Downloads & Free Reading Options - Results

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

This report presents an evaluation instrument through which school districts and schools can identify and select computer-based school information management systems (SIMS) suited to their needs. These selection criteria were identified through a survey questionnaire and interviews at 18 representative schools in the Edmonton (Alberta) Public School District. As a result of analysis of these data, a three-level evaluation process has been devised, with progressively more detailed selection criteria. Level 1 defines the four basic functions of SIMS: school records, scheduling, student attendance, and grade processing. It also covers basic criteria such as cost, reliability of vendor, hardware capacity, and ease of use. The Level 2 selection criteria are more detailed, and are used to determine whether a system meets the needs of a particular school. Level 3 evaluation, aimed at the few systems that are finalists in the selection process, involves functional and performance testing of all system modules in a real life environment. Evaluation at Level 3 is a two-phase process: first, each system is evaluated against the most detailed criteria, and second, the outcomes of individual product evaluations are summarized and compiled for comparison and final selection. Accordingly, two separate instruments are included: the SIMS Selection Criteria Level 3 working form, and the Comparison Summary and Review Form. Appended are the questionnaire and interview forms used to gather the information from which these criteria were derived, and a detailed scoring comparison form. (TE)

600 pages : 24 cm

This paper summarizes major experiences and practices of information development units of state-based career information systems which produce accurate, current, and localized occupational and educational information for career planning. It is intended as a guide for states considering setting up a similar system and for staff members in presently developing state-based systems of career information. Sections of the paper provide explanations and detail related to these areas: (1) characteristics of good information, (2) definition of an implementation strategy to follow and information topics to be covered, (3) staffing the information development unit, (4) use of a data collection strategy that relies on existing data sources, (5) implementation of a systematic information updating design, and (6) use of workplans to organize major tasks. Appendixes include a workplan and job descriptions of information development unit staff. (YLB)

This paper summarizes major experiences and practices of information development units of state-based career information systems which produce accurate, current, and localized occupational and educational information for career planning. It is intended as a guide for states considering setting up a similar system and for staff members in presently developing state-based systems of career information. Sections of the paper provide explanations and detail related to these areas: (1) characteristics of good information, (2) definition of an implementation strategy to follow and information topics to be covered, (3) staffing the information development unit, (4) use of a data collection strategy that relies on existing data sources, (5) implementation of a systematic information updating design, and (6) use of workplans to organize major tasks. Appendixes include a workplan and job descriptions of information development unit staff. (YLB)

Results are reported of the first experiments for a computer conference management information system at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Between August 1975 and March 1976, two NASA projects with geographically separated participants (NASA scientists) used the PLANET computer conferencing system for portions of their work. The first project was a technology assessment of future transportation systems. The second project involved experiments with the Communication Technology Satellite. As part of this project, pre- and postlaunch operations were discussed in a computer conference. These conferences also provided the context for an analysis of the cost of computer conferencing. In particular, six cost components were identified: (1) terminal equipment, (2) communication with a network port, (3) network connection, (4) computer utilization, (5) data storage and (6) administrative overhead.

Results are reported of the first experiments for a computer conference management information system at the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Between August 1975 and March 1976, two NASA projects with geographically separated participants (NASA scientists) used the PLANET computer conferencing system for portions of their work. The first project was a technology assessment of future transportation systems. The second project involved experiments with the Communication Technology Satellite. As part of this project, pre- and postlaunch operations were discussed in a computer conference. These conferences also provided the context for an analysis of the cost of computer conferencing. In particular, six cost components were identified: (1) terminal equipment, (2) communication with a network port, (3) network connection, (4) computer utilization, (5) data storage and (6) administrative overhead.

Planning and Implementing Computer-Based Management Information Systems from American Management Association

The need for management information by college and university administrators is becoming more intense. Recognizing that computerized information systems have not been able to satisfy this growing need, an alternative approach to the preparation of management information is described. This approach places the needs of decision makers before those of systems developers and outlines a process for the collection, evaluation, analysis, and interpretation of institutional data that should precede the implementation of computer-based information systems. (Author)