ONLINE or FACE-TO-FACE Learning...Which is Which?

Continuing Education and Knowledge Retention:
A Comparison of Online and Face-to-Face Deliveries
Connie Schardt
Duke University
Julie Garrison
Grand Valley State University

This paper is all about the comparison of online learning and face-to-face learning. In our current situation today it has been said that online learning is more effective than those who still use the old school education which is face-to-face but I hadn’t really found one research that validates the said claim not until I found this research which was posted by my classmate on our discussion thread in research.

Face-to-face discussion also known to us as education 2.0 is a learning style which limits the students learning to the learning of its teachers therefore learning happens in four corners of the classroom. People say that this kind of teaching strategy is obsolete since we are in the age of technology which means sky is the limit. With such claims that stated above I asked myself. If education 2.0 is obsolete then why does almost every teacher that I have known still uses this strategy? Luckily I was able to attend the Philippine youth congress in information technology (y4it 2009) held at the University of the Philippines Diliman campus last September 8-11 2009 and two of the speakers discussed this matters. Mr. Noel Feria discussed the difference of the “obsolete” education 2.0 and education 3.0. He said that education 3.0 is not widely implemented because it has no clear framework yet. He was asked how this education 3.0 works and unfortunately he hasn’t given any clear answer to the question. While the other speaker Prof. Rommel Feria a faculty member of the University of the Philippines Department of Computer Science directly said that “teachers are afraid that their students may surpass them” when asked why education 3.0 is not widely implemented.

Online discussion on the other hand also known as education 3.0 is a learning strategy wherein students are not required to go to school. They are given requirements to be accomplished and given the freedom of how are they going to learn it themselves of course by using the resources that are usually on the net. Teachers do not limit their students to know what they also know. Students may meet their teachers face=to-face only for consultation purposes. Talks about the effectiveness of the online discussion are still on a debate. They said that education 3.0 is more effective than education 2.0 because information nowadays doubles every second and one teacher cannot accommodate all. The main concept of education 3.0 is “search for new knowledge and acquire and share new knowledge in and from your classmates” this may be their way of at list maximizing the knowledge that can be learned. Not limiting the source of knowledge to one person only (the teacher) education 3.0 encourages everyone to search for knowledge and acquire knowledge that their classmate searched in this case everyone is the source of knowledge.

If you try and compare the definitions or overviews given above you’ll most probably say that education 3.0 is more effective over education 2.0 but do you have raw data? Do you have survey result to validate your claims? This study aims to do such thing by comparing the knowledge acquired by those using the education 3.0 and 2.0 or in this paper called DE or distance education and CE for continuing education respectively. The authors have given three assessments namely the Pre-test, Post-test, 6 month Post-test to compare if which of the two educational system is more effective.

This study was designed to determine if there is a difference between learning retention for students taking a continuing education course in the classroom compared to taking the same course through distance education. Students were given three assessments to determine their baseline knowledge of the topic, what they learned immediately after the course, and what they retained six months after the course. Pooled data from those assessments showed that there was no statistical difference in the scores of the two groups of students, leading the authors to conclude that neither delivery method is better than the other.

The result:

Seventy-two professional librarians enrolled in the course during 2004. Fifty-six librarians completed the demographic survey and at least one of the pre- or post-tests. Fourteen librarians completed the course but did not submit any surveys or assessments, despite repeated requests for compliance. Two librarians dropped the course and did not finish the work.

The two groups, continuing education (CE) and distance education (CE), were similar in terms of type of library (academic or hospital) and primary responsibilities (reference or education). The groups differed in terms of age and experience. The CE students were older with more years of experience. All (100%) of the CE students were 36 years old or older, compared to 64% of the distance education students. Eighty two percent of the CE students had 10 years or more of library experience, compared to only 29% of the distance education students. As expected the CE students reported a strong preference (82%) for traditional classroom instruction; while only 61% of distanced education students reported this preference. When asked about reasons for taking an online course, both groups indicated that convenience of not traveling, timeliness of the topic, and working at own pace as the most important factors.

Seventeen students from the traditional face-to-face class and 21 students from the distance education course completed the first post-test. As indicated in Figure 1, there was a significant decline in the number of students completing responses to the subsequent tests. Ultimately, data from all assessments were available for only 10 CE and 11 DE students.

