Evaluation of QuickCampus++ as Integrated Student Management

System of Pangasinan State University

Julius Cesar O. Mamaril1 , Fernando S. Viray Jr.2 , Clark Kim C. Castro3 , Jerry C. Diaz4, Carlos
Manuel S. Abalos5, May Ann D. Bruan6
1
Director, ICT Management Office, Pangasinan State University
2
Deputy Director, ICT Management Office, Pangasinan State University
3
Head, System Administration and Support Services Unit of the ICT Management Office, Pangasinan
State University
4
Head, Network Maintenance and Technical Unit of the ICT Management Office, Pangasinan State
University
5
Administrative Aide I, ICT Management Office, Pangasinan State University
6
Administrative Aide I, ICT Management Office, Pangasinan State University

Abstract – Information technology competencies are now vital due to the growing need for
information technology competence is in the operations of an organization. The function of operations
such as transforming the input does an output that needs a technological intervention To function
correctly. A significant feature of information and communication technology (ICT) has been the
opportunities that it has provided for the formation of school-student partnerships. Through this online
portal, the students have been able to access and monitor their academic progress.

Keywords – student management system, software evaluation

INTRODUCTION

Over the past few decades, universities all over the world have been experiencing new paradigms in the
way they handle and manage students’ information due to the proliferation of ICTs and its applications
such as web-based student information systems.

Information systems have evolved into one of the most important applications for reducing human errors,
ease and quick use of information in any organization. More and more applications innovated and
invented to cope with ever changing and fast-moving world of information, communication technologies.

The Student Information Management System (SIMS) is a web-based application software designed to
introduce a conducive and structured information exchange environment for integrating students, parents,
teachers, and administration of a college school. [] It is the centralized database where all information
pertaining to students are properly stored in an educational institution. [] Principally, it is used for
management of the most pivotal information about entities such as students, faculty courses, applications,
admissions, payments, exams, and grades. [] An effective SIMS provides a simple interface for
maintenance of student information. It can only be used by educational institution or colleges to maintain
the records of students easily.

Universities and educational institutions took advantage of the availability of this technology to address
some of the commonly experienced issues in implementing manual management of student records and
delivery of services. Among the known challenges that educational institutions faced include the lack of
manpower to accommodate enrollees, manual task of filling up forms, and inaccuracy in information
stored. [] Resolving said challenges brought educational institutions improvement in delivery of their
student services such as shorter registration times, improved accuracy of student information and ease of
access to relevant student information when needed. []
QuickCampus++, otherwise known as the Baseline Integrated School Management and Corporate Back-
Office System (“QuickCampus”) developed by Datamobility, a company engaged in the provision of
computer systems related products and services, was subscribed to by Pangasinan State University to
cover the basic campus or academic operations and public web portal support, using the public Internet
and private virtual server infrastructure in a web-hosted-application model as the enabling technology.

This student management system provides the support for a subset of front-end and back-end operation
needs of the school management enterprise activities based on the following scope.

1. Admission Support Module covers data capture for new (or prospective) students prior to official
enrollment/ registration. These include application, testing, admission, interviews, and other
surveys that will aid the Marketing Support Module.
2. Student Information Module provides the repository and query facility for all previous and
currently enrolled students identified by a permanent student number system. It covers the history
(course/subject taken, grades/performance, commendation, attendance, discipline, etc.), personal
information and existing enrollment registration.
3. Enrollment Support Module covers schedule planning (regular semester subject offering, or based
on statistics provided by Student Information module against available instruction resources),
subject schedule/slot availability monitoring, assessment and enrollment/ registration of students
for the current semester (or school year).
4. Student Performance Module covers the transparent, planned and unified grading/scoring and
attendance recording of individual students during the course of the semester. It provides cross
auditing of enrollment statistics, academic, attendance and entry control (in/out) while tracking
down subject syllabus enforcement.
5. Self-service Kiosks/ Student Portal Module provides a member-only (student-only or parent-
only) space in the school’s public web. It is accessible using a user-assigned service password
and student number as log-in. It covers self-evaluation, self-service enrollment/assessment,
updating of personal record, viewing of accounts and clearance notification, viewing of current
semester’s academic performance and attendance record, and other functions.

This study deals with the user’s evaluation of the QuickCampus++ as an Integrated Student Management
System of Pangasinan State University. The students can access their individual academic records.

