.62 VE 4.00 E 4.08 E
users
4. Graphics interface 4.12 E 4.65 VE 3.95 E 4.19 E
5. Trouble shooting 4.10 E 4.33 E 3.90 E 4.10 E
Composite Mean 4.02 4.52 3.97 4.10
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 14
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Enrollment System in Terms of Security
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Security level for 4.20 E 4.23 E 4.10 E 4.17 E
Registrar
2. Security level for 4.25 E 4.31 E 4.05 E 4.20 E
Asst. Registrar
3. Security level for 4.15 E 4.19 E 4.05 E 4.17 E
Treasurer
4. Security level for 4.25 E 4.15 E 4.05 E 4.17 E
Asst. Treasurer
5. Backup copy of 4.01 E 3.73 E 4.00 E 4.03 E
student data
6. Security from 3.99 E 4.00 E 4.00 E 4.13 E
malicious
mischief
7. Security from 3.96 E 3.81 E 4.05 E 4.41 E
viruses
Composite Mean 4.11 4.06 4.01 4.09
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 15
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of Accuracy
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Semester & 4.18 E 4.19 E 4.10 E 4.17 E
school year
2. Student Number 4.04 E 5.00 VE 4.05 E 4.20 E
3. Course 3.99 E 5.00 VE 4.05 E 4.17 E
4. Student Name 3.99 E 5.00 VE 4.05 E 4.17 E
5. Number of 4.04 E 4.04 E 4.00 E 4.03 E
subjects enrolled
6. Number of units 4.01 E 4.77 VE 4.00 E 4.13 E
per subject
7. Computation for 4.36 E 4.92 VE 4.05 E 4.41 E
general average
8. Computation for 4.42 E 4.88 VE 4.10 E 4.46 E
GPA per grading
period
Composite Mean 4.13 4.73 4.04 4.22
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 16
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of Maintainability
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Database for 3.97 E 4.08 E 4.05 E 4.00 E
student master file
2. Database for 3.99 E 4.15 E 4.10 E 4.03 E
grading sheet
Composite Mean 3.98 4.12 4.08 4.02
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 17
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of User Friendliness
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Ease of Use 4.05 E 3.81 E 4.10 E 4.01 E
2. Navigating the 4.03 E 3.92 E 4.00 E 4.01 E
system
3. Instructions for 4.02 E 4.04 E 4.00 E 4.02 E
the users
4. Graphics interface 4.08 E 3.62 E 3.95 E 3.98 E
5. Trouble shooting 4.07 E 3.65 E 3.90 E 3.97 E
Composite Mean 4.05 3.81 3.99 4.00
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 18
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Report Card Generation System in Terms of Security
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Security level 4.01 E 4.12 E 4.10 E 4.04 E
for Registrar
2. Security level 3.92 E 4.08 E 4.00 E 3.96 E
for Asst. Registrar
3. Security level 3.99 E 4.23 E 3.95 E 4.03 E
for college faculty
4. Security from 3.98 E 4.08 E 4.00 E 4.00 E
malicious
mischief
5. Security from 3.92 E 4.00 E 3.95 E 3.94 E
viruses
Composite Mean 3.97 4.10 4.00 3.99
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 19
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of Accuracy
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Student 4.11 E 3.96 E 4.10 E 4.09 E
Personal record
2. Student 3.96 E 3.92 E 3.80 E 3.93 E
education history
3. Course Title / 4.08 E 4.08 E 4.15 E 4.09 E
Degree
4. Graduation 4.12 E 4.00 E 4.10 E 4.10 E
date 4.11 E 4.00 E 4.10 E 4.09 E
5. S.O. Number 4.09 E 4.00 E 4.10 E 4.08 E
6. S.O. Date 4.21 E 4.19 E 3.95 E 4.17 E
issued
7. Course
Number & course 4.16 E 4.12 E 4.05 E 4.14 E
descriptive title
8. Subjects 4.29 E 4.19 E 4.00 E 4.24 E
enrolled per
semester 4.32 E 3.92 E 4.05 E 4.22 E
9. Grades &
course units
10. Student 5.00 VE 5.00 E 5.00 VE 5.00 VE
s subjects &
grades history for
transferee
11. Availab
le space for TOR
remarks
Composite Mean 4.22 4.13 4.13 4.19
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 20