When comparing the scores of only those who completed all assessments, the DE students averaged over 10 points higher than the CE group in each test. Both groups showed a significant improvement from the pre-test to the post-test (CE increased by 57%, DE increased by 21%). As expected, average student scores declined from the first post-test to the second post-test (CE decreased by 14%, DE decreased by 11%.), although they remained higher than pre-test levels. Based on the raw numbers, it appeared that students in the DE group came into the classroom with a greater knowledge of the subject and retained more knowledge six months after the course had ended.

Due to the small number of students who completed all assessments, the data from all the participants was re-analyzed and adjusted for missingness. When the data was recalculated using a mixed model, with fixed effects for time (three levels) and group (classroom and distance) and time/group interaction, the adjusted differences were not statistically significant. Considering all the data, the study showed that the distance education group and face-to-face groups had no difference in level of knowledge retention

Source: http://www.eblip4.unc.edu/papers/Schardt.pdf

Research Work to be Publish

It is never easy for your research to be published in journals specially those top-tier journals. It is like you are auditioning for some kind of a reality show. Yes, it is hard but the benefits would be great. Some of us want our research to be published to prove that we are a worthy researcher, others for pride purposes and others wants their research to be publish because of the money that comes along with it. As to what are real intentions of why we want our researches to be published, it will all go through tough processes or procedures. Of course publications don’t just choose anybodies research and publish it, it may affect their credibility if they are able to publish researches that are not reliable and are not significant at all.

Submitted researches are reviewed by reviewers before it will be published. Reviewers are the real authors of Computing Reviews. The computing community depends on reviewers for authoritative, unbiased critiques of the essential literature in the field. Reviewers are expected to contribute reviews that demonstrate that they have read the material thoroughly and have considered it in depth, from a critical perspective. Reviewers are prominent persons having attained remarkable achievements in the field of research. Each reviewer has their own perspective of what they are finding in a research before they approve in for publication.

Originality of the research is a big factor for your research to be able to pass the screening made by the reviewers. Having an original research and good output would really give you an edge over the others. Your research should also be relevant for it to be able to be accepted. Reviewers have no specific requirements when reviewing someone’s research work they are most probably concern on the quality of your research work. Their most concern is on how you presented your research and if your research is relevant or would fit to their intended audience. The name of the author would be a great factor too. Even in the research publication world influence is also one factor that affects if your research will be published or not. If you have no remarkable record yet it maybe a lot harder for you to have your research published compared to those experienced authors.

Evaluating a Good Research

A researcher has its own way of thinking that is why sometimes researches of the same thing end up with different output. On my own point of view a good research work should be easily understood or else your reader may find it too much complicated and would disregard it. A good research work should be supported by legitimate facts. Researcher doing the research should not be biased especially if the output is not what he/she expects to be or else your research work will not be accurate or reliable. As I search trough the net I found some ways on how you evaluate a research work and this one gives a really short yet easy way to evaluate a research work.

A good contribution to a research area should have most of these qualities:
• address an important problem
• be novel, building on existing good research
• use good scientific methods, and best practices in the research area
• report significant results
• have positive benefits/implications in the research area
• be well communicated in writing and in person

The first two items above talks about the general purpose of the research done. If a research work addresses important problems especially current problems that the society is facing then that would be a good start to know if the research work is of good quality. In short, the research should be timely. The next three items probably talks about how the researcher comes up with the result? What methods or practices that he or she used? Does the practices and methods that he or she used appropriate for the research? This part is really crucial for it is where the results are generated. Even though you have a really good research topic, timely and all, it would all mean useless if your ways of finding solutions to the problems are not right. And the last items talks about the researcher’s way of presenting his or her result. If it is presented in a way that is too complex readers would lose the urge to read your findings. After all who wants to read a research work that you don’t understand. Researchers should present their outputs in a way that readers can easily understand it.

