acadev presentation
DESCRIPTION
About AcadevTRANSCRIPT
A c a d e m i c
D e v e l o p m e n t . . .
A c a D e v . C o m
Introduction
About Aca Dev.
Main Features
Academic Excellence Development.
Two in One (an Integrated system)
ADEQuATEs ©
ITIMAAD ©.
© A c a D e v . C o m
2 / 40
About A c a D e v
Academic Development is a software company.
Area of expertise: Academic Development,
Accreditation Projects Consultancy.
Products/services: software, consultancy, training and
system implementations
Targets: Education institutions
Purpose: accreditation and academic quality
development.
Products: ADEQuATEs © and ITEMAAD ©
© A c a D e v . C o m
3 / 40
Main Features
Web-based (intranet and internet)
Distributed and online application
Automated scheduling: tasks and courses
Automated Monitoring, moderating and task
controls.
Automated generation of Self Evaluation Scales
and Reports.
© A c a D e v . C o m
4 / 40
Main Features (continued)
Fully compatible with NCAAA formats and
requirements .
Fully compatible with ABET requirements.
Paperless environment: all reports, documents,
supporting proofs (analysis and results) are
uploaded to the system.
Trackable environment: The systems KNOWS
who did what and when by keeping histories of all
users' activities.
© A c a D e v . C o m
5 / 40
Academic Excellence Development.
Developed by a talented team of academicians with:
proven experience in academia, (measured in decades),
accreditation project management,
software development.
Conducted a profound system analysis and requirement
Specification
Scalable data bases design:
the system can be applied to one department and then scaled up to one
faculty, then can grow to encompass a set of colleges.
Object oriented design and coding.
© A c a D e v . C o m
6 / 40
Academic Excellence Development.
The Time issue
Current Problem
redundant communication via: fax, email, telephone, official and/or corridor
meetings,
a not-well-thought-of task assignment (unfair, unbalanced, , inconsistent,
black box, drown in a plethora of good-practices)
Acadev Completely eliminates the waste of time by:
A couple of meetings to set datelines, identify the task-forces and wisely
assign the tasks (good-practices)
All kind of users perform their assigned tasks online, with a priori fixed
datelines.
The system knows precisely the actual need for each and every good-practice
(a ratio, a number, a report, a questionnaire result, an argument, a
statement, etc...)
© A c a D e v . C o m
7 / 40
Academic Excellence Development.
The quality issue:
Current Problem
unclear responsibility/accountability through unprofessional task
handling
Quality of jobs not good since difficult to monitor all the assignments
Tremendously promotes and enforces academic quality:
Users will be motivated to conduct their tasks on time and with quality since:
Clarity: tasks are formally specified in the system.
Efficient Tracking: Managers can access and check online who is behind
schedule.
Quality control: Managers evaluate the quality of the completed tasks
Inherent consequence: the system instils a “Healthy” competition among
users.
© A c a D e v . C o m
8 / 40
Academic Excellence Development.
The black-box issue.
Current Problem
Unbalanced loads, unfair assignments, unrealistic deadlines.
Quality drops, because
assignment seen as a burden rather than a task, feels of injustice.
unclear responsibility/accountability through unprofessional task handling
difficult to monitor all the assignments
Enforce fairness and transparency in task assignment :
Users will be responsible and accountable for :
Transparency: Task-forces can see the status quo and the content of the
tasks undertaken by their peers.
System is trackable: managers knows who did what and when.
© A c a D e v . C o m
9 / 40
Academic Excellence Development.
The money issue.
Current Problem
TONS of print out needed for report and scanned documents.
A need might arise to develop in-house applications that support your
accreditation projects and academic development
Save a lot of money:
All documents are uploaded into a repository of the system. Practically a pure
paperless system. However, we recommend to the need for some summary or
synthesizing reports to be archived as hard copies.
Pay once and No licences fees needed for the platform (OS, Server, etc)
that will run the system.(refer to the last slides)
New functionalities can be added in an effective, efficient and easy manner.
© A c a D e v . C o m
10 / 40
Academic Excellence Development.
