THE EFFICIENCY AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF THE IMMACULATE

CONCEPTION (UIC) ENROLLMENT SYSTEM AS ASSESSED BY ITS USERS

Emma Sagarino, Richel Mae Camales, Raffy Vincent Castillo, Farrah Claire Delima,
Chessa Faminialagao, June Requillo, Karl Kershey Valmoria,
Karl Vinmar Mendiola, and Mark Quin Mingo

Accountancy and Business Administration Program

ABSTRACT

An inefficient and ineffective university enrolment system may add to the stresses a student could
experience in his college life particularly during the enrolment period. Hence, for the purpose of
providing feedback to the UIC administration, this study was conducted to assess the college
enrolment system as to its efficiency and effectiveness. The survey using a researchers-made
questionnaire was administered to 365 randomly selected college students on the first semester of
the academic year 2014-2015. The results were triangulated through interviews with three
personnel—a registrar’s staff, a cashier and an academic coordinator. Respondents find the
enrolment system to be averagely efficient and effective. However, there are some issues that
need to be addressed and these include insufficiency of evaluators, lack of familiarity on the
curriculum of the evaluators, and inadequacy of time for evaluating students prior to the enrolment
period particularly on the second semester. Moreover, the efficiency of the enrolment system is
dependent on the efficiency of its subsystem. Hence, a malfunction of one component could affect
the efficiency of the succeeding components. Tukey results show that the Education group is the
least satisfied clientele while the first year students are the most satisfied group.

Keywords: Academic research, enrolment system, efficiency, effectiveness, Davao City

INTRODUCTION
One of the stressful activities a college student would undergo may include enrolling
oneself every semester. Apparently, the issues and concerns faced by the students could be
attributed to the type of system the school is utilizing. Anderson (2011) had noted that under the
traditional paper-based system, the number of newly enrolled students with their respective year
levels are based on approximates until the forms have been processed. Consequently, this system
will not be facilitative in anticipating the required number of classrooms, the needed number and
the field of expertise of faculty that would most likely result to an overshoot student-to-teacher ratio.
More so, some college students in Davao City colleges and universities would compare the
efficiency of the enrolment system of their respective institution during the enrolment period.
Efficiency is often measured by the students in terms of the number of hours or days they have
spent before they could complete the enrollment process. This comparison of experiences when
enrolling is an indication that college students give credence to the quality of enrolment system
their school has.
To address the tedious and costly processes of enrolment system many schools have
shifted to a computerized system. In fact, some have even explored online registration systems
which eliminate the use of paper forms. An online student enrolment and registration system

1
eliminate the physical cost of paper forms and the need to manually transcribe them. The online
system offers the following advantages: up-to-date information, seamless integration, facilitates e-
commerce and many more. As gleaned from their respective websites these are some of the
schools in the Philippines, which are now using online enrolment system: University of the East
(Obillo and Doloric, 2008); Siliman University; University of the Philippines, Cebu; Adventist
University of the Philippines, Adamson University and Ateneo de Davao University.
In response to the call of time, the UIC started using a computerized enrolment system in
1994. However, since then there was no evaluation made as to the efficiency and effectiveness of
the said system, this study has been conducted. As provided by the university registrar’s office, the
enrolment system comprises of five areas—evaluation, cashier, loading, printing and validation.
The result of this study could serve as a form of feedback to the UIC school administrators
as regards the views of the students on the effectiveness and efficiency of the college enrolment
system. It is hoped that the findings of this investigation may serve as a basis for making decisions
to improve further the enrolment system utilized by the college department.
Conceptual Framework
Efficiency, as defined by Thesaurus refers to the accomplishment of a task with a minimum
amount of time which could also be referred to as the competency in performance. In this study,
efficiency pertains to completing the whole process of enrolment with the most reasonable time.
Hence, the efficiency of the enrolment system is conceived to be indicated by the promptness of
the personnel assigned to the different sub-systems (evaluation/loading, cashier, encoding, printing
and validation) of the enrolment system, their ability to complete a task within a reasonable period
of time, adequacy of personnel assigned in each sub-system, sufficiency of equipment and the
quick role of the computerized system in facilitating the transactions.
On the other hand, effectiveness pertains to the accomplishment of the intended result
(Thesaurus). Thus, contextually the effectiveness of the enrolment system is manifested by the
correctness of loaded subjects and financial record as indicated in the Class Schedule and
Assessment Record (CSAR) of each student.
Further, it was conceived that the efficiency and effectiveness of the enrolment system will
vary based on the profile of the respondents.

