LAN-Based Computer-Managed Performance Appraisal System For the Academic Staff of College of Computer Studies, Tarlac State University

_____________

A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of College of Computer Studies Tarlac State University Tarlac City

_____________

In Partial Fulfilment Of the Requirements for the Degree Bachelor of Science in Information Technology

_____________

By Don Q. Druja Elijah P. Simon Perry O. Quiazon

Introduction Project Context Some organization are monitoring and measuring the performance of their employees to know bad practices and begin the process of solving issues. Other business conducts performance appraisal for development and promotion purposes. One goal of conducting performance evaluation is to improve employee morale by monitoring their capability in doing their job. It also identify the strengths and weaknesses and to make the right decision of controlling the work performance of the employee. For schools and universities, they conduct regular performance appraisal to see how effective the teacher or instructor is. Every school wants to provide quality education to students through the effectiveness of the instructors teaching. Identifying strength and weaknesses, making informed resources allocation decisions and motivating instructors to improve performance can help achieve policy objectives such as school improvement, school accountability as school choice. Students are the ones who regularly experience teaching capabilities of an instructor and their opinion is a good indicator to determine their strong and weak points during classes. A student evaluation for academic instructors is one of the key factors to know if the college and students are meeting their expectations from a specific proctor or instructor. At Tarlac State University, they conduct Performance Evaluation twice every semester. Currently, they take the form of paper-based questionnaire and being answered by the evaluator with every question having a 5 scale rating guide (Outstanding to Poor) and has an optional comment and recommendation that can be filled up. The chairperson will choose a random of 30 students on different classroom that will evaluate the faculty staff. After the evaluation process, the chairperson will tally all the forms from each of the student being evaluated and at the same

time reading the comments. After reviewing all the evaluation made by the students, the chairperson will inform the instructor on the results and send all reports to the dean to have a final review. The same process on evaluation is also done on other evaluators particularly the supervisors, peers and instructor to be evaluated. There are certain concerns that are faced by the chairperson. During the evaluation process, with a minimum number of 30 students, the chairpersons can still increase the number of evaluators. But as more evaluators they get, the more work will be needed to tally the results. It will take more time to finish all the reports before submitting it to the dean. It may also produce inaccurate results due to human error. The LAN-Based Computer-Managed Performance Appraisal System for the Academic Staff of College of Computer Studies, Tarlac State University aims to improve the process of validating the forms and minimize the time of tallying the results. It will also give more accurate results of tallying because the system is the one that will execute the tasks. This will also provide efficiency on the users by generating same output results with less resources such as papers, ballpens, envelopes and other materials.

Purpose and Description The study is about the research and development of a LAN-Based Computer-managed Performance Appraisal System for the Academic Staff of College of Computer Studies, Tarlac State University. The system is capable of giving a module to the raters as an instrument for the faculty evaluation. The raters will fill up the forms then the system will do the tallying and computation of the academic staff rating based on the users input, then displays the summary of ratings. The system will generate reports showing the summary of rating based on the PESF Form 5 used by the college. It can also produce a more detailed report which uses the different forms as the basis which is also used by the college. It shows every category with its corresponding rating scale. The system then can generate the reports which will be reviewed by the Chairpersons and the College Dean. The researchers goal is to develop a system that will lessen the time and workload during the evaluation. It will help the chairpersons and college dean to do the monitoring and reviewing of ratings at ease. The locale can add more number of raters without increasing the amount of work. The more raters added, the more reliable the output can be. The results will also be generated fast and more accurate.

Statement of the Objectives This study is intended for the development of a LAN-Based Computer-Managed Performance Appraisal System for the Academic Staff of College of Computer Studies, Tarlac State University. Specifically, this study aims to achieve the following objectives: 1. To design and develop a LAN-Based Computer-Managed Performance Evaluation System for the Academic Staff of College of Computer Studies, Tarlac state University which has the following functions: 1.1 Access Module 1.2 Performance Evaluation Module 1.3 Report Form Module 2. To validate the LAN-Based Computer-Managed Performance Appraisal System for the Academic Staff of College of Computer Studies, Tarlac State University according to: 2.1. Users 2.1.1. User Interface 2.1.2. Functionality 2.1.3. Accuracy 2.1.4. Reliability 2.2. IT Experts 2.2.1. User Interface 2.2.2. Database Design 2.2.3. Security 2.2.4. Efficiency

