Mechanisation For University Records

Press, Volume C, Issue 29673, 17 November 1961, Page 21

Mechanisation For University Records

Because the University of Canterbury expects soon to begin mechanisation ot its huge records shedules. the assistant registrar (academe), Mrs H. B. Hewitt, was sent to Australia recently to examine methods there. In 10 days she visited the University of Sydney <12.000 - udentsi. the University of New South Wales <8500), the University of Queensland Woo>. the University of Melbourne (11.000), the University of Adelaide <6700). and found that all of them have introduced punch-card methods, sometimes in conjunction with computers, and that all plan greater mechanisation. They and we have found that there comes a time within the strict timetable requirements of a university .'ear when manual methods become uneconomic and when mechanisation eases the need to employ more specialised staff.” Mrs Hewitt said yesterday. The new methods were now well tried overseas, Australian univers ties were highly enthusiastic. and Canterbury had ordered card punching and sorting equipment to arrive at the end of this year. Already records tasks had been designed for the electronic computer being installed at the University of Canterbury and Mrs Hewitt said the operators believed they had devised a scheme by which it could quickly note any clashes in examina- '■ on timetables. That was a problem not yet mechanicel y overcome in any of the centres she visited. Roll Limits Every Australian university was facing complex problems through increasing student members and most of them would have some sort of restriction on entry next year. Mrs Hewitt said. Adelaide would restrict ent try to medical courses as a first step toward holding the ultimate roll at 8000; Melbourne and its new sister Monash University were having discussions on schemes of selection; Sydney would enforce quotas requiring prior application for enrolment; and New South Wales had announced that it would

have limits in some faculties. “Provided our new building programme keeps up to the desired timetable. Canterbury hopes that it will not have to restrict enrolments,’* Mrs Hewitt said, “but, with full autonomy next year and a steady increase in students, there will be a big load on our administration. My trip showed that our methods leave little to be desired except more machines for our records.’’ In Australia and in Canterbury’s future these machines could quickly produce scores of combinations of statistics on enrolments for the information of departmental heads, class lists, information required by Government departments, examination schedules for supervisors and examiners, and then lists on the completion of results. These systems could even issue result cards, Mrs Hewitt said. All this greatly accelerated work, gave a high degree of accuracy, and freed staff for duties which, could . not be performed by machines. Mrs Hewitt said she was interested to see the size of Australian universities’ staffs handling academic administnation. Adelaide, which was closest to Canterbury in size, had 24 academic administrative staff compared with 11 in Christchurch. Admittedly the Australian universities handled matriculation examinations (which were administered by the Education Department in New Zealand) but this additional load was offset by the use of punch cards and computers. The University of Queensland had an administrative staff of 278. One feature which impressed Mrs Hewitt was the rationalisation of fees which were paid on enrolment in some places.