Profile  Efficiency level

- evaluation
 Age - cashier
 Sex - encoding
 Program - printing
 Academic status - validation
 Effectiveness
- Correctness of entries of the
loaded subjects.
- Correctness of the financial
obligation

Figure 1. Conceptual Framework

2
Statement of the Problem

This study assessed the efficiency and effectiveness of the UIC enrolment system from the
perspective of the college students who have been dependent on the system each time they would
enroll every semester. Specifically, it answered the following questions:

1. What is the profile of the respondents in terms of

1.1 Sex
1.2 Academic Status
1.3 Year Level
1.4 Program?

2. What is the level of efficiency of the Enrollment System as experienced by the UIC
Students?

3. What is the level of effectiveness of the Enrollment System as experienced by the UIC
Students?

4. Is there a significant difference in the level of efficiency when the respondents are grouped
according to their profile?

5. Is there a significant difference in the level of effectiveness when the respondents are
grouped according to their profile?

METHOD

The study intended to describe the evaluation rating of the users particularly the college
students as to the efficiency and effectiveness of the UIC enrolment system thus; the research
design was descriptive-evaluative. Further, the insights of select personnel who utilized the
enrolment system were also elicited through a qualitative approach--interviews.

This study was conducted at the University of the Immaculate Conception, Davao City.
UIC is run by the Religious of the Virgin Mary (RVM), a religious congregation founded by Mo.
Ignacia del Espiritu Santo. At present, UIC has three campuses one is in Bajada, which houses the
basic education department and the other two campuses where the college students and the
graduate students hold classes are located at Fr. Selga Street which is the main campus and in
Bonifacio Street known as the annex campus. Since the evaluation was done primarily by the
college students, then the investigation was made in the UIC Fr. Selga and Bonifacio campuses.

The respondents were composed of 365 (based on Research Advisors, 2006) college
students from nine programs—Accountancy and Business Administration (ABA), Education (educ),
Liberal Arts (LA), Engineering and Architecture (EA), Information Technology Education (ITE),
Medical Laboratory Science (MLS), Nutrition and Dietetics and Hotel and Restaurant Management

3
(ND/HRM), and Pharmacy (pharma). They were randomly selected and proportionately distributed
to the different courses.
Moreover, three personnel (one representative from the registrar’s office, one cashier and
one coordinator) were interviewed to triangulate the results of the survey. The staff from the
registrar’s office (RO) is in charge of receiving requirements from the students or parents/guardians
during enrolment. She had been working in the RO for three years. The cashier has been working
in UIC for 24 years and the third interviewee had served as an academic coordinator for six years.
The primary gathering tool for this research is researchers-made which was validated by
select experts in terms of clarity of directions, presentation and organization of items, suitability of
items, adequacy of items per category, ability to attain the purpose, objectivity and appropriateness
of scale. Further, it also went through a dry run (pilot testing) to test its reliability and it yielded a
Cronbach alpha coefficient of .825. The questionnaire is composed of three parts—part 1 is about
the profile of the respondents which are in checklist form, part 2 is about efficiency and Part 3
pertains to the effectiveness. The items leading to the evaluation of the efficiency and effectiveness
of the enrolment system utilized a 4-point Likert scale (4 - highly agree, 3 - agree, 2 moderately
agree and 1 disagree). More so, in-depth interview guide questions were formulated to verify some
problematic areas implicated from the survey results.
T-test and analysis of variance were done to determine whether a significant difference
exists in the level of efficiency and effectiveness of the enrolment system when respondents are
categorized according to their profile. The level of efficiency and effectiveness were interpreted
using the matrix below.
Scale Description Interpretation
3.25 – 4.00 High Very efficient/very effective
2.50 – 3.24 Average Efficient/effective
1.75 – 2.49 Low Fairly efficient/fairly effective
1.00 – 1.74 Very Low Not efficient/not effective

4
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Profile of the Respondents

The respondents are composed of more females (61%) than males (39%) as shown in
Figure 1. The majority is regular students comprising of 77% while 23% is categorized as irregular
students (Figure 2). As to year level, almost one thirds (32%) are first year students, while the rest
are almost equally distributed to second year, third year and fourth year representing 24%, 22%
and 21%, respectively (Figure 3). Moreover, the respondents are dominated by ABA (23%),
Pharmacy (16%) and MLS (15%) students as they represent the three biggest programs in the
university (Figure 4).

