limitless data in a data driven world 4.4.16
TRANSCRIPT
Limitless Data In A Data Driven World:
Implementing A Data Warehouse
Cassandra Elizondo, Assistant Registrar for Student Systems and Technology
www.utah.edu
April 4th, 2016
University of Utah• Utah’s oldest and largest institution of higher education
• Flagship University in Utah
• 4 year, research 1, public institution
• Over 100 undergraduate and graduate degree programs
• Over 30,000 students
• 2 campuses – Main campus, Salt Lake City, UT; Asia campus, Songdo, South Korea
• PeopleSoft 9.0, Webi 4.1 service pack 5, Canvas
April 4th, 2016
Timeline• Why a Data Warehouse?
• Identifying the Stakeholders
• Initial Planning
• Building the Data Warehouse
• Creating Governance and Guidelines
• Gathering the Users
• Training
• Restructuring: Creating Competency Levels
• Current State of Affairs
April 4th, 2016
Why a Warehouse? • Enrollment Management wanted data to get out to the colleges
• More data driven decisions needed to be made
• The Colleges wanted data
April 4th, 2016
Meet The Stakeholders• Associate VP Of Enrollment Management
• Director Of Admissions; Other Admissions Members
• University Registrar; Other Registrar Members
• Director Of Financial Aid; Other Financial Aid Members
• Office Of Budget and Institutional Analysis (OBIA)
• Representatives From School Of Business, College Of Engineering, and College Of Nursing
• University IT (UIT) – BI Team
April 4th, 2016
Initial Planning
April 4th, 2016
February – March 2013Design session
• 10 days of workshops between mid-February and mid-March
• 19 sessions, about 2 ½ hours each
• Goals
• Develop logical dimensional models
• What did we want to see in the data warehouse?
• What was our purpose for using the tool?
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
Building The Warehouse
April 4th, 2016
April 2013• Begin building the universes and dimensions, kicking off the behind the scenes set-up
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
August 2013 – April 2014• Defining objects
• First meeting had too many voices; decided two people would define the objects
• Approval was sent to the Associate VP of Enrollment Management; were never approved
• Defining leadership
• Decided to move approval process and the majority of the project leadership to the Registrar’s Office
• At this point, the objects had been pulled into the data warehouse
April 4th, 2016
May – October 2014• Implementation meetings began
• BI Team/UIT, Registrar’s Office, School of Business, College of Engineering, College of Nursing, Office of Budget and Institutional Analysis (OBIA)
• Created an Assistant Registrar position to take on this project (Me!)
• Met every other Friday through Summer and early Fall
• Branded the data warehouse the Student Data Warehouse (SDW)
April 4th, 2016
Before Going Live• Comparisons to other Universities
• Website creation
• Governance and Guidelines
• The Users
• Library Reports
April 4th, 2016
Website Creationhttp://registrar.utah.edu/faculty/datawarehouse/
April 4th, 2016
Governance and Guidelines
April 4th, 2016
Governance and Guidelines
April 4th, 2016
Governance and Guidelines
• Members consist of: University Registrar - chair, Office of Budget and Institutional Analysis, BI Team/UIT, Associate Registrar, 2 Current User Group Members
April 4th, 2016
Governance and Guidelines• Gathering the Users
• Colleges were meeting with the Associate VP of Enrollment Management – wanted the data
• Decided to give access to one User from each College – would have access to all data in the warehouse – Phase I
• BI Team did not have the resources to support being the sole report writers
• With this short timeline we were given for implementation, this was our only option
• Colleges had never had access like this to the system – did not fully understand how “messy” the data was
April 4th, 2016
Governance and Guidelines
• College Dean Users would be the main contact for Phase II – department level users, with access to only their department data
April 4th, 2016
Definitions
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
Building the Library• Sub-committee formed – Met July through November
• BI Team/UIT, Registrar’s Office, Office of Budget and Institutional Analysis (OBIA), School of Business, College of Engineering, College of Nursing, College of Fine Arts, College of Health
• Came up with ideas for reports we would want• What was being asked for already
• Academic Reports – already delivered reports – converted to the data warehouse, with input controls, filters, and other options
• Currently have 19 published reports; working on a dozen more
April 4th, 2016
Building the Library
Resources
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
October – November 2014• October – decided to launch November 1st
• Presented to Council of Academic Deans (CAD) and requested one representative be appointed from each college by December 1st
April 4th, 2016
December 2014• Onboarding meetings for Users
• Beginning of December
• Kick off meeting held mid-December for all Users
• Data Management Committee started meeting monthly in January 2015
• College Dean User group started meeting monthly in February 2015
April 4th, 2016
January – February 2015• Training
• January 22nd – 28th: Basic Navigation training
• February 2nd – 6th: In-depth training – how to write a report
• From the Basic and In-depth training, we realized there would need to be more trainings than we originally anticipated
• Planned another In-depth training for March
April 4th, 2016
March - April 2015• March 9th – 13th: In-depth trainings
• Added weekly drop-in sessions for people to practice creating reports outside of training
• April 13th – 17th: In-depth trainings
• Discussion started about needing different types of trainings – discussed in both the User Group and the Management Committee meetings