2.2.5. Accuracy 2.2.6. Reliability

Scope and Delimitation The study focuses on the research and development of a LAN-Based Computer-Managed Performance Appraisal System for the Academic Staff of College of Computer Studies, Tarlac State University. This study covers about the major processes of the evaluation including the computation of ratings. The intended users are the students from the College of Computer Studies of Tarlac State University. The college supervisors, peer workers and the employee themselves are also included as users. The target domain of the system is the CISCO Laboratory. Other colleges within Tarlac State University are not part of the research. The study only covers the evaluation for academic staff only.

Related Literature and Studies This chapter presents the related literature and studies to help in acquiring more knowledge and deep insights relevant to the study. This related information containing the documents and materials that used has become the basis of theories and facts for this study. Related Literature According to Marlou Felix S. Cunanan III, MBA, MIT on his post about Aldersgate College Performance Evaluation System, it is a tool for measuring, monitoring and controlling work performance from different perspectives, i.e., students, subordinates, superiors, and peers. The performance reports and ratings generated by the various evaluation perspectives will be analyzed and consolidated to be used for making decisions on the following:

1. Employee improvement programs 2. Granting of pay increments 3. Determining order of layoffs 4. Rating employees suitability for promotion 5. Examining the employees suitability for the job 6. Justifying administrative decision to transfer, demote, or dismiss an employee[1] According to Jerry Jensen on his article entitled Employee Evaluation: Its a dirty job, but somebodys got to do it. a good performance appraisal system serves organizational development by promoting productivity toward the maximum results from minimum investment of resources. The researchers believe that a good performance appraisal system will have a large impact on the organization because it is one way to identify such wasteful practices and begin the process of correcting them. The researchers also know that it will be a positive experience and

contribute to the overall welfare of an organization. If done properly, performance appraisal is a very effective tool to improve performance and productivity and for developing employees. It also helps individuals to do better, raises self-esteem and motivation. [2] The framework for evaluation of education in schools and for appraisal and feedback of teachers are key TALIS concerns. Evaluation can play a key role in school improvement and teacher development (OECD, 2005). Identifying strengths and weaknesses, making informed resource allocation decisions, and motivating actors to improve performance can help achieve policy objectives such as school improvement, school accountability and school choice. The researchers believe that the greater the emphasis on specific aspects of teacher appraisal and feedback, the greater the change in teachers practices to improve their teaching. In some instances, more emphasis in school evaluations on certain aspects of teaching is linked to an emphasis on these aspects in teacher appraisal and feedback which, in turn, leads to further changes in teachers reported teaching practices. In these instances, the framework for the evaluation of education appears to be operating effectively. [3]

Conger (1998), carried out an exploratory study to review the purposes and practices of performance appraisal. The study indicated the trend in US, as giving high focus on documentation, development and linking performance appraisals with pay and promotion purpose. In Korea, performance appraisal is used for development and promotion purposes. In Canada it is used much less for compensation and pay. In Australia performance appraisal is used for development and promotion purposes. At University of Minnesota, performance appraisal policy statement indicates that, employees performance appraisal is done on an annual basis.[4]

The researchers read about a forum that here are a number of reasons why performance appraisal is not as effective as it could be. The first is that many organizations do not have clearly established corporate objectives for undertaking performance reviews. Many managers, particularly in large organizations, routinely complete the required forms which are then filed and the subject not mentioned again until the next review period, usually a year hence. But Bacal(1999) quoted: Performance appraisal isn't about the forms. The ultimate purpose of performance appraisal is to allow employees and managers to improve continuously and to remove barriers to job success, in other words, to make everyone better. Forms don't make people better, and are simply a way of recording basic information for later reference. If the focus is getting the forms "done", without thought and effort, the whole process becomes at best a waste of time, and at worst, insulting.[5]