39%

Female
61%
Male

Figure 1. Sex of the Respondents

23%

Regular
77% Irregular

Figure 2. Academic Status of the Respondents

5
 1%
1st year
21% 32% 2nd year

3rd year

22% 4rth year

5th year
24%

Figure 3. Year Level of the Respondents

25% 23%

20% 16% 15%

15%
9% 9% 10%
10% 7% 8%

5% 3%

0%

Figure 4. Course of the Respondents

Level of Efficiency of the Enrolment System

Generally, the respondents rated the efficiency level of the enrolment system to be
average as manifested by an overall mean of 2.70. Among the indicators of efficiency, the item
which yielded the highest mean (2.78) pertains to evaluation while the lowest mean (2.66) pertains
to the encoding section. This result implies that the evaluation mechanism is found to be more
efficient as compared to the dynamics of the other areas such as cashier, encoding, printing and
validation.
Under the evaluation section, it is noteworthy that the respondents find the personnel to be
organized (m=2.84) and facilitative (m=2.84). It could be noted however, that there is a need to
improve the sufficiency of the personnel with a mean of 2.61. The two interviewees—the registrar’s
staff and academic coordinator agree on the observation on insufficiency of evaluators. They even
added that aside from the concern in number, the lack of familiarization of teacher evaluators in the
curriculum is another issue that must be addressed. If the evaluator lacks knowledge on the
prerequisite subjects most likely he/she would commit errors—advising students to enroll subjects
even without completing the pre-requisite subjects. Policy of the registrar states that subjects will
be nullified if pre-requisite subjects were not taken or were failed.

6
 Another concern that was raised by the academic coordinator is the insufficiency of time
for evaluating students prior to the enrolment period of the second semester. This situation is a
consequence of the short span of time between the submission of final grades for the first
semester (end of October) and the enrolment period (first week of November).
A similar result is noticeable in the cashiering section in which the sufficiency of personnel
was also rated the lowest with a mean of 2.45. Whereas, the section’s strength is on the efficiency
of the computerized system in facilitating the payment of the enrollees (m=2.79). The interviewed
cashier disagrees on the observation of the students as to the insufficiency of the number of
cashiers during enrolment especially in the Fr. Selga campus. According to her the long queue of
students are often caused by inaccuracies committed in the encoding section. Examples of
inaccuracies are non-reflection of laboratory subjects, NSTP or ROTC, deficiency of signatures in
the plotting form, and failure of the enrollee to reflect her/his family name. She even claimed that
given a normal situation where all the necessary information have been loaded appropriately in the
student’s record, a cashier can complete each transaction within one minute.
For the encoding/loading section, sufficiency of personnel has also been rated with the
lowest mean of 2.59 though respondents still consider the computerized system contributory to its
efficiency to encode the subjects to be enrolled during the semester (m=2.76). The three
interviewees unanimously observed that the efficiency of the encoding/loading section rely on the
quality of the evaluation and plotting of subjects. They said that if correct subjects with its
corresponding schedules and classroom assignments are plotted clearly by the
students/parents/guardians, the encoding/loading will be done seamlessly.
On the other hand, for the printing section two items are equally recognized to be
efficient—the printing of CSAR (m=2.76) and the utilization of the computerized system in
facilitating the printing of the CSAR (m=2.76). In this area, the sufficiency of the printer
necessitates improvement as it yielded the lowest mean of 2.58. However, the cashier disagrees
on this observation because according to her, it is the evaluation and plotting that must be
perfected. She had reiterated three times during the interview that the erroneous output of the
previous sections will make the cashiering and printing inefficient. This observation of the cashier
that inefficiency of a section would affect the efficiency of the other sections of the enrolment
system confirms the systems theory (Checkland, 1997). Apparently, systems theory emphasizes
on the relations between the parts and how they work together as a whole (Chikere and Nwoka,
2015).
For validation component, the computerized system was still noted to be a good feature
with a mean of 2.75. The promptness of the personnel in reporting to their duty was rated the
lowest (m=2.63). This result implies that the students are very keen as regards the punctuality of
the personnel who would facilitate the enrolment. It can be observed that during enrolment period
several students arrive in the school ahead of the personnel.