The Auditing issue.
Current Problem
MUST hire an independent reviewer to AUDIT the Tons of printed
documents
Freaking Time consuming
Frustration when he/she have a hell of time to find a specific
document
Affect his/her judgement
Cost a lot of money because of the audit effort and audit time
© A c a D e v . C o m
11 / 40
Academic Excellence Development.
The Auditing issue.
What does the NEW System offer? The independent reviewer has a userID and a password
He/she logs on to the system and can navigate his way
seamlessly through every good-practice in the most
flexible way.
For each good-practice, a synopsis , what is required and
the attached proofs are one click away from him/her.
At the end of each good-practice, the reviewer can see :
Self Evaluation Scales Report
the internal assessment.
Then, he/she can enter his /her:
Independent Opinion and
Independent overall assessment
© A c a D e v . C o m
Auditing time
tremendously
reduced.
Reviewer gives
positive review
Reviewer costs
much less
money
12 / 40
Two in One - an Integrated system
ADeQuATES
Academic Development and Quality Assurance for Teaching and
Education system
Faculty Management Module
Department Management Module
Program Management Module
Course Management Module
Staff Management Module
Stakeholder Management Module
(alumni, employers, advisors)
Feedback/questionnaire Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
13 / 40
Two in One - an Integrated system
ITEMAAD
Integrated Teaching and Education Management for
Accreditation and Academic Development
Task Assignment Management Module
Task-forces/Committees Management Module
Moderation/monitoring/control Management Module
Reporting/Self-Evaluation Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
14 / 40
ADeQuATES Architecture
*
ADeQuATES ©
Ma
na
gers
Dean
Admin
HoD*
Sta
keh
old
ers
Alumni
Employers
Program
Advisers
Sta
ff Instructors
Course
Directors
Program
managers
Programs Courses
Faculty/
College
Department
Feedback
StakeHolders’
Responses
*HoD: Head of
Department
© A c a D e v . C o m
15 / 40
F A
C U
L T
Y
Dep
art
men
ts
Co
mm
itte
es
Dean
Sta
ffs
Faculty Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
16 / 40
Complete information / details of a given
faculty/college
(name, dean, mission, vision, etc...)
Committees (faculty-level),
Departments and
staffs.
Faculty Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
17 / 40
Department Management Module
Dep
art
men
t
Pro
gra
ms
Co
mm
itte
es
Sta
ffs
HoD QA
Dean
© A c a D e v . C o m
18 / 40
Complete information
details of a given department (name, HoD, welcome
message, etc.)
Committees:
creating department-level committees.
Assigning committees chairs
Programs: creating programs
e.g., diploma, BSc, Postgraduate, etc.
Staffs: assigning academics
Department Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
19 / 40
COURSE
DIRECTORS
INSTRUCTORS
DEAN
PAEC
HoD
Other
COMMITTEES
consult
Assig
n c
ou
rses
/mo
nit
or
Devise a program
Design course
syllabus
Deliver courses /
Courses Direct
Assessment
Support Design/
improve program,
Evaluate a program
Monitor
STUDENTS
EMPLOYERS
ALUMNI
(indirect)
Program
Assessment
as a whole
PROGRAM
ADVISORS
Courses Indirect
Assessment
Program Evaluation
Findings, recommendations
Program Evaluation
Findings, recommendations
Monitor
Department Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
20 / 40
•course
1
Program
eg., BSc_CS
•Course Graded works
•Exit Forms
•Alumni feedback
•Employers feedback Course
directors
Instructors Alumni
•course2 •course51
PAEC
(Program Assessment
Evaluation Committee)
Students
•Program
Educational
Objectives
•PEO1,PEO2,
PEO3, PEO4,...
•ABET
•The 11 Student Outcomes
•SO1, …, SO11
•course1
…
Mapping Dom
Learns with PEOs
(NCAAA)
Mapping for each
course (Abet)
Employers
• NCAAA
•The 4 Learning Domains
•DL1, …, DL4
Mapping for each
course (NCAAA)
ACCREDITATION
BODY, NCAAA&
ABET
Map
pin
g D
om
Learn
s
wit
h P
EO
s (
Ab
et)
Program Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
21 / 40
Complete Program Specification
100% conform to NCAAA format
Context, Program Educational Objectives (PEOs),
structure/organization, Learning Domains, mission,
policies, etc.