Related Studies A performance appraisal interview is a primary and important context for the supervisor and employee to work together to achieve superior performance. A survey of the research literature reveals that the appraisal interview functions to provide feedback on performance, to counsel and provide help, to discover what the employee is thinking, to teach the employee to problem solve, to help the employee discover ways to improve, to set performance goals, and to discuss compensation. In addition, the literature reveals three reasons that determine frequency of interview: the nature of the goal of the interview, the kind of position the employee has in the organization, and the characteristics of the employee's performance. The performance appraisal interview provides an intriguing communication situation for the student of organizational communication. Employees undoubtedly need the feedback of their supervisor to do their best. Yet they are often anxious at the prospect of an appraisal interview. On the other hand, supervisors recognize that employees want to know how they are doing on the job. They also realize that they should communicate with their employees about work performance. Yet, in practice, performance information is frequently not discussed with employees and when it is discussed it may be given in a perfunctory manner. In addition, it has long been recognized that some supervisors avoid performance appraisal interviews, while others experience anxiety and discomfort in doing them. Beyond this, the infrequent and ineffective use of performance appraisal interviews is well documented. The irony of this situation is that a performance appraisal interview is a primary and important context for the supervisor and employee to work together to achieve superior performance. Yet, fear keeps the process from achieving its full potential.[6]

The researchers observe that some practices on doing the performance appraisal is not right. They experience discomfort and frequently not been talk about. But the proper way to conduct performance appraisal is that the supervisors and the employees should interact to know if they are doing their job and if there is a need of improvement. With this, they will eliminate lack of knowledge on their job evaluation.

Reference: [1] http://www.aldersgate-college.com/news/aldersgate-performance-evaluation-system posted on February 22, 2011 [2] http://www.tgci.com/magazine/EmployeeEvaluation.pdf copyright 1997, The Grantsmanship Center: the leader in grants and program development training [3] Creating Effective Teaching and Learning Environments: First Results from TALIS ISBN 978-92-64-05605-3 [4] Conger, J.A.D. Finegold & E.E. Lawler (1998) Appraisal Boardroom performance Harvard Business Review [5] Bacal, R. 1999. Performance management. New York: McGraw-Hill. [6] Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Southern Speech Communication Association (Winston-Salem, NC, April 11-14, 1985).

Technical Background This chapter explains the technical readiness of the locale in using the proposed project. Table 1 Hardware Resources Desktop Computers and Laptops Description The chairpersons of the college use desktop computers and laptops in tallying and

computing the evaluation results. Printer Printer is used to produce copies of evaluation results which will be submitted to the college dean. Software Resources Operating System Operating system is needed to run programs and application software. Microsoft Office A Microsoft Office program such as Microsoft Excel is used to tally and compute ratings. Information Resources Rater Form Data needed in the evaluation process are acquired through answered rater forms to be filled by the college supervisors, chairpersons, peer workers and students.

Technical Capabilities The intended users for the proposed project are the colleges Supervisors, Academic Staff and Students. The users are computer literate and are able to operate desktop application and computer components. Technical Feasibility The minimum hardware and software requirements needed to operate the proposed system are the following: Table 2 Hardware Requirement Desktop computer with a minimum specification of: Processing capacity of 1.77 GHz or higher. 512 MB of RAM of higher 64 MB graphic of higher 80 GB hard disk drive or higher Software Requirements Description The specifications of a desktop computer indicated are needed to operate the proposed project.

Operating System

Operating System is needed to run the software applications.

Visual basic

Visual Basic is chosen to be used in developing the system because all the features needed is supported by the program.

MySql

MySql will be used as the database server of the system because of its good data storage and retrieval capabilities.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY This chapter is the methods of research and data gathering instruments to be utilize in the study. The researchers are using the Developmental Methodology because it is suited for application development. They use it through planning and analysis. The next step will be the implementation, promotion and innovation of the system. SOFTWARE ENGINEERING METHODOLOGY The researchers use Rapid Application Development (RAD). The researchers use this method of decreasing the time taken to design software systems. It uses incremental development and the construction of prototypes and encourages constant feedback from users by keeping lines of communication clear- with the end goal of expediting the development cycle. It is a methodology for compressing the analysis, design, build and test phases into a series of short, iterative development cycles. This has a number of distinct advantages over the traditional sequential development model. There are 4 phases of Rapid Application Development that the researchers follow. Figure 1

Figure 1 shows the overview of the Rapid Application Development that the researchers used. Starting at the Requirements Planning. The researchers gather all documents that will be needed in order to start designing the project. After the first phase is done, User Design and