7
Table 1. Level of efficiency of the enrolment system as experienced by students
Indicators Mean SD Description
A. Evaluation section 2.78 Average
1. Evaluator’s reporting to the evaluation area on time (on or before 7:30
2.79 .84 Average
AM).
2. Reasonableness of the period consumed in evaluating each student. 2.83 .79 Average
3. Organization of the personnel handling the evaluation. 2.84 .84 Average
4. Sufficiency of personnel in the evaluation area to accommodate the
2.61 .89 Average
students during enrolment.
5. Facilitation of the evaluation of every student during enrolment. 2.84 .89 Average
B. Cashier 2.67 Average
6. Reporting of cashier to designated area on time (on or before 7:30 AM). 2.72 .86 Average
7. Systematized cashiers 2.66 .88 Average
8. Sufficiency of cashiers to accommodate the students during enrolment 2.45 .91 Low
9. Reasonableness of the cashier in completing the transaction with
2.71 .91 Average
each student during enrolment.
10. Efficiency of a computerized system in facilitating payment of every
2.79 .94 Average
student during enrolment.
C. Encoding 2.66 Average
11. Encoder’s reporting to the loading area on time (on or before 7:30
2.63 .92 Average
AM).
12. Systematic organization personnel in the loading area 2.64 .93 Average
13. Reasonableness of time consumed in loading subjects. 2.67 .92 Average
14. Sufficiency of personnel in the loading area to accommodate the
2.59 .88 Average
students during enrolment.
15. Efficiency of a computerized system in facilitating loading of subjects. 2.76 .94 Average
D. Printing 2.69 Average
16. Reporting of the personnel in the printing section on time (on or before
2.67 .91 Average
7:30 AM)
17. Systematic organization of personnel in the printing section. 2.70 .89 Average
18. Reasonableness of time consumed in the printing of CSAR. 2.76 .93 Average
19. Sufficiency of printers in the printing section during enrolment. 2.58 .94 Average
20. Efficiency of the computerized system in facilitation the printing of
2.76 .92 Average
CSAR
E. Validation 2.68 Average
21. Reporting of personnel in the validation area on time (on or before
2.63 .88 Average
7:30AM)
22. Systematic organization of personnel in the validation area. 2.66 .88 Average
23. Reasonableness of time consumed in validating an Identification card
2.68 .89 Average
(ID).
24. Efficiency of a computerized system in facilitating the validation of an
2.75 .96 Average
ID.
Overall mean 2.70 .66 Average

8
Level of Effectiveness of the Enrolment System

The respondents find the enrolment system of the college department of the university to
be effective as manifested by an overall mean of 2.91. The two indicators of effectiveness which
yielded the highest mean pertains to the accuracy of financial record as reflected in the receipt
(m=3.04) and the accuracy of the subjects enrolled as reflected in the CSAR (m=3.00). Moreover, it
is noteworthy that the use of the computerized system is found to be effective in facilitating the
evaluation of the subjects of the students with a mean of 2.99.
The three indicators which were rated the lowest include the reliability of schedule of
classes as reflected in the CSAR (m=2.76), reliability of room assignment (m=2.79) and the
monitoring of deficient subjects every enrolment (m=2.84). In line with these issues, the program
coordinator commented that the possible cause of the unreliability is that the changes in schedules
and classroom assignments after the enrolment were not effectively disseminated to the students.
Hence, there are students who might be lost due to the changes of schedules and classroom
assignments especially those who failed to report on the first and second day of classes. This
comment is a confirmation that some of the information contained in the CSAR may not be
absolute—changes may still occur depending on the availability of the classrooms and teachers.