Curriculum detail (courses, codes, credit hrs etc)
Mapping matrix
done automatically – synthesized form the mappings of individual
courses
NCAAA Domains of Learning versus PEOs
Abet Student Outcomes versus PEOs
Program Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
22 / 40
Complete Program Report
100% conform to NCAAA format
Generated Year to Year progression rates and some
pertinent statistics.
Automatic detection and generation of:
Courses with unusual results (e.g., grades <<low, >>high)
Courses with unusual stats (e.g., attendance <<low)
Automatic Performance result generation (Abet compliant)
Automatic detection of « problem courses » which help in
Decision Maker (e,g., action plan for improvements)
Program Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
23 / 40
•course1
Co
urs
e
•Direct
Assessment •Exit Forms
•Student feedback
Course Report
Instance for each
(sem/year)
•Course Delivery
Instance for each
(sem/year)
Co
urs
e S
yllab
us
UN
VA
RIA
NT
*
Course Learning
Outcomes •CLO1,CLO2…CLOn
•TextBooks,
•References
•Teaching : Materials
Strategies
•Direct
Assessment (graded works )
•ABET
•The 11 Student Outcomes
•SO1, …, SO11
• NCAAA
•The 4 Learning Domains
•DL1, …, DL4
Course
directors
Instructors
Students
Mapping
with CLOs
Assessing
Designing
Assessing
UNVARIANT *: A course syllabus is static by default , i.e., instructors must abide by its content when
delivering it. The only instance when the syllabus changes is when the PAEC advises the curriculum
committee to revise the syllabus.
Course Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m 24
Complete Course Specification (syllabus)
For each semester, an Online course
assignment activity is undertaken- by HoD.
Once a course is assigned to course director
and instructors:
Automatically, two course instances (delivery and
report) are created
Automatically, the main data is pulled from the course
syllabus and fill the two course instances.
Course Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
25 / 40
Course DELIVERY instance
For each semester, instructors:
Map course assessment scheme with CLOs
Enter marks. Then grades are generated automatically
For each assessment scheme,
a max, min, median graded work sample need to be
uploaded.
Automatic course performance calculation is triggered.
Automatic data are sent to the corresponding course
report instance.
Course Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
26 / 40
Course REPORT instance
For each semester, Course directors:
Fill in course report.
Automatic generation of pertinent information (stats and
results)
Automatic detection/generation of:
deviation from Course week-by-week delivery scheme (as stated
in syllabus)
deviation from assessment scheme (as stated in syllabus)
Course Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
27 / 40
P e
o p
l e
•management
HoD Dean
•Students
Admin
•Staff
•Stakeholders
•Alumni •Employers
•Program
Advisers
•management
People/Users Course Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
28 / 40
Administrator (or HoD/Dean) can:
Manage staff
Edit (create/update staff accounts and profile)
Assign roles and admin duties
Manage alumi
Edit (create/update Alumni students accounts and profiles)
Manage Employers
Edit (create/update Employers accounts and profile)
Manage Program Advisors
Edit (create/update Program Adviors accounts and profiles)
People/Users Course Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
29 / 40
F e
e d
b a
c k
•management
Feedback/
Questionnaire
Dynamic Design
•Questionnaire Responses From
•Alumni •Employers
•Program
Advisers
•management
Feedback & Questionnaire
Management Module
HoD Dean
Admin
© A c a D e v . C o m
30 / 40
Administrator (or HoD/Dean) can:
On the fly design a generic questionnaire
Set a dateline and assign it to a group of
responders
Monitor the responders feedback
Feedback & Questionnaire
Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
31 / 40
ITEMAAD Architecture
ITEMAAD©
Committees/
Task-forces Control/followup/
datelines
Document
Repository (scanned, proofs)
Man
ag
ers
Dean
Admin
HoD*
ADeQuATES ©
Reports, stats,
answers feedback
© A c a D e v . C o m
The NCAAA 2x11
Standards (institution and program levels)
32 / 40
Managers assign tasks to different task-forces and
committees)
Each task IS “good-practice” (NCAAA parlance)
assignment.