According to Linda Finlay researches can be evaluated in 4 C’s
1) Clarity - Does the research make sense? To what extent is the research systematically worked through, coherent and clearly described?
2) Credibility – To what extent do the findings match the evidence and are they convincing? When the author is arguing evidentially, is the evidence marshaled rigorously and opened up for external audit? Are the researcher’s interpretations plausible and justified? Can readers see what the researcher saw even if they disagree with the conclusions drawn by the researcher?
3) Contribution – To what extent does the research add to knowledge of an issue or aspect of human social life? Does it enrich our understanding of the human condition? Is it empowering and/or growth-enhancing? Does it offer guidance for future action or for changing the social world for the better? Does it offer a interesting basis for future research?
4) Communicative resonance – Are the findings sufficiently vivid or powerful to draw readers in? Do the findings resonate with readers’ own experience/understandings? As meanings are elicited in an interpersonal context, have the knowledge claims been tested and argued in dialogue with others, including participants, research supervisors or the wider academic community?

Henwood and Pidgeon identified 7 attributes which characterize a good research.

1. The importance of fit – The themes or analytical categories offered by the researcher should fit the data. The researcher demonstrates this by writing clear, explicit accounts of how these categories were evolved.
2. Integration of theory - The researcher needs to discuss the relationship between units of analysis and the degree to which they can be integrated or generalized (for instance, exploring how themes might be combined moving towards a theory).
3. Reflexivity – The role of the researcher needs to be acknowledged and accounted for in the documentation of the research.
4. Documentation – The researcher needs to provide an audit trail: a comprehensive account of what was done and why.
5. Theoretical sampling and negative case analysis – The researcher needs to continuously develop and modify any emerging theory, exploring cases that do not fit as well as those which might generate new knowledge.
6. Sensitivity to negotiated realities – While participant validation may be necessary, the researcher needs to demonstrate awareness of the research context, power differentials and participant reactions to the research. It is particularly important to explain any differences between the researcher’s interpretations and those of the participant(s).
7. Transferability - The researcher should suggest how the research may have applicability beyond the particular research context.
Lincoln and Guba propose four criteria for ‘naturalistic’ research.
1) Credibility – This concept replaces the idea of internal validity, by which researchers seek to establish confidence in the ‘truth’ of their findings. Instead, Lincoln and Guba focus on the degree to which findings make sense. For instance, they recommend that qualitative researchers use ‘member checks’. Here participants are given their interview transcripts and the research reports so they can agree/disagree with the researcher’s findings. In addition, credibility is built up through prolonged engagement in the field and persistent observation and triangulation of data.
2) Transferability – Transferability replaces the concept of external validity. Instead of aiming for random sampling and probabilistic reasoning, qualitative researchers are encouraged to provide a detailed portrait of the setting in which the research is conducted. The aim here is to give readers enough information for them to judge the applicability of the findings to other settings.
3) Dependability – This concept replaces the idea of reliability. It encourages researchers to provide an audit trail (the documentation of data, methods and decisions about the research) which can be laid open to external scrutiny.
4) Confirmability – Confirmability, replacing the concept of objectivity, also invokes auditing as a means to demonstrate quality. For example, the researcher can offer a self-critically reflexive analysis of the methodology used in the research. In addition, techniques such as triangulation (of data, researcher, and context) can be useful tools of confirmability.

To summarize everything, researches can be evaluated trough its importance. How important the research work is? Since research main purpose is to find solutions to problem it is essential that a research work should meet that purpose. As I’ve stated above a research work should timely. Another criterion is that a research work should be reliable and dependable. How will the reader know is the research is dependable? The reader may check how the research was done. What did the researcher do to get the information? Is the source of information reliable? Does the method used fit the research problem? Those are some of the questions needed to be asked if you want to check the reliability and dependability of a research work. And lastly, a research should be reader friendly. The complete documentation should be provided and the research work should be presented in a way that users easily understand it especially the conclusion or output part.
For the researchers, I have found something for you to be guided before proceeding in making your research.

1. What’s the problem?
2. Who cares about the problem?
3. What have others done?
4. What would you like to do?
5. What can you really do?
6. How are you going to do it?
7. What results did/will you get?
8. Who would/will care about your results?
9. Where will you share your results?
10. What are you going to do afterwards?

Those questions should be satisfied for you to produce a good research work.