Table 2. Level of effectiveness of the enrolment system

Indicators Mean SD Description
1. Effectiveness of a computerized system in facilitating the 2.99 .85 Average
evaluation of subjects.
2. Accuracy of the reflected payment in the receipt. 3.04 .88 Average
3. Accuracy of the list of subjects to enroll based on evaluation 3.00 .89 Average
4. Accuracy of all the subjects enrolled as reflected in the CSAR. 2.95 .89 Average
5. Readability of the CSAR all throughout the semester 2.95 .90 Average
6. Recognizable character of the ID in the turn style all throughout 2.90 .92 Average
the semester
7. Monitoring of deficient subjects every enrolment. 2.84 .94 Average
8. Justifiability of the advices of the evaluator regarding the subject 2.91 .87 Average
that should be enrolled.
9. Reliability of the subjects reflected in the CSAR. 2.93 .95 Average
10. Reliability of the room assignment per subject as reflected in the 2.79 .91 Average
CSAR.
11. Reliability of schedule of classes as reflected in the CSAR. 2.76 .95 Average
Overall mean 2.91 .72 Average

Variability of the Responses on the Efficiency of the Enrolment System

The rating of the respondents (Table 3) on the efficiency of the enrolment system
significantly differ according to program (p<.05). The programs with the highest mean include the
Music, ITE, LA, and ABA while the program with the lowest mean is the Education. The Tukey test
revealed that in the following pairs the former group finds the enrolment system more efficient as
compared to its counterpart—ABA and Educ, ABA and Pharma, LA and Educ, EA and Educ, ITE
and Educ, ND/HRM and Educ, MLS and Educ, LA and Pharma, ABA and Pharma. This result

9
implies that the Education group is the least satisfied clientele of the university in terms of the
enrolment system. Moreover, this result connotes that the implementation of the enrolment process
differ because each program takes care of the evaluation and loading of subjects. Hence, the
Education program must find ways to improve its technique in implementing the enrolment
processes.
The assessment on the efficiency also significantly vary when respondents are categorized
according to year level (p<.05). Tukey results show that the first year respondents rated the
efficiency of the enrolment system higher as compared to the second year, third year and fourth
year respondents. This finding signifies that the first year is the happiest group when it comes to
the efficiency of the enrolment system. This result could be understandable as the first year
students’ enrolment does not require an evaluation of subjects similar to the higher years. Once the
freshmen applicant passed the entrance examination, he/she is required to fill-up the application
form in the admission office and attach the required documents such as high school report card,
NSO birth certificate and 2x2 picture. The admission director will interview the applicant. Then, the
student will pay the necessary down payment (cashier’s office), accomplish the computer-based
profiling, submit the documents to the registrar’s office, wait for the loading of subjects and claim
the Class Schedule and Assessment Record (CSAR).
It could be noted however, that the respondents have the same level of rating on the
efficiency of the college enrolment system when they are categorized as to sex and academic
status as manifested by p-values of .387 and .553, respectively (Table 4). This result could mean
that female has the same level of endurance and patience with that of her male counterpart. The
finding on the academic status refutes the assumption that non-regular students would most likely
find the system inefficient due to the longer time consumed during their evaluation.

Table 3. Analysis of variance in the level of efficiency of the enrolment system when respondents
are grouped according to program and year level
Group n Mean p-value Interpretation
Course
ABA 87 2.87
Educ 24 2.08
EA 35 2.60
ITE 39 3.00
Significantly
LA 28 2.90 .000
different
MLS 57 2.66
Music 13 3.09
ND/HRM 29 2.64
Pharma 60 2.44
Year Level
1st year 120 2.98
2nd year 87 2.57
Significantly
3rd year 82 2.62 .000
different
4rth year 78 2.50
5th year 5 2.38

10
Table 4. Test of the significance of the difference in the level of efficiency when respondents are grouped
according to sex and academic status
Group n Mean F p-value Interpretation
Sex
Female 226 2.68 Not significantly
.750 .387
Male 146 2.72 different
Academic Status
Regular 285 2.76 Not significantly
3.53 .553
Non-Regular 87 2.48 different
Variability of the Responses on the Effectiveness of the Enrolment System

As shown in Table 5, respondents’ rating on the effectiveness of the enrolment system

significantly differs based on course grouping (p<.05). Education program yielded the least mean
(2.15) and this level caused the significant difference. This result implies that the Education
program find the enrolment system not as effective as compared to what the other programs had
experience.
On the other hand, the first year students find the enrolment system significantly more
effective as compared to what the other year levels felt (p<.05). Again, this result connotes that the
standard of the first year students could be lower as compared to the other year levels. Another
possible reason is that since block section scheme is being applied to the first year students, the
probability of committing error in the CSAR is very limited.
However, the respondents’ rating on the effectiveness of the enrolment system is of the
same level regardless of their sex and academic status with p-values lesser than .05 (Table 6).
This finding negates the idea that non-regular students would most likely give lesser rating
because of the difficulty they usually experience when enrolling.

