Heading Image Start ASSIST Info Center Home Page

Responses to the questions posted using online chat during CCC Confer Curriculum and Articulation Systems Webinar. Similar questions have been combined.

  1. Sometimes the articulation requires a letter grade and no grade of "CR" or "Pass/No Pass" is allowed. Was that accounted for in the minimum grade required data options?

  2. Response: The data for the look up values hasn't been finalized. Grade type is one of the attributes already considered and on the Next Gen list. This scenario will be handled.

  3. Are these prefixes going to be prepopulated for us in NEXT GEN from the legacy system?

  4. Response: Yes, the conversion from ASSIST legacy system will populate the Next Gen system for all the prefixes, prefix history, course numbers, course outlines, titles, transferability, and outlines. Some base course articulation will be converted as well, but full agreements will not be imported.

  5. Is back dating available or would a school need to go in term by term to adjust an articulation?

  6. Response: All of the data on the back end (in progress data) is managed either by academic year or year term and is assumed to continue from the point it's changed or until the system has another change recorded. If articulation needed to be changed in the past, the user could return to a previous year term and make that change and as long as there wasn't another change in the system for a future year term that would move forward until changed. If an overarching change needed to be made (ex. A version removed or backdating a change) that would be available from the History Editor available to administrative users. Those effects would be on the 'in progress' data. In Next Gen when a change is made it will persist until changed again. If a course needed to be change from 2012 through the present date that could easily be accomplished by making the change in term 2012 and the change will be carried through today and beyond until changed again.

  7. But not previous to the 2014-15 agreements? Right?

  8. Response: This is a very good point. All historical agreements will be brought into ASSIST Next Gen in PDF format, 'frozen.' Any changes made will not be reflected on past 'PDF' agreements but will be reflected for those agreements generated from within Next Gen. So this change option refers to future agreements or those built into Next Gen, not the data brought over in conversion.

  9. Why is ENV ST101 and ENVS101 displayed here?

  10. Response: Data conversion issue.

  11. When you say the begin date can be adjusted by the administrator, that does not change the existing published agreement?

  12. Response: Correct. Any adjustments made still need to be pushed forward by the AO to make those changes available on the public side. Those changes are simply for the in progress data. Course or articulation changes made within Next Gen will remain as work in progress until a user controlled process is run to move the changes into the Public view.

  13. Is it possible to test the initial import and purge bad import and re-import?

  14. Response: Data conversion testing and re-running is currently in process internally. There will be opportunities for AO review.

  15. Is the "administrator" that may change the begin date someone other than the Articulation Officer?

  16. Response: There is a feature in Next Gen that allows an Administrator (currently identified as ACS staff) to use a system function to change a value in history. This is like a direct data update and not a preferred method and would only be used when another update method will not work. This is controllable on the profile, and as of now does not include AOs. It is part of 'set up' and is still being determined.

  17. How will prior years be viewable to the public?

  18. Response: All historical agreements will be brought into Next Gen in PDF format. This includes all that are currently available in the legacy system.

  19. Will there be a history for the attributes available?

  20. Response: Yes - History will be kept for all values.

  21. Limitations are on CCC side?

  22. Response: The limitations displayed varies based on the context. Shows for both CCC courses proposed or for articulation to courses at a 4 year.

  23. Will the "Impact" also show what majors that course is associated with?

  24. Response: Yes, the 'Impact' feature will show course transferability and the majors a course is associated with.

  25. Currently in the Legacy System, UC's cannot select a CCC course that is not UC Transferable for articulation purposes. Will this also be the case in NEXT GEN?

  26. Response: This is to be determined based on policies. Business rules can be implemented in either direction.

  27. Could we view if a course is UC transferable on the articulation screens?

  28. Response: Yes, the transferability status is shown in the Transferability and Eligibility Report from the gear menu of a course.

  29. When an agreement is labeled as "Draft," will that flag be included in the data extracts to prevent it from populating in PeopleSoft?

  30. Response: For the current extract file formats that include the 'draft' flag they will continue to contain that field. For new file formats that need that flag it will be included. There are custom rules we can set up for extract files.

  31. Could we add a date to the denied course list?

  32. Response: It is not there right now but we will put it on the list for phase 3.

  33. How do you select a specific major not listed in the Share Major Section Manager?

  34. Response: All majors will be listed. You only see a couple here because not all major info has been imported. As majors are added, they will populate on this Share Major Section Manager list.