Another guideline that I found on the net entitled 15 steps to a good research which is addressed to the researchers are as follows:

1. Define and articulate a research question (formulate a research hypothesis).
2. Identify possible sources of information in many types and formats.
3. Judge the scope of the project.
4. Reevaluate the research question based on the nature and extent of information available and the parameters of the research project.
5. Select the most appropriate investigative methods (surveys, interviews, experiments) and research tools (periodical indexes, databases, websites).
6. Plan the research project.
7. Retrieve information using a variety of methods (draw on a repertoire of skills).
8. Refine the search strategy as necessary.
9. Write and organize useful notes and keep track of sources.
10. Evaluate sources using appropriate criteria.
11. Synthesize, analyze and integrate information sources and prior knowledge.
12. Revise hypothesis as necessary.
13. Use information effectively for a specific purpose.
14. Understand such issues as plagiarism, ownership of information (implications of copyright to some extent), and costs of information.
15. Cite properly and give credit for sources of ideas.

The guidelines given above are provided for researchers to provide a good research work. Researchers should also have the determination and perseverance especially in finding resources in supporting their claims. Researching is not easy and the world becomes what is it now because of the researches that was done so I guess it’s all worth the difficulties.

FOSS in the Philippines

I was browsing the net to find any FOSS advocates located here in davao but some article about a Bill in the house of the representative (Bill No. 1716) or FOSS act of 2007 catch my attention. I really didn't know that there was a bill concerning FOSS.

The bill include:

Government’s Principal Obligations

The Philippine government must not only “recognise the legitimacy of FOSS and FOSS licenses,” but will “use only ICT goods and services that comply with open standards,” “encode data intended for public consumption in open standard data format,” and “apply only FOSS or FOSS solutions in all ICT projects and activities, except in extraordinary circumstances.”

“Extraordinary Circumstances”

circumstances” include instances in which there is “no reasonably available ICT good or service supporting open standards and/or FOSS in the field, area, or activity” or a “government agency or office has an existing, widely used and widely implemented proprietary ICT system and there is no reasonably available technology using open standards and/or FOSS.”

Preference to the Philippine ICT Industry

The government must avoid dependence on a single vendor when pursuing ICT investments and preference for procurement must be given to Filipino-owned ICT companies.


There also arise a problem if the government can sustain the said migration from Proprietary standards to FOSS.

Factors frustrating FOSS migration
Notwithstanding the numerous advantages associated with the adoption of FOSS, the following were the factors identified that may frustrate the Philippine government’s migration to FOSS:

(1) Inadequate infrastructure: The Philippines may not yet have sufficient infrastructure, in terms of skilled providers and IT personnel, to sustain the government’s comprehensive migration to FOSS.

(2) Migration costs and resistance: The cost of migrating to FOSS may well exceed the licensing costs of proprietary software, because government users have confidence in existing legacy systems and resist the introduction of new programmes.

(3) Market interference: The government’s adoption of FOSS may deprive the private sector of business opportunities and may in turn distort the market value of software.

(4) Model procurement guidelines: Current government policy indicates that it would prefer to retain a flexible system of software procurement based on the economic standard of total cost of ownership (TOC). If the TOC is less than or equal to that of proprietary software, only then will preference be given to FOSS.

Unfortunately, the said bill was not realized until now. T___T


Source

Enrollment System Evaluation

As we all know (at least the Institute of Computing students), the University of Southeastern Philippines tapped our two instructors last semester to build a new enrollment system for the university. They both unloaded their subjects to focus on building the new enrollment system. I heard that the said project was quite urgent that is why the two instructors namely Engr. Cagape and Dr. Mercado drop all their subjects and distributed it to other Institute of Computing instructors except for one subject each. They only have one semester to do the said project which I guess not enough for the said system was quite huge but then again I was happy that they were able to do everything on schedule. The system was tested last summer 2009 and as expected lots of problems was encountered during enrollment. Some students have their own share of problems during enrollment period for the summer 2009. Some had their courses wrong, name, subjects and lots of errors found during testing. Though it had given some problems to some students, it was a good move to have those errors fixed in preparation of the enrollment for the school year 2009-2010.

Some of the very evident preparation made by the university is by providing tarpaulins all over the campus illustrating how the enrollment process goes. It was the first time since I entered the university to have a thing like that maybe because of the new enrollment system (I’m talking about the program itself) that is used for this year’s enrollment or maybe they just felt like they have enough money to fund such tarpaulins. Now it’s time to evaluate if the tarpaulins or illustrations provided really did help during the enrollment.

