Abstract
This implementation report explores Rowan University's efforts to automate first-year course placement and registration. Historically, Freshman Instructional Guides (FIGS) at Rowan were manually executed, requiring significant time from Testing Services, University Advising, and the Registrar's Office to evaluate placement needs and assign students to courses. Given the 57% surge in first-time degree-seeking student enrollment over a decade, the manual processes became increasingly unsustainable. In response, a cross-departmental team developed a comprehensive automated process to integrate data from Banner (Student Information System), Google Sheets maintained by Advising, and other sources. This computerized process classifies students by program groupings, determines primary and secondary course placements, checks Banner for real-time availability and constraints, and completes bulk course registration for first-year students. The resulting system processed over 3500 incoming students, saving over 350 hours annually, reduced the potential for human error, and enabled staff to shift focus from administrative work to strategic advising. This report outlines the implementation context, design architecture, technical integration, assessment methods, lessons learned, and practical implications for institutions with similar challenges.
References
Bailey, T. R., Jaggars, S. S., & Jenkins, D. (2015). Redesigning America's community colleges: A more straightforward path to student success. Harvard University Press.
Bailey, T., & Mabel, Z. (2022). The next generation of guided pathways: Building sustainability into student success reforms. American Institutes for Research. https://www.air.org
Bailey, T., Mabel, Z., & Jenkins, D. (2023). Scaling student success reforms through guided pathways 2.0. Community College Research Center. https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu
Crosta, P. M. (2013). Intensity and attachment: How the chaotic enrollment patterns of community college students relate to educational outcomes. Community College Review, 41(2), 118–142. https://doi.org/10.1177/0091552112471556
EDUCAUSE. (2023). AI and automation in academic operations: Emerging trends and institutional readiness. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu
EDUCAUSE. (2024). Horizon Report: Teaching and Learning Edition. EDUCAUSE. https://library.educause.edu/resources/2024
Ellucian. (2023). University of Central Florida streamlines registration with data-informed automation. Ellucian Case Study. https://www.ellucian.com
Klempin, S., & Karp, M. M. (2015). Creating a system for student success: How colleges can develop and scale technology-mediated advising. Community College Research Center. https://ccrc.tc.columbia.edu/publications/creating-system-student-success-technology-advising.html
Lane, J. E., & Lyle, J. A. (2020). Automating the student lifecycle: Early adoption of end-to-end planning systems. EDUCAUSE Review. https://er.educause.edu/articles/2020/7/automating-the-student-lifecycle
NACADA. (2021). Technology in advising: Enhancing efficiency and equity. National Academic Advising Association White Paper. https://nacada.ksu.edu
Tyton Partners. (2022). Driving toward a digitally transformed student experience. Tyton Partners Research Brief. https://tytonpartners.com