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of Maintainability
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Database for 4.12 E 3.96 E 4.00 E 4.08 E
student master file
2. Database for 4.14 E 4.08 E 3.95 E 4.11 E
courses
3. Database for 4.07 E 4.12 E 4.10 E 4.08 E
grading sheet
4. Database for 4.12 E 4.19 E 3.90 E 4.11 E
prospectus
5. Database for 4.08 E 4.00 E 3.95 E 4.05 E
QueryTOR
Composite Mean 4.11 4.07 3.98 4.08
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 21
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of User Friendliness
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
Ease of Use 4.07 E 4.00 E 4.00 E 4.05 E
2. Navigating the 4.21 E 3.96 E 3.90 E 4.13 E
system
3. Instructions for 4.08 E 3.81 E 3.90 E 4.01 E
the users
4. Graphics interface 3.96 E 3.92 E 4.00 E 3.96 E
5. Trouble shooting 3.93 E 4.00 E 3.95 E 3.95 E
Composite Mean 4.05 3.94 3.95 4.02
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 22
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Transcript of Record System in Terms of Security
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Security level 4.02 E 4.27 E 4.05 E 4.07 E
for Registrar
2. Security level 4.11 E 4.27 E 3.95 E 4.12 E
for Asst. Registrar
3. Backup copy 3.98 E 4.00 E 3.90 E 3.97 E
of student data
4. Security from 4.01 E 3.96 E 3.95 E 3.99 E
malicious
mischief
5. Security from 3.83 E 3.96 E 4.00 E 3.88 E
viruses
Composite Mean 3.99 4.09 3.97 4.01
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 23
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of Accuracy
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Student name 3.91 E 4.12 E 3.95 E 3.95 E
& number
2. Course title or 4.00 E 4.04 E 4.05 E 4.01 E
degree
3. Course number 3.92 E 3.81 E 4.00 E 3.91 E
& course
descriptive title
4. Subjects 3.86 E 4.12 E 3.95 E 3.91 E
enrolled per
semester 4.00 E 4.08 E 3.90 E 4.00 E
5. Grades &
course units 3.92 E 4.12 E 4.00 E 3.97 E
6. Student
subjects & grades
for transferee
Composite Mean 3.93 4.04 3.98 3.96
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 24
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of Maintainability
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Database for 4.02 E 4.00 E 3.90 E 4.00 E
student master file
2. Database for 3.94 E 4.08 E 3.95 E 3.97 E
grading sheet
Composite Mean 3.98 4.04 3.93 3.98
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 25
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of User Friendliness
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Ease of use 4.02 E 3.96 E 3.95 E 4.00 E
2. Navigating the 3.97 E 4.08 E 4.00 E 3.99 E
system
3. Instructions for 3.83 E 3.96 E 3.95 E 3.87 E
the users
4. Graphics interface 4.04 E 4.00 E 4.00 E 4.03 E
5. Trouble shooting 3.95 E 3.88 E 3.90 E 3.93 E
Composite Mean 3.96 3.98 3.96 3.96
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
Table 26
Effectiveness of the Enhanced Registrar Information System in the Area
of Grade Evaluation System in Terms of Security
Users Adminis- IT Experts Average
trations
Items Inter Inter- Inter- Inter-
X preta X preta- X preta X preta-
-tion tion -tion tion
1. Security level for 3.91 E 4.23 E 3.95 E 3.97 E
Registrar
2. Security level for 4.03 E 4.23 E 3.95 E 4.05 E
Asst. Registrar
3. Backup copy of 3.91 E 4.04 E 4.10 E 3.95 E
student data
4. Security from 4.00 E 4.38 E 3.90 E 4.05 E
malicious
mischief
5. Security from 4.01 E 4.04 E 3.95 E 4.01 E
viruses
Composite Mean 3.97 4.18 3.97 4.01
Legend: 4.51-5.00 Very Effective (VE), 3.51-4.50 Effective (E), 2.51-3.5 Moderate Effective (ME), 1.51-
2.50 Silghtly Effective(SE), 1.00-1.50 Not Effective(NE)
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Copyright 2004.
