Business level statistics - LA

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

During the Infrastructure Forum meeting today we discussed the possibility to gather the following data from each HEI in the EWP Network:

From the sending HEI, those LAs for outgoing students which meet the conditions:

• exists at least one approved version of LA,
• the last existing version of LA is approved.

Do you agree that this statistics will properly show the picture of system in operation and activity of local IRO staff?
Could you. please, check if this description is clear and you can easily gather such data?

Could you share this statistics with EWP tech team? As yet unofficially, we will not yet share it with anybody outside the team.

After we gather some opinions we will ask DG EAC for their opinion and their ideas how we will be gathering such (similar) data in the future.

[kamil-olszewski-uw]

It depends on what exactly we want to report. If we want to know about the number of all signed and valid LAs, we should skip the point "the last existing version of LA is approved". If we want to know the number of all signed LAs, for which there is no need to perform any additional actions (i.e. they do not have any modification proposals awaiting approval of the receiving university), then this point should be taken into account.

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

Please, have a look at this proposal. Can you calculate such statistics in your system? Is this clear for you what the statistics means on the business level?

1. LA for outgoing: Number of LAs that have been created at local HEI and have been approved by the partner HEI.
2. LA for outgoing, processing completed: Number of LAs created at local HEI that have been approved by the partner HEI and no new version of LA is currently waiting for the partner approval.
3. LA for incoming approved.
4. LA for incoming with at least one version rejected.
5. LA for incoming with the latest version approved.
6. LA for incoming with the latest version rejected.
7. LA for incoming in with the latest version awaiting approval.

Do you see any other interesting statistics concerning LAs we might want to have?

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

Our proposal for today is the following (we will discuss it on 2022-06-22 at the Infrastructure Forum meeting):

LAs for outgoing:

1. Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the partner HEI.
2. Number of LAs with the latest version approved by the partner HEI.
3. Number of LAs with the latest version awaiting partner’s approval.

LAs for incoming:

1. Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the partner HEI.
2. Number of LAs with the latest version approved by the partner HEI.
3. Number of LAs with the latest version rejected by the partner HEI.
4. Number of LAs with the latest version awaiting partner’s approval.

Is this more clear now?

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

The latest description:

LAs for outgoing (sending HEI):

1. Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the receiving HEI with the latest version approved by the receiving HEI or awaiting receiving HEI’s approval.
2. (before and during the mobility) Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the receiving HEI and with some versions after the approved one which have been approved by the receiving HEI or await receiving HEI’s approval.
3. Number of LAs with the latest version approved by the receiving HEI.
4. Number of LAs with the latest version awaiting receiving HEI’s approval.

LAs for incoming (receiving HEI):

1. Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the receiving HEI.
2. Number of LAs with the latest version approved by the receiving HEI.
3. Number of LAs with the latest version rejected by the receiving HEI.
4. Number of LAs with the latest version awaiting receiving HEI’s approval.

[LDeprez]

LAs for outgoing:
How to translate 'awaiting receiving HEI's approval'? Is this including or exclusing LA's where the latest version got a comment-proposal from the receiving HEI?

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

It means that we wait for the answer. If we have got the answer (acceptance or rejection) we do not wait. The ball is now on our side.
Do you think it is better to reformulate to make it more clear?

