Skip to Content
Former Member
Nov 05, 2007 at 10:29 PM

Multiple Requirements Catalogs



Per Michael Fan's suggestion in:

Non-Existent Requirement Profiles after Processing with RHIQAUDIT_MP_CS

I have been exploring the idea of associating requirements catalogs with programs of study. Generally speaking, it seems to be quite elegant and natural with regards to SLCM's audit capabilities.

However, in our existing paper-based process, the structure of our undergraduate programs is somewhat messy in the sense that undergraduates can have different yearly versions of the catalogs for each major or minor that they sign, plus another different yearly version of the catalog for their overall degree and general education requirements.

Furthermore, in our undergraduate programs catalog, programs of study are named after the various degree programs (B.S., B.A., etc...), and majors and minors (academic specializations) in those degree programs are attached as module groups to their corresponding programs of study. So, unlike some universities, we do not have distinct programs of study for each major (like B.S. in Computer Science, B.S. in Physics, B.A. in Philosophy, etc...).

This seems to imply that we need to derive requirements catalogs from the academic specializations associated with a student's study object (CS - 516 - CG), and not just the program of study (CS - 514 - SC) associated with that study object. If we are to emulate the existing paper process to any reasonable extent, then it seems that we would also need to generate requirements profiles from multiple requirements catalogs (derived as stated above), and I am still not quite sure whether the SLCM audit system was designed to accommodate this.

Any thoughts on whether we should be considering a restructure of our undergraduate format (a potential bureaucratic nightmare), or whether SAP can be made to work well with the notion of more than one requirements catalog (or more than one version of a requirements catalog) contributing to a requirements profile?

Thank you,