Construction takes place simultaneously. Before starting the actual coding, the researchers looks and create what should the system will look like. Many ideas came up on how to design the system. Adding features on the system, designing sample user interface and putting important information was one of the things the researchers considered before implementing the system. Getting some ideas on the internet to see what the system will look like was also been made. Putting the suitable background of the system will also been examine by the researchers. After the designing phase, the researchers will now start to make codes on the system. After the construction phase, the researcher will be testing the system if there is a need to fix. The new system will be build, deliver, and place in operation much sooner Data Gathering tool This part of the study discusses the different types of research instruments used. The details on the research that were used are described in this section. Its nature, purpose, construction, content-validation, and pre-testing are explained. In the collection of data, the following were used as instrumentation: Interview The researchers conduct interview to the people who knows about the process of evaluation. It is a good tool to gather data because it is a direct conversation wherein it is a form of question and answer format that leads to a specific purposed study and compared with manual operation. The answers gathered on the interview were used as basis in the development of the system.

Questionnaires The researchers use this method to easily reveal the result and lead the researchers for further development or improvement needed. The researchers make a questionnaire so the chairpersons will have a time to answer the questionnaire that the researchers needed. Internet One good source of gathering of data is Internet surfing. Some information needed for the development of the study where gathered through the used of Internet. The researchers use the internet because the newest books available are not readily offered everywhere. They are also inexpensive to purchase, electronic books, internet web pages, and software help files come very handy in sticky situations that require the newest knowledge and trends. This technique help the researchers to established the basic concepts in creating the system. Library Research The researchers use library to collect materials for use in intensive research projects. They look at the different thesis studies related to the system they are proposing. It s a good gathering tool because whenever the researchers encounter some problems concerning their research they can use the library resources to have a clear and wide understanding regarding the problem. STATISTICAL TREATMENT The statistical tool that will be use by the researchers is frequency distribution to determine the reliability of the study. 1 will the the lowest possible rating and 5 being the highest achievable score. Given is a five poing scale that will use in determining the overall weight of each item described in the questionnaire.

In calculating the mean of tabulated data, the formula below will be use: Mean = 5f+4f+3f+2f+1f/f Where: f= Summation of frequency

Economic Feasibility Manual Performance Evaluation Materials Unit/Set Quantity Price(Php) Total Cost (Php) 40 200 90 2880 3210

Ballpen Stapler Stapler Wire Papers Total

Pc Pc Set Set

4 4 1 2880

10 50 90 1

Equipment

Unit/Set

Quantity

Price(Php)

Ballpen Stapler Total

Pc Pc

4 4

10 50

Total Cost (Php) 40 200 240

Equipment + Material = Cost 240 +3210 = Php 3450 Proposed Project

Hardware/Software/Net work

Unit/S et

Quanti ty

Price(Ph p)

*Operating System *Desktop Computer *Data Server *UTP Cable *RJ45 Title

Pc Set Set Meter Pc pc

20 20 1 200 40 1

8950 15000 18000 10 5 5000

Tot al Cos t (Ph p) 0 0 0 0 0 500

Total Asterisk (*) means already available Maintenance Cost 5000 Pesos

0 500 0

Hardware/Software/Network + Maintenance = cost 5000 + 5000 =Php 10000

Intangible Benefits The Computer Managed Performance Evaluation System helps the users to evaluate the faculty staff. Having a performance evaluation system will lessen the work of the chairperson in tallying the results. The more users to evaluate a certain employee, the more accurate the result can be and it reduces the time in tallying because the system will do the job. The system will also be the one responsible in computing the results and producing the reports. The system gives huge advantage not only on the part of the users but also the college because of the utilization and the expose on the application development. The users will develop their skills and increase their knowledge on using a system and appreciate the importance of having an application that will help them finish the job faster and reliable.

Organizational feasibility Planning means setting performance expectations and goals for groups and individuals to channel their efforts toward achieving their objectives. Getting the staffs involved in the planning process will help them understand the goals of the institution, what needs to be done, why it

needs to be done, and how well it should be done. Performance evaluations at TSU, which provide the chairpersons and the dean with an opportunity to assess their faculty staffs contributions to the college, are essential to developing a powerful work team. One of the goals of a performance evaluation system are to provide an equitable measurement of the instructors contribution to the workforce, produce accurate appraisal documentation to protect both the instructors and in the higher positions, and obtain a high level of quality and quantity in the work produced. The system will also enhance the researchers proficiency in terms of developing a new application that the college can utilize and for better understanding of software development on the school. Carrying out the processes of performance management provides an excellent opportunity to identify developmental needs. During planning and monitoring of work, deficiencies in performance become evident and can be addressed. Areas for improving good performance also stand out, and action can be taken to help successful employees improve even further.