The new enrollment system based on the tarpaulins given has this following flow

Enrollment Procedure for old students

· STEP 1 – STUD ACCTS.

o Check students’ accounts.

o Check balance.

o Clearance signing.

· STEP 2 – COLLEGE

o Advising / Pre- Registration

o Payment of other fees (Local Council fee , Obrero Campus Student Council fee, Collegiate headlight fee and Insurance).

o Encoding.

o Assessment of fees.

o Temporary Certificate of Registration Printing.

· STEP 3 – STUD ACCTS. (Scholars Only)

o Submit Temporary Certificate of Registration.

o Posting of Accounts.

· STEP 3 – CASHIER (Paying Students)

o Submit Temporary Certificate of Registration.

o Payment of Matriculation.

o Official Receipt Printing.

· STEP 4 – REGISTRAR

o Present Clearance.

o Present Official Receipts (Tuition and other fees).

o Printing of Official Certificate of Registration.

Enrollment Procedure for New students and Transferees

· STEP 1 – UNIVERSITY GUIDANCE AND TESTING OFFICE

o Encoding of Student Information.

o Identification No. Assignment.

· STEP 2 – OFFICE OF STUDENT SERVICES (Scholars Only)

o Scholarship Application.

o Releasing of Scholarship Card.

· STEP 3 – ROTC/CWTS

o Registration and Sectioning of ROTC/CWTS.

o Releasing of ROTC/CWTS slip.

· STEP 4 – COLLEGE

o Present enrollment requirements.

o Advising / Pre-Registration.

o Payment of other fees (Local Council fee, Obrero Campus Student Council fee, collegiate headlight fee and Insurance).

o Encoding.

o Assessment of fees.

o Temporary Certificate of Registration Printing.

· STEP 5 – STUD ACCTS. (Scholars Only)

o Submit Temporary Certificate of Registration.

o Posting of Accounts.

· STEP 5 – CASHIER (Paying Students)

o Submit Temporary Certificate of Registration.

o Payment of Matriculation.

o Official Receipt Printing.

· STEP 6 – REGISTRAR

o Submit enrollment requirements.

§ Form 138 (High School Card).

§ Photocopy of NSO Birth Certificate.

§ USEPAT Entrance Exam Result.

§ Admission Slip.

§ Medical Certificate.

§ Certificate of Good Moral (Original).

§ 2 pcs. 2x2 recent ID picture.

§ Prospectus of the enrolled course.

§ 1 pc. Long brown envelop.

§ Official receipt of tuition and other fees.

o Printing of Official Certificate of Registration.

Enrollment Procedure for Shiftees

· STEP 1 – STUD ACCTS.

o Check students’ accounts.

o Check balance.

o Clearance signing.

· STEP 2 – FORMER COLLEGE

o Request to shift.

o Recommendation to shift.

· STEP 3 – NEW COLLEGE

o Acceptance of Shiftee

o Advising / Pre- Registration.

· STEP 4 – UNIVERSITY GUIDANCE AND TESTING OFFICE / OFFICE OF STUDENT SERVICES

o Student Profile Updating

· STEP 5 – NEW COLLEGE

o Payment of other fees (Local Council fee , Obrero Campus Student Council fee, Collegiate headlight fee and Insurance).

o Encoding.

o Assessment of fees.

o Temporary Certificate of Registration Printing.

· STEP 6 – STUD ACCTS. (Scholars Only)

o Submit Temporary Certificate of Registration.

o Posting of Accounts.

· STEP 6 – CASHIER (Paying Students)

o Submit Temporary Certificate of Registration.

o Payment of Matriculation.

o Official Receipt Printing.

· STEP 7 – REGISTRAR

o Present Clearance.

o Present Official Receipts (Tuition and other fees).

o Printing of Official Certificate of Registration.

