Whereas, Article I, Section 7 of the University Assembly (the assembly) charter requires that the assembly “examine other matters which involve the interests or concern the welfare of a substantial segment of the University community and make recommendations thereon to the appropriate officers or decision-making bodies of the University”; and,

Whereas, in response to the concern of a substantial segment of the University community with Peoplesoft’s poor performance during Fall add-drop, the assembly established an ad-hoc Committee to Consider Peoplesoft (the committee) on September 3, 2008; and,

Whereas, the committee identified two questions to ask key stakeholders in order to evaluate Peoplesoft’s overall efficacy: 1) “Is Peoplesoft satisfactorily meeting your departments/functions minimum needs? If not, describe why not,” and 2) “Is Peoplesoft meeting your expectations? If not, please explain”; and,

Whereas, after communicating and meeting with the appropriate University personnel, it was determined that said questions could best be analyzed through a close look at survey data already collected by the University administration; and,

Whereas, said survey data was delivered to the committee on November 1, 2008, for review;

Be it therefore resolved that both the committee and the assembly believe that the University administration has identified Peoplesoft’s performance issues and worked well to systematically improve the overall functionality of the system; and,

Be it further resolved that the assembly suggests that priority continues to be placed on improving both the faculty advisor system and the efficiency of student registration; and,

Be it further resolved that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the Office of the President, the Office of the Vice President for Student and Academic Services, and the Office of the Provost.

Respectfully submitted,
Mark Fontana
Vice Chair, University Assembly