Allows flexibility of task assignment.
i.e. Instead of assigning a whole sub-standard to one team, a team
can work on similar good practices at different sub-standards .
Teams can :
Work independently
work cooperatively
check the status and the content of other tasks in the same sub-
standard.
ITEMAAD: Task Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
33 / 40
Each task has a start and end date.
Trigger events are awaken when datelines for task
completion are reached.
Report and feedback to the managers about the status quo
of tasks handling.
The system logs all activities of all users.
Each time a user update, upload, create, anything in the system, the
system will record all the pertinent information.
Managers can check what, when a particular user has done
something.
ITEMAAD: Moderation/monitoring/
control Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
34 / 40
An on-going automatic generation of Self-Evaluation
Scales Report for each sub-standard
Proofs of good practices can be :
scanned (soft-copy) documents uploaded to the systems,
report (programs and courses) automatically generated by
ADeQuATES
questionnaire results generated by ADeQuATES
Statistics data automatically fed by ADeQuATES
Arguments and explanations directly input by the responsible team
For each institution, an “independent” automatic “file
arborescence” that will harbor proofs of good-practices is
dynamically created.
ITEMAAD: Reporting/Self-Evaluation
Management Module
© A c a D e v . C o m
35 / 40
We used LAMP, HTML, CSS, Ajax and Javascript OS: Linux
Server: Apache
DATABASE: MySQL
Server Scripting: Php and Ajax
Client: scripting: Ajax and Javascript
Presentation: HTML and CSS
The main two advantages are the increased security and
the reduced cost of the end products as compared to
the licensing issues with Microsoft.
Technology and Development
© A c a D e v . C o m
36 / 40
Why LAMP technology?
Area LAMP ASP.NET
Performance Very good Often requires more expensive
hardware to perform well
Scalability Scales very well Can be difficult to scale
Administration Difficult: Often requires
reading
documentation and
editing text files
Easy: Often can be done through
point and click interface
Compatibility Very good: New versions
usually
backwards-compatible
Moderate: New versions often
break functionality
Configuration flexibility Extremely flexible Not very flexible
Technology and Development
© A c a D e v . C o m
37 / 40
Why LAMP technology?
Area LAMP ASP.NET
Licensing cost No licensing cost Expensive licensing cost
Platform(s) Multiple Windows only
Hardware Costs
Runs on very inexpensive servers
Requires slightly more expensive servers
Staffing Somewhat difficult to find qualified people
Very easy to find qualified people
Security Very good Historically very bad, but improved recently
Technology and Development
© A c a D e v . C o m
38 / 40
Please Visit: www.acadev.com
And/or contact the following:
Contact Contact Info Address
Mr. Randy Hill
CIO
Email: [email protected]
In IT Business since 1993
Dr. Hallam Nasreddine,
System Architect
Email: [email protected]
In academia since 1993
70 W 36th Street New York,
NY 10018 Tel 1: 1-347 784 4742
Mr. Genois Julien, Software
Engineer
Email: [email protected]
In academia since 1996
Mr LeBlanc, Marc, Database Administrator
Email: [email protected]
In academia since 1986
Prof. Dr. Abou Elhassan Benyamina, Software Engineer
Email: [email protected]
In academia since 1988
More details
© A c a D e v . C o m
39 / 40
Please Visit: www.acadev.com
And/or contact the following:
Contact Contact Info Address
Dr. Benyamina Djohara,
Software Engineer, server
administrator
Email: [email protected]
In academia since 1994
Mrs Sara Aw, Software Engineer
Email: [email protected]
In academia since 1999
70 W 36th Street New York,
NY 10018 Tel 1: 1-347 784 4742
Mrs Iris Boardman, secretary Sarah Djani
BI
Email: [email protected]
Business Intelligence
More details
© A c a D e v . C o m
40 / 40