Enrollment Procedure for old students:

· Honestly speaking, I really don’t think that the tarpaulin provided was really needed. I asked some of my friends in the university that are from different colleges if they even had to look for the illustration provided and I got the same response from them, “NO”. Old students (at least the once that I know) from the university already knows how the enrollment system in the university flows. I, myself don’t even noticed the tarpaulin that was posted near the Engineering comfort room during enrollment. Though the system was new, as students nothing is new, we still do the same as what we did last semester. I mean, we are not the one operating the system though we are the customers we are not the users so I don’t think that the tarpaulin was really needed. And for those who looked at it (I’m talking about the old students) it may confuse you a little bit. As I was looking at the illustration I noticed that the scholarship card validation which takes place at the office of the student’s services was not in it. We (scholars) cannot have our Pre- Registration form encoded not until we can have our scholarship cards validated. Considering that almost half of the students of the university are scholars I guess having an error like that may cause some problems during enrollment.

Enrollment Procedure for New students and Transferees

· It was three years ago when I entered this university as a freshman. I know how it feels when you are in a new environment. On the transferees and new students’ part I guess having this illustration for the enrollment procedure is a very big help to them. It adds to your confidence if you know what to do, I know that and I know you know that too. It is really a must to have an illustration for new students and transferees but then again the illustration given was not accurate enough at least for those transferees. Not all transferees has to take up ROTC/CWTS course, they may have already took it up on their previous school. Transferees I guess (I’m not sure) needs to have their subjects taken from other school validated here if the course or subject description is the same so that he/she don’t have to take it all over again here. And for the requirements in the registrar’s office, the form 138 (High school card) is that really needed for the transferees? I guess they have to submit their TOR or transcript of records from their school though I’m not that sure I guess that’s how things work on transferees. And lastly transferees has to pass a certificate of good standing I guess (not really sure) and unfortunately it was not on the list.

Enrollment Procedure for Shiftees

· First things first, the word “shiftees” or “shiftee” doesn’t exist (I guess it’s a slang word? What do you think?), I tried to search it at dictionary.com and all I got was the word shifter which means “One who, or that which, shifts” I guess it’s the right word but I guess that word is widely used even I myself use it often I just realized it doesn’t exist because Microsoft word don’t recognize it. So much for that, shiftees or shifters are also considered old students in the university. But since they shifted they have to do additional steps to complete their enrollment. The illustration maybe needed but I guess it is not a must if you have bigger budget then I guess you may provide one. Same thing goes for shiftees or shifters they have to have their scholarship cards (for scholars only) validated before the encoder encodes their subjects enrolled.

To summarize everything, the illustration given was a big help for transferees and new students but then again they should have separated the illustrations for the two because new students and transferees has different business or at least made their illustration more versatile and accurate because it is really a big help for transferees and new students. In the case of the old students and shiftees or shifters I guess the illustration provided was not really needed though the system changed the old students still know what to do during enrollments because the steps or procedure doesn’t changed that much. The purpose of the illustrations was to help the students during enrollment especially those who are new and not to confuse them. But then again, it was way better compared to those bond papers posted on walls with very confusing steps which was used for the past years. It is clear, big and understandable compared last semester. I appreciate the efforts of those people who are behind this very big improvement for the betterment of the services that they can offer to the students.

If I were to be tapped by the university to evaluate the new enrollment system I would be very honor to do it. Imagine you’re just a student and you are tasked to do such thing. I would probably base my comments and suggestions on my own experience. I would talk as a student and not as anyone else. As a student my only concern is I can enroll easily. Now, my comment about the system (I’m talking about what Engr. Cagape and Dr. Mercado made) would be nothing. Honestly speaking I haven’t even seen the interface of the program and I don’t know if it is harder or easier to use compared to the previous system.

The only thing change in the new system is that the encoder only gives us two copy of the certificate of registration which is called temporary certificate of registration based on the illustrations above and the other two copies will be printed again in the registrar which is called the official certificate of registration. Now as to the reason why it is done that way don’t ask me because I don’t why but still I have my own little analysis on why it is done that way. The old system needs those papers that have holes on the side, sorry I don’t know what it’s called and I heard that those papers are ordered from a supplier and it costs more than the usual white bond paper. In case that those special kinds of paper runs out, the school will find it hard to print Certificate of Registration forms. Those special kind of papers are printed on a dot matrix printer which takes longer compared to those ink jet printer that are used now. Maybe, they made it like this to save money because of the budget cut on SUCs and I guess to have a faster printing time though you have to wait again while the registrar prints the official Certificate of Registration. Now my only concern is that I am happy I have clearer Certificate of Registration now because the Certificate of Registrations are directly printed on an ink jet printer not like the past Certificate of Registration which are carbon copied only.

