1 / 17

An Arizona Course Applicability System (CAS) Users’ Presentation Kristy Jacobs North, ASU DARS

DARS degree audit and transfer articulation interactions:. An Arizona Course Applicability System (CAS) Users’ Presentation Kristy Jacobs North, ASU DARS Millie Torre, ASU DARS Amy Fountain, CAS Transfer Analyst Arizona Advising Roundup - February 22, 2002. What will we cover?.

brier
Download Presentation

An Arizona Course Applicability System (CAS) Users’ Presentation Kristy Jacobs North, ASU DARS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. DARS degree audit and transfer articulation interactions: An Arizona Course Applicability System (CAS) Users’ Presentation Kristy Jacobs North, ASU DARS Millie Torre, ASU DARS Amy Fountain, CAS Transfer Analyst • Arizona Advising Roundup - February 22, 2002

  2. What will we cover? • Overview of DARS – the Degree Audit and Reporting System • A simple example • A direct equivalency: TA • A direct equivalency: DA • More complicated examples • Different equivalencies for ASU Main, West, East: TA & DA • A required portfolio review: TA & DA • A major-specific rule: TA & DA • Summary & questions for the experts?

  3. Overview of DARS – “TA” vs “DA” • DARS is a software package that provides the “engine for CAS” • DARS provides two sets of database tables used in creating the CEG and Transfer Guides: • Transfer Articulation (TA) tables store information about course equivalencies • Degree Audit (DA) tables store information about academic requirements • The CEG in CAS reads the TA tables • CAS-generated Transfer Guides and Planning Guides read the TA AND DA tables

  4. Example 1: A simple equivalency – TA (for the CEG) • NPC's ART 103 • TA encoding for UA: • Table for NPC courses. Entry for ART 103=source, UA course ART 102= target. • TA encoding for NAU: • Table for NPC courses. Entry for ART 103=source, NAU course ART 150 is target. • But look – there’s more for NAU to do! • NAU also has an entry in this rule, called an “Alternate Identity”, that is entered as “AHI”. • The CEG displays: ART 150, “also satisfies: Aesthetic and Humanistic Inquiry (AHI)”

  5. Example 1: A simple equivalency – DA (for the Transfer Guides/Planning Guides) • Degree Audits are made of three nested pieces: • Academic Program • Academic Requirements • Academic Subrequirements • In order for ART 103 to show up in a transfer guide, it’s university equivalent must be mentioned in a subrequirement. • ASU builds a table that looks for ASU’s ART 112, (Program=BA Studio Art, Requirement=ART-18 hrs, Subrequirement=required courses). • ASU’s transfer guide will report that NPC’s ART 103 is equivalent to ASU’s ART 112, so will satisfy the same requirement that ART 112 does. • NAU’s liberal studies guide looks for all AHI courses using a DARS subrequirement

  6. Example 2: A more complicated equivalency – different/similar rules for different campuses (TA for CEG) • Cochise's AJS 101 • Equivalent to JUS 100(SB) at ASU Main, AJS 100(SB)at ASU West, and JUS 100(SB) at ASU East. • ASU maintains a total of four articulation tables. • Rules that are the same, regardless of campus, are encoded in a master set of articulation tables. • When a rule differs between any of the three campuses it has to be encoded in East, Main and West articulation tables.

  7. Example 2: A more complicated equivalency – different/similar rules for different campuses (TA for CEG) – cont’d • Why does the East equivalency display, when it’s the same as the Main equivalency? • Because the rule has been encoded in all three campus tables. • It may not be the case that these equivalencies for ASU Main and East are actually identical! • There may be differences in some of the hidden codes associated with the rule for East or Main that make these rules look a little different to CAS. • We’ll see an example of a hidden code in our example 4! • If there were no West/East specific rules to display, the CEG will simply show one equivalency for ASU.