OBJECTIVES OF THE STUDY

This study aims to determine the fitness for use and the level of user satisfaction of QuickCampus++
as an integrated student management system among its Pangasinan State University users, namely
students, instructors, and non-teaching staff who are users of the system. Specifically, it aims to answer
the following research questions:
1. What is the demographic profile of the various user groups?
2. What is the level of satisfaction of Quick Campus++ users in terms of Functional Suitability,
Compatibility, Usability, Reliability, Security, and Portability among different user groups?
3. Is there a significant difference in the level of satisfaction between user groups?
4. Is there a significant difference in the level of satisfaction between user groups in terms of their
demographic profile?

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The researchers used the descriptive-correlational research design and a set of questionnaires to be used
as a tool for gathering data. The respondents of this study are the various users of QuickCampus++ more
commonly known as “PORTAL” namely students, instructors, and administrative staff. Stratified random
sampling will be used to determine the number of respondents for each user group. The proponents devise
a user assessment tool based on the ISO 25010:2011 for software quality standards which qualifies the
criteria on Functional Suitability, Compatibility, Usability, Reliability, Security, and Portability.
Suggestions for modifications and improvements will be done to improve the instrument. The survey
questionnaire was uploaded to Google Forms. Upon improvement of the instrument, the link will be
disseminated to the intended respondents through user groups, students’ email account group chat, and
messenger to gather data. Upon the completion of the data gathering procedure, the data will be cleaned
based on standards set by researchers for analysis. The cleaned data on Microsoft Excel shall then be
uploaded into IBM SPSS for analysis. Average weighted means will be used to summarize the responses
and determine the level of satisfaction of QuickCampus++ users. The difference in satisfaction between
user groups and demographic profiles shall then be investigated using independent samples t-test and
ANOVA.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Table 1. Demographic Profile of the Respondents

Descriptive
Software Quality Standard Mean SD Rank
Rating
Functional Suitability 3.97 0.95 Agree 1
Performance Efficiency 3.64 0.95 Agree 5
Compatibility 3.68 0.92 Agree 4
Usability 3.73 0.90 Agree 3
Reliability 3.62 0.91 Agree 6
Security 3.58 0.98 Agree 7
Portability 3.76 0.93 Agree 2
LEGEND: 4.21 – 5.00: Strongly Agree; 3.41 – 4.20: Agree; 2.61 – 3.40: Neither Agree nor Disagree;
1.81 – 2.60: Disagree; 1.00 – 1.80: Strongly Disagree

The table shows

Descriptive
Software Quality Standard Mean SD Rank
Rating
Functional Suitability 4.05 0.58 Agree 3
Performance Efficiency 4.01 0.93 Agree 5
Compatibility 4.05 0.83 Agree 2
Usability 3.99 0.70 Agree 6
Reliability 4.03 0.68 Agree 4
Security 3.80 0.80 Agree 7
Portability 4.09 0.80 Agree 1
LEGEND: 4.21 – 5.00: Strongly Agree; 3.41 – 4.20: Agree; 2.61 – 3.40: Neither Agree nor Disagree;
1.81 – 2.60: Disagree; 1.00 – 1.80: Strongly Disagree

Descriptive
Software Quality Standard Mean SD Rank
Rating
Functional Suitability 3.91 1.17 Agree 5
Performance Efficiency 3.89 1.12 Agree 7
Compatibility 3.95 0.98 Agree 4
Usability 4.07 0.89 Agree 2
Reliability 4.03 0.93 Agree 3
Security 3.90 0.98 Agree 6
Portability 4.13 0.86 Agree 1
LEGEND: 4.21 – 5.00: Strongly Agree; 3.41 – 4.20: Agree; 2.61 – 3.40: Neither Agree nor Disagree;
1.81 – 2.60: Disagree; 1.00 – 1.80: Strongly Disagree

Software Quality Standard SST df F p-value η2

Functional Suitability 840.7 943 0.11 0.89 0.00
Performance Efficiency 850.0 943 2.19 0.11 0.00
Compatibility 801.8 943 2.47 0.09 0.01
Usability 757.0 943 1.91 0.15 0.00
Reliability 775.5 943 3.72 0.02* 0.01
Security 903.2 943 1.37 0.25 0.00
Portability 806.3 943 2.40 0.09 0.01
*significant at the 0.05 level

CONCLUSIONS & RECOMMENDATION

This is to conclude that majority
It is recommended that a

REFERENCES