Table 5. Analysis of variance on the level of effectiveness of the enrolment system when
respondents are grouped according to program and year level
Group n Mean p-value Interpretation
Course
ABA 87 3.09
Educ 24 2.15
Eng’ng 35 2.73
ITE 39 3.24
Significantly
LA 28 3.00 .000
different
MLS 57 2.95
Music 13 3.20
ND/HRM 29 2.81
Pharma 60 2.78
Year Level
1st year 120 3.20
2nd year 87 2.85
Significantly
3rd year 82 2.83 .000
different
4rth year 78 2.67
5th year 5 2.22

11
Table 6. Test of the significance of the difference in the level of effectiveness when respondents
are grouped according to sex and academic
Group n Mean F p-value Interpretation
Sex
Female 226 2.68 Not significantly
.750 .387
Male 146 2.72 different
Academic Status
Regular 285 2.97 Not significantly
.001 .972
Non-regular 87 2.74 different

Conclusions

The UIC enrolment system is perceived to be averagely efficient. The concerns that were
identified under the evaluation component are the following—insufficiency of evaluators, lack of
familiarity on the curriculum of the evaluators, and inadequacy of time for evaluating students prior
to the enrolment period particularly on the second semester. Inaccuracies in the encoding section
are noted to prevent the efficiency of the cashiering while the quality of the evaluation and plotting
affects the efficiency of encoding. Hence, efficiency of the enrolment system is dependent on the
efficiency of its sub-system.
The enrolment system is also averagely effective. The issues that hamper its excellent
effectiveness could be attributed to the ineffectual dissemination of changes in the schedules and
classroom assignments prior to the start of classes. This is an implication that the classroom
assignments indicated in the CSAR are not definite.
As to the enrolment system’s efficiency and effectiveness, the Education group is the least
satisfied clientele while the first year students are the most satisfied group. Male and female,
regular and non-regular students equally find the system to be efficient and effective.

12
 References

Anderson, (2011). Paper-Based Enrollment: Problems and Solutions. School Business Affairs.
Retrieved on December 10, 2014 from
http://www.schoolofficepro.com/paper_based_enrollment_problems_and_solutions.pdf

AUP Online Information System. Retrieved on January 19, 2015 from http://www.aup.edu.ph/aolis/

Checkland, P. (1997). Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Chikere C. and Nwoka J. (2015). The Systems Theory of Management in Modern Day
Organizations - A Study of Aldgate Congress Resort Limited Port Harcourt. International
Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 5, Issue 9, September 2015 1 ISSN
2250-3153.

Enrolment and CRS. Retrieved on January 19, 2015 from

http://upcebu.edu.ph/admissions/enrollment-and-crs/

Obillo C. and Doloric V. (2008). UELaunches Web-based Enrollment. Retrieved on January 19,
2015 from https://www.ue.edu.ph/manila/uetoday/index.php?nav=19.htm&archive=200805

Online Enrollment of Siliman University. Retrieved on January 19, 2015 from

http://su.edu.ph/page/26-Admission-Procedures

Primer for online enrolment for First Semester, SY 2013-2014

http://www.adamson.edu.ph/?page=viewannouncements&newsid=827

Research Advisors (2006). Sample Size Table. Retrieved on May 20, 2015 from
http://www.research-advisors.com/tools/SampleSize.htm

Student Information System of Ateneo de Davao University. Understanding the College Student
Enrollment Process. Retrieved on January 19, 2015 from https://sis.addu.edu.ph/

Thesaurus. Retrieved on August 15, 2015 from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/efficiency

13
 Appendix A. Questionnaire

Q#_______

Dear UIC Student

Please evaluate the UIC Enrollment system as to its efficiency and effectiveness using the instrument
below.

Name (Optional) __________________________________Age_______________Gender____________

Course & Year_______________________________

Academic Status: Regular (______) Irregular (_______)

Instruction: Please use the scale below in evaluating the efficiency of the enrollment system. Please
check the box (cell) that best corresponds to your answers.