  8. Example 2: A more complicated equivalency – different/similar rules for different campuses (DA for Transfer/Planning Guides) • Let’s look at a Justice Studies Transfer Guide at ASU Main: • Only the equivalencies to the courses required for an ASU Main degree are listed. • Let’s look at an Administration of Justice Transfer Guide at ASU West: • Only the equivalencies to the courses required for an ASU West degree are listed. • There are also separate transfer guides for ASU East. • Only the equivalencies to the courses required for an ASU East degree are listed.

  9. Example 3: A bit more complicated equivalency – portfolio review (TA – for the CEG) • Maricopa's INT 135 • TA encoding for ASU: • TA tables must include equivalency for students who have NOT completed the portfolio review requirement. • A human being must review a student’s portfolio. If approved, an equivalency for DSC 122 is granted and recorded in the student’s Degree Audit record at ASU. • There’s a CEG text note informing students about the portfolio requirement • The CEG shows the equivalency that the student would get BEFORE the portfolio has been reviewed.

  10. Example 3: A bit more complicated equivalency – portfolio review (DA – for the Transfer Guides) • Let’s look at the Interior Design Transfer Guide at ASU: • Maricopa’s INT 135 doesn’t appear under the DSC – 30 hrs requirement – but that’s what it would satisfy should it pass portfolio review. • This is because INT 135’s CEG equivalency: STUDIO/E isn’t called for as a required course in the relevant sub-requirement. • A text note instead informs students: • “BSD INTERIOR DESIGN Transfer credit for courses below is based on portfolio review.” • The specific Maricopa courses, and their appropriate ASU equivalencies AFTER portfolio review are given.

  11. A note about text notes in the CEG and Transfer Guides! • We in Arizona have added the ability for schools to add text notes to the CEG to the ‘baseline’ CAS product. • Text notes may be added to DA processing also – but this is also a by-hand process. • Text notes for the CEG are maintained separately from the actual DARS tables (they are for information only, and are not a part of DARS processing) • Therefore, if you have questions about the display or lack of display of a text note, contact your CAS Team!

  12. Example 4: A still more complicated equivalency – major-specific equivalency (TA – for the CEG) • Maricopa’s GBS 220 • “Accepted in lieu of MAT 119 for Business majors only”, else “elective”. • What does DARS TA need to know? • It needs to know the equivalency for GBS 220 for the unadmitted, undecided student • It also needs to know a special secret code that only the DA tables for the Business majors can interpret. • The standard equivalency appears in the CEG. • The “secret code” is suppressed from the display – because it’s not user-friendly! • The code is “BP MAT”

  13. This seems like a good opportunity for a text note! • We agree…but; • See our discussion of text notes from before!

  14. Example 4: A still more complicated equivalency – major-specific equivalency (DA – for the Transfer/Planning Guides) • Let’s generate a CAS Planning Guide: • GBS 220 DOES apply towards the requirement! • Why? • Within the Business academic programs, a requirement and subrequirement are encoded to look for the secret identity of this course-but this secret identity isn’t displayed to users. • Because the secret code isn’t visible in the requirement, it won’t show up in a normal static transfer guide. However, the ATP and CAS Planning Guides will each show the course.

  15. So, what’s a user to do? Read our minds? • Principle 1 – any problem can be fixed, if the CAS Team is aware of it • Principle 2 – some fixes will take longer than others, because some are harder than others • Principle 3 – triangulation! The CEG, Transfer Guides and Planning Guides are useful sources of information – and each is more student-specific than the previous • Finding the right tool for the right purpose is part of the trick!

  16. Want to learn more or report a problem? • The link to “Your CAS Team” is a great resource for you to use to report problems and ask for more info. • Your Arizona CAS Team has national DARS experts on it – if there’s a way to address your issue, they’ll know about it. • Your DARS experts want to help you understand this complicated system. So if you have a question for them, ask it now or…

  17. Ask it later! • Contact Your CAS Team • Go to http://az.transfer.org/cas • Click on “Your CAS Team” • Kristy Jacobs-North: ASU DARS • Millie Torre: ASU DARS • Amy Fountain, CAS Transfer Analyst: Amy.fountain@asu.edu; (520) 206-4916

More Related