  35. Could there be a "share with the following majors" option, for when it should be shared with more than one major, but not ALL?

  36. Response: To use the Share feature for sharing a section with other majors, simply click the majors for sharing or select all or none at top of list.

  37. Does the Share Major Section Manager selection need to be done each time there is new articulation, e.g. Biology course to course?

  38. Response: This doesn't relate to articulation--articulation is automatically associated with a major in the system based on the courses included in the major--this is in the case that there are specific segments of a major that need to be used in more than one major. Either there is text used in multiple majors or there are specific sets of requirements used across multiple majors (Ex: a dept has a specific set of requirements).

  39. The font contrast is hard on eyes - too light

  40. Response: The system still needs to go through accessibility compliance review.

  41. Will the admissions text include ability to insert images, or will it be limited to text and hyperlinks?

  42. Response: The rich text boxes will allow the inclusion of images, hyperlinks, and formatted text.

  43. Is there a coding scheme to identify majors?

  44. Response: Each major does have an abbreviation associated with it. Major names are assigned by the universities to code them specifically if desired.

  45. Will the Community Colleges also be able to set up their local GE plans in this area as well? Can we access this information?

  46. Response: Access to the Articulation area is only limited by roles assigned. The system will fully allow access to any functionality, but policy would determine which groups have access to Articulation (or other areas of the system).

  47. Each of our majors does have a major code assigned by the CSUCO.

  48. Response: This is referencing CIP codes as a standard organizing principle for majors. Policy is determining if CIP codes will be used within Next Gen. CIP codes pertain to both CSU and UC.

  49. Is there a data dictionary for these footnote elements?

  50. Response: There is not data dictionary yet but it will be provided.

  51. Is there an XML "export" / report?

  52. Response: As an overview, we are looking at providing compatibility for what is currently available, as well as some other options.

  53. Are you using control + click to select the institutions? Will that work?

  54. Response: Selection of the institutions is a simple click on each to be included.

  55. Can you select multiple CSUs and one CCC?

  56. Response: Yes, that's one of the compare courses by major features. You can view either one 4 year with multiple CCCs or 1 CCC with multiple 4 years.

  57. Will Course Changes be one of the reports available?

  58. Response: Yes, the course change report will be available.

  59. Are there any plans to include each CCC TMC aligned ADT course requirements so comparisons can be generated between traditional major requirements and ADT requirements?

  60. Response: Not at this time.

  61. Shouldn't the GE designations be in this report?

  62. Response: Yes, GE designation can be included.

  63. What was the reason behind using True and False instead of Yes or No for UC and CSU transferable?

  64. Response: For reporting, either way is correct. We can use Yes / No if that is easier.

  65. So to confirm, all existing reports from assist maintenance reports will come over (course versions, course changes, etc.)?

  66. Response: Yes, the intention is to include all the ASSIST maintenance reports.

  67. Is there a field that indicates that an agreement between courses exists? Can I lookup courses that have agreements?

  68. Response: Regarding the data for course articulation, yes a field exists for indicating course articulation. That is an area still being developed.

  69. If I provide a CSU course, can I see what CCC courses have been articulated?

  70. Response: Yes, the data will support this function.

  71. Can the drop down boxes be modified so California State University is changed to CSU so the campus name can be viewed?

  72. Response: Yes, the abbreviation CSU and UC will be used in several areas of the system where screen field size is a limitation.

  73. Are the data sources going to be published? Or is it only through this interface?

  74. Response: We are looking at some ad hoc reporting features, but there will be other ways that data will be available to outside systems. All data extracts that you currently can access, you will still be able to receive on the same schedule with Next Gen. This is just a standard way of working with this data using the ad hoc reporting options.

  75. Will the CCC get access to the data marts?

  76. Response: Yes, data marts will be available through the ad hoc reporting feature. Roles could limit reports available. We are still working internally to determine any policy restrictions around who will have access to which data marts.

  77. Hi, when will the session be archived?

  78. Response: It is available now via: this link

  79. What are the important dates moving forward?

  80. Response: We are expecting a release at the end of 2015 to the articulation officers for setting up agreements and a public system go-live in mid-2016.