Operational Feasibility According to the survey weve conducted, the user acceptance and the supervisors said that they will save more time if the process of tallying and computing will be done by a program.

The student evaluators are limited to at least 30 due to the limited number of forms available and the amount of work it may produce if more evaluators are added. The supervisors also agree that the generation of reports should be fast as much as possible. One of the questions of the survey that the supervisors agreed is that it will be better if a computerized Personal Appraisal will be implemented. This shows that the proposed project will be supported by the users.

Rating Scale for User Lan-Base Computer Managed Performance Appraisal System For the Academic Staff Of College of Computer Studies

Name: ____________________ (Optional) Position: ____________________ (Optional) Direction: Please read the items carefully and place a check mark that best describes your opinion regarding the item listed. All responses shall be treated with the strictest confidence and will be used for research purposes only. If there is a need to change responses, blacken the previous one before choosing another.

Legend: Rating 5 4 3 2 1 Equivalent Strongly Agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly Disagree

Validating Operational Feasibility Test No. 1 1 2 Chairpersons could save more time if the process of tallying and computing will be done by a program. The student evaluators are limited to at least 30 due to the limited number of forms available and the amount of work it may produce if more evaluators are added. There is a possibility to encounter problems in tallying the results due to human error. The generation of reports should be fast as much as possible. The process of performance appraisal will be better if a computerized performance appraisal system will be implemented.

Rating 2 3 4

3 4 5

Comments ______________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________ II. Validating Organizational Feasibility Test No. Rating 1 2 3 4 5 1 Develop competence among personnel 2 Develop the quality of teachings and knowledge of the staff

3 4

Building the solidarity between the staff and supervisors Improving the staffs job performance

Comments ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ III. Validating Economic Feasibility Test No. 1 1 2 Having a Performance Evaluation system will lessen the work of the chairperson in tallying the results The users will develop their skills and increase their knowledge on using a system and appreciate the importance of having an application that will help them finish the job

Rating 2 3 4

Comments ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

IV. Validating Technical Feasibility Test No. 1 1 The devices that will be use on the system like the computer and printer will be available on the college

Rating 2 3 4

Comments ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ THANK YOU VERY MUCH!! Rating Scale for User

Name: ____________________ (Optional) Position: ____________________ (Optional) Direction: Please read the items carefully and place a check mark that best describes your opinion regarding the item listed. All responses shall be treated with the strictest confidence and will be used for research purposes only. If there is a need to change responses, blacken the previous one before choosing another.

Legend: Rating 5 4 3 2 1 Validating User Interface Test No. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Feature of the System User Access level Allow User to Rate: Peer Supervisor Dean Ability of producing reports on: Evaluation rated by rater Overall rating of the Faculty Staff Record maintenance of users profile and record: Add new employee Edit and delete existing records Update evaluation period Permit use to change password Presents the faculty manual Equivalent Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Poor Very Poor

Rating 2 3 4

Comments ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________ Rating Scale for IT Experts

Name: ____________________ (Optional) Position: ____________________ (Optional) Direction: Please read the items carefully and place a check mark that best describes your opinion regarding the item listed. All responses shall be treated with the strictest confidence and will be used for research purposes only. If there is a need to change responses, blacken the previous one before choosing another. Legend: Rating 5 4 3 2 1 Equivalent Outstanding Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Poor Very Poor

Test No. 1 2

Accuracy 1 Compute properly the ratings of the staff Produce accurate reports

Rating 2 3 4

Test No. 1 2

Reliability 1 Have centralized Database Easy to use and understand

Rating 2 3 4

Test No. 1 2 3

Security 1 User will type his name and password in a user level form Unauthorized person cannot modify or delete database Users can only rate person who is allowed

Rating 2 3 4

Test No.

Efficiency

Rating

1 1 2 The system has the capability to make ready to print report The ratings of employees are sorted and computed by the system.

Comments ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________