April 4th, 2016
Graduation Pipeline• Was forgotten in the initial planning
• With lack of graduation pipeline, the student story was not complete
• Users were hesitant to use the tool with missing data
• Work began to bring graduation pipeline into the warehouse
April 4th, 2016
May 2015• Major milestones
• Testing of the Graduation Pipeline data
• Creation of the Competency Levels/Assessments• Competency Level = Time Commitment
April 4th, 2016
June – July 2015• Level training kick off – presented competency level descriptions at the Council of
Academic Deans (CAD)
• Lost a number of Users because of this
• Graduation data go-live
• Level trainings offered; assessments given
• All Users required to be a Level II
April 4th, 2016
April 4th, 2016
User Profile & Skill Set• User should commit 10-15 hours per week
• User should understand college/department needs and processes in order to make strategic data driven decisions
• Example: student experience
• User should be familiar with data management tools, including a background in PeopleSoft
• Have an interest in learning new technology, such as webi, tableau, and have an understanding of excel
• User should have demonstrated analytical and critical thinking skills
April 4th, 2016
Level Descriptions• Three levels of User competency
• Level I• Basic minimum knowledge needed to produce and understand library reports (this will
be minimum competency for Phase II Users)
• Level II• Dean User minimum competency requirement to build basic custom reports, ability to
edit library reports, and to analyze & validate reports
• Dean User will serve as college level support contact for Phase II User
• Level III• Advanced reporting skills for Dean User to build more visually complex and meaningful
reports for decision makers
April 4th, 2016
Level I: Expectations • It is expected that the User will watch and/or read through every tutorial provided on
the canvas website under the level I trainings.
• It is expected that the User will interact with the discussion board in Canvas, by creating threads and commenting on other users threads.
• It is expected that the User will have run every library report available.
• It is expected that the User will have a firm understanding of the definitions, as well as where to find them when clarification is needed.
• Time commitment: 2 trainings, 4 hours each in training; 10 hours per week outside of trainings for one month
April 4th, 2016
Level I: Qualifications/Assessment • User should understand their role and responsibility in the Dean’s User group. (Governance and
Guidelines)
• User should have a basic understanding of the SDW definitions. (Definitions)
• User should be able to navigate the SDW, know where to save files, how to export to excel, and find the Library Reports. (Basic navigation)
• User should be able to open a Library Report, enter the prompts, and run the Library Report, as well as refresh the data. (Run a Library Report)
• User should have a basic understanding of each Library Report (Registrar’s website)
• User should have an understanding of Canvas, how to review the modules/tutorials, where to contact the other Users, and how to find out when the next training session is scheduled. (Canvas)
• An assessment to determine the Users knowledge of the definitions, where to find them, what they mean, and what the importance of the definitions are, as well as a basic navigation of the website and the student data warehouse will be administered to determine User’s competency in level I.
April 4th, 2016
October – December 2015• October 2015
• Subquery training discussed
• Request for Service e-form created – easier to submit problems/new reports to be created
• Allowed us to more easily track the questions that were coming in
• November 2015
• Subquery training added as level II.B
• Training
• December 2015
• Drop-in office hours for Users started up again – must sign up
April 4th, 2016
Current State Of Affairs
April 4th, 2016
Phase IIWe have just begun discussing implementing Phase II – department level access
• Security
• Forming a task force
• Governance and Guidelines
• Library Reports
• College Dean Users – their role
April 4th, 2016
December 2015 - PresentBrainstorming sessions
• Library Reports discussion –need more reports
• How to build a report• What objects are needed
• What is the question you are wanting answered
• What helpful features should be included (input controls, filters, counts, etc.)
• Who will view this report
• Etc.
• Each session the Users submit new report ideas to BI Team/UIT to be built• Users are supposed to be writing these and submitting them to be added to the library,
but most do not have time to do this
April 4th, 2016
January 20164 Colleges got together to hire one person to be the College Dean User for their Colleges
• College of Fine Arts, College of Humanities, College of Social and Behavioral Sciences, and College of Health
• Currently resides in Office of Budget and Institutional Analysis (OBIA)
• Granted membership to the Data Management Committee
• Other Colleges are interested in following this model
April 4th, 2016
Pitfalls• Missing Graduation Data
• Were not given a clear direction of what qualifications the Users would need
• First year – discovering what we were missing, what needed to be changed
• New product; new model
• Structure – who was in charge?
• Had to stay in Registrar’s Office
• Library Reports not tested properly before go-live
April 4th, 2016
Triumphs• User group monthly meetings
• Open communication
• Being open to change
• Keeping stakeholders aware of what was going on
• Data Management Committee meetings
• Discussed the issues the Users would present
• Communication to Council of Academic Deans (CAD)
• Creation of the competency levels
• Knowing what was required; giving more structure