  81. Will CCC AO be able to see the denied history of a course?

  82. Response: Yes. Through the workflow function, a CCC course submitted for articulation but denied will provide system response to the originator.

  83. Will there be an interface with Ellucian Colleage ERP?

  84. Response: SIS interfaces are yet to be determined.

  85. How will we access legacy data after Next Gen is deployed?

  86. Response: This will be a policy decision from the oversight groups.

  87. Will we be able to preview the documentation before phase 3 comes online?

  88. Response: Documentation will be made available. Likely through the info.assist.org webpage on the Next Generation tab.

  89. Will you be providing a client for those who wish to use the web service, or does each institution need to build their own client?

  90. Response: We have more work and building around specifications to do in this area. For non-CurricUNET users, we welcome your input and feedback so that we can make sure we are coming to some kind of middle ground as far as meeting your needs.

  91. Ellucian has two product lines: Banner/DegreeWorks, and Colleague/Degree Audit/Student planning. Will you support the integration of the later one too?

  92. Response: Discussions haven't ruled out support of any these. DegreeWorks seems to be the most commonly used of these. We simply need to continue looking at options and working in this area.

  93. What technology are you using to develop the web service (PHP, .NET, something else)?

  94. Response: Our entire application is built on a Microsoft backbone; ASSIST Next Gen is based on C-Sharp.net/MVC Framework. Data will be 'served' from this system. We are also using a SQL server backend.

  95. Is there an ability to see what has been changed? Or do we have to keep track of changes ourselves? (In reference to year over year changes and what is transferable).

  96. Response: We track changes year over year and term over term. Any information that is related to what is transferable will be tracked.

  97. Will we be able to generate a downloadable list of all changes/updates made from the last catalog to zero in on transfer rules needing updates for the next catalog? Can this be added to the reporting list?

  98. Response: Something like this would need to be added to the available reports list. We'll take this down as a request and will explore further as development allows.

  99. Why tilde-delimited? I've never seen that as a standard delimited form. Our ERP has standard import hooks for CSV, Fixed-Width, and XML, which seem to be more common standards...

  100. Response: We took directly from existing specifications. XML is our preference but we will continue to provide files in the format in which they are available in the Legacy ASSIST system so that there will be a minimum need for change on most users' sides.

  101. What is your plan for supporting future enhancements/changes to campus degree audit programs?

  102. Response: It's a future consideration but this is yet to be determined at this point/phase in development.

  103. If using Microsoft's MVC framework, then you are using Web API's? So data will be coming down using REST, not SOAP?

  104. Response: This is our preference. The conclusion depends on what the client can support. If necessary we would build SOAP interfaces but our preference is to continue using the Web API.

  105. Will the Web Services API support import or only export?

  106. Response: At this time, we are focused on course outline changes as far as imports go. Anything beyond that needs a little more discussion and extrapolation.

  107. We want to update our transfer institution majors data; will this be available in text file format via ASSIST?

  108. Response: This is noted as a request and we will see how this fits into the rest of the structure we have planned.

  109. Where will the technical documentation for this project be posted?

  110. Response: Documentation will be on the ASSIST information site: info.assist.org under the "ASSIST Next Generation" tab. You'll get notice that this information is there through the appropriate list serve or channel.

  111. Can we build our UC to UC and CSU to UC articulations using ASSIST Next Gen?

  112. Response: Yes--system will support "any to any" articulation. There are no limitations the way it is being built.

  113. Are you planning to do an interface to PeopleSoft?

  114. Response: Tentatively, we think yes but this is something that needs further looking into.

  115. We would like to be able to load ASSIST data into the PeopleSoft Rules tables for External Education.

  116. Response: We can note this is a request but we'd need to know what data would be imported. It's something for consideration as we continue development of the curriculum management system portion of ASSIST Next Gen. Ultimately, our aim is to provide web services that make appropriate articulation data available.

  117. Is there a work-group in process to discuss those file format/ column lists etc.?

  118. Response: Not yet, but you can e-mail Project Manager Lenny Robison if interested in such a group. Lenny can be reached at lenny.robison@sbcglobal.net.

  119. Who do we contact to get on list for being part of workgroup/steering committee/beta testing?

  120. Response: E-mail Project Manager Lenny Robison (lenny.robison@sbcglobal.net).