Manila, 1999
January 2005
Meycauayan
2004
INTERNET
[http://bearlink.berkeley.edu/sis/uris.html]
[http://www.sqlwizard.com/main_sub14.html]
3. The Prototyping Model.
[htpp://www.searchvb.techtarget.com/sDefinition/0,,sid8_gci755441,00
.html]
Dear Respondents:
1. Respondent Group
Users [ ] Administrations [ ] IT Experts [ ]
1 2 3 4 5
A.2 Report Card Generation N SD ST O A
1. Presence of student number [ ] [
] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Accurate student course
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Accurate student name
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
4. Accurate number of subjects enrolled
[ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. Accurate grades per grading period [ ] [
] [ ] [ ][ ]
6. Computation of GPA per grading period [ ] [
] [ ] [ ][ ]
7. Security of records [ ] [
] [ ] [ ][ ]
1 2 3 4 5
B.3 Transcript of Records N SD ST O A
1. Accurate Student Personal Record [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Student education History [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Course Title or Degree [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
4. Graduation Date [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. S.O. Number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
6. S.O. Date Issued [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
7. Accurate Course Number & Course Descriptive Title [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
8. Accurate subjects enrolled per semester [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
9. Accurate grades and course units [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
10. Student subjects & grades history for transferee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
11. Available space for TOR remarks [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
1 2 3 4 5
A.4 Security (Assessment & Payment) NE SE ME E VE
1. Security level for Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Security Level for Treasurer [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
4. Security Level for Assistant Treasurer [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. Backup copy of student data [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
6. Security from malicious mischief [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
7. Security from viruses [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
B.2 Maintainability
1. Database for Student Master File [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Table for Grading Sheet [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
B.4 Security
1. Security level for Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Security level for College Faculty [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
4. Security from malicious mischief [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. Security from viruses [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
C. Transcript of record
1 2 3 4 5
C.1 Accuracy NE SE ME E VE
1. Student Personal Record [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Student education History [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Course Title or Degree [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
1 2 3 4 5
NE SE ME E VE
4. Graduation Date [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. S.O. Number [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
6. S.O. Date Issued [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
7. Course Number & Course Descriptive Title [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
8. Subjects enrolled per semester [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
9. Grades and Course Units [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
10. Student subjects & grades history for transferee [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
11. Available space for TOR remarks [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
C.2 Maintainability
1. Database for Student Master File [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Table for Courses [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Table for Grading Sheet [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
4. Table for Prospectus [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. Table for QueryTOR [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
C.4 Security NE SE ME E VE
1. Security level for Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Backup copy of student data [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
4. Security from malicious mischief [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. Security from viruses [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
D.2 Maintainability
D.4 Security
1. Security level for Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
2. Security level for Asst. Registrar [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
3. Backup copy of student data [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
4. Security from malicious mischief [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
5. Security from viruses [ ] [ ] [ ] [ ][ ]
APPENDIX
The Computation for the tuition fees and computation of other fees got
Least Effective rating from both group of respondents on the part of accuracy
rating on the part of the users respondent while Least effective and even not
effective ratings was given by the admin group of respondents. In terms of user
friendliness indicators, Troubles shooting item got Not Effective rating and
graphics interface item got Least Effective rating from the users group of
respondents. Same items got Not Effective rating from the Admin group of
get and the lowest is Not Effective rating from both group of respondents.
or GPA per grading period got the lowest rating of Not Effective from both group
per grading period got the lowest rating of Not Effective from both group of
respondents. For User Friendliness indicator, Graphics interface item got most
number of Moderate Effective and Trouble Shooting got the lowest rating of Not
Effective from the Users group of respondents. On the other hand Graphics
Interface and Trouble Shooting Items got the most number of Not Effective rating
from the Admin group of respondents. For Security indicator, got the most
The indicators are not applicable in the sense that both system are
generate good services not only for the students but to other offices requesting for