4 Highly agree, 3 Agree, 2 Moderately Agree, 1 Disagree

A. Efficiency

Please check the box that best corresponds to your answers.

Items 4 3 2 1
1. The evaluator reports to the evaluation area on time (before 7:30 AM).
2. The period consumed in evaluating each student is reasonable.
3. The personnel handling the evaluation are well organized.
4. There are enough personnel in the evaluation area to accommodate the
students during enrolment.
5. The use of a computerized system efficiently facilitates the evaluation of every
student during enrolment.
6. The cashier reports to his/her designated area on time or before 7:30 AM.

7. The cashiers are very systematic.

8. There are enough cashiers to accommodate the students during enrolment

9. The cashier completes the transaction with each student during enrolment
within a reasonable period.
10. The use of a computerized system efficiently facilitates the payment for every
student during enrolment.
11. The encoder reports to the loading area on time or before 7:30 AM.
12. The personnel in the loading area are very systematic.
13. The personnel in the loading area load the subject within a reasonable time.
14. There are enough personnel in the loading area to accommodate the students
during enrolment.
15. The use of a computerized system efficiently facilitates the loading of subjects
during enrolment.
16. The personnel reports in the printing area on time or before 7:30 AM.
17. The personnel in the printing area are very systematic.
18. The printing of CSAR is completed within a reasonable time.
19. There are enough printers in the printing area during enrolment.

14
20. The use of a computerized system efficiently facilitates the printing of CSAR
during enrolment.
21. The personnel reports in the validation area on time or before 7:30 AM.
22. The personnel in the validation area are very systematic.
23. The validation of IDs is made within a reasonable time.
24. The use of a computerized system efficiently facilitates the validation of IDs .

B. Effectiveness

Items 4 3 2 1
1. The use of a computerized system effectively facilitates the evaluation of my
subjects during enrolment.
2. The payment I made as reflected in the receipt is exact.

3. The subjects I am supposed to enroll every semester are accurately loaded

during enrolment.
4. All the subjects I enrolled every semester are correctly reflected in my CSAR.
5. The CSAR is readable all throughout the semester.
6. My validated ID is recognizable in the turn style all throughout the semester.
7. The deficiency/subjects that I failed are monitored every enrolment
8. Advices of the evaluator regarding the subject I will enroll is justifiable.
9. The subjects reflected in the CSAR are reliable.
10. The room assignment per subject reflected in the CSAR is reliable.
11. The schedule of classes reflected in the CSAR is reliable.

15
 Appendix B. Interview Guide Questions

1. How long have you been working in UIC particularly in your current designation?
2. How do you find your job especially during enrolment period?
3. Did the current enrolment system help you in reducing the challenges you face during
enrolment period?
4. Please rate the UIC enrolment system as to its efficiency from 1 to 5, 5 as the highest.
Please justify your rating.
Indicators of efficiency: promptness of the personnel assigned to the different sub-systems
(evaluation, cashier, encoding, printing and validation) of the enrolment system, their ability to
complete a task within a reasonable period of time, adequacy of personnel assigned in each sub-
system, sufficiency of equipment and the quick role of the computerized system in facilitating the
transactions.
5. Please rate the enrolment system as to its effectiveness from 1 to 5, 5 as the highest.
Please justify your rating.
Indicators of effectiveness: correctness of loaded subjects and financial obligation as
indicated in the Class Schedule and Assessment Record (CSAR) of each student.

6. This item is intended for the registrar’s office representative. Under the printing section
sufficiency of printers yielded the lowest rating from the respondents. Do you agree with
this observation? Why?

This item is intended for the cashier. Under the cashier’s component, sufficiency of
personnel yielded the lowest rating. Do you agree with this observation? Why?

This item is intended for the evaluator. Under the evaluation component, sufficiency of the
personnel to accommodate students during enrolment system yielded the lowest rating. Do
you agree with this observation? Why?

7. For the assessment of the effectiveness, there were three items which were rated the
lowest--the reliability of schedule of classes as reflected in the CSAR (m=2.76), reliability
of the room assignment per subject as reflected in the CSAR (m=2.79) and the monitoring
of deficient subjects every enrolment (m=2.84). What do you think are the reasons why
they find these items/areas not very effective?

8. What do you think are areas that still need improvement in the current enrolment system of
the university?

16