To the enrollment system as a whole, I guess this semester’s enrollment system was better compared last year. The university was more prepared comparing it to the previous enrollments. I remembered the university tried to change their system that when you have your documents on the cashier or students account they will be the one to bring your documents to the registrar and all you have to do is to wait when you will be called. But then it was not a successful move because they have to do it by batch which means the documents say student 1 to student 25 will all be passed to the registrar at the same time which is unfair to students 1 because he/she has to wait the same time with student 25 even though he/she passed his/her documents ahead of time. I don’t like that system, I don’t like waiting in vain, you don’t know until when you will be called and I hate it. And again, now they somehow revised their system.They deployed guards on the cashier and registrar’s area. One entrance, one exit wow that was quite cute... (hehehe). They are more organized this semester, and I salute the University for such a Great Improvement. The registrar has new windows; I guess 8 windows (not so sure) open to serve the students. They also made every window available for every college in short no matter from what college, institute or school you are from you may be served by any registrar compared last semesters that each college has its own registrar and take note no windows so we really have to get inside their office to have our Certificate of Registration validated. Yes, it was messy compared this semester, though the new system in the registrar’s area was disadvantageous to us (students of the Institute of Computing) because we have to follow the long line to registrar compared last semester the line for the Institute of Computing was short I am still happy for the changes that was done.

Other parts of the enrollment process like OSS, Cashier (not so sure, I never went to cashier because I’m a scholar), Student Accounts, Colleges and so on seems like no changes happened at least changes that are evident enough for us students to feel it. As usual, the students account area still has a long line but then again more organized because of the guards that are around. The OSS area was still the same, no changes at all. If I would rate this semester’s enrollment it would be a B, there are still rooms for improvement and I hope that every semester we’ll achieve it one by one.

As to my suggestions, the university should have provided more electric fans around the cashier and registrar area. All the students look messy, haggard and look tired. We are all sweating while waiting in the line. The area where the cashier and the registrar were too small for their purpose. Imagine all the students from the seven colleges, school and institute of the university meet there to pay accounts, validate everything or any other transactions that is done there. The area was too small; they should have transferred to a bigger area, more conducive for us students.

One more thing, during the payment of the Local Council, OCSC fee, Headlight fee and other fees I think it was too tiring. First the Local Council Office, Headlight Office and OCSC office are on both ends of the campus, the students have to walk a long distance just to pay and finally to have a piece of paper that are called receipts and we have to walk back again to our respective buildings and then back again to the OSS office for scholarship validation and then go back again to the college for encoding and finally to the cashier and registrar. Imagine those things that the students do in order to enroll himself/herself to the university. I really don’t think that the proper positioning of the offices was planned very well. It gives us lots of stress and makes us tired just by going through each office. The university should have foreseen that and made a move to solve the problem. They may rearrange the offices put it all on one building or rearrange the order of enrollment. We are their clients and like what I always said we deserve to have the best. The OSS, UGTO, OCSC, Clinic, Headlight offices are on the other end of the campus and its very hassle in our part to go back and forth their not just once but thrice in my case just to have myself admitted in the university. I know the construction of a new building for the offices to be all in one building which are not far from the other buildings would cost much and the university doesn’t have the necessary budget to fund it so I guess they have to think of a way to minimize to one the back and forth that we do during enrollment. Like what I said they may rearrange the order of enrollment process.

Lastly, I would just like to say that I’m not discriminating or something; I’m just expressing how I feel about the enrollment system. I guess it’s a healthy practice that the university should sometimes listen to their students because the point is we are not on the same shoes no matter how they analyze how we feel if this thing is implemented they will never feel like what we feel. I am a student and I feel what my co-students feel, we share the same sentiments and I guess at least half of the students of the University of Southeastern Philippines feel the same way as I do about the new enrollment system. I was just hoping that the improvements that are happening now may continue until everything will be close to perfection.

Thank you for reading this very very very long post. I hope I don’t sound like anyone who acts like he/she knows everything. I hope I am not talking crap things and make some sense. Again thank you for giving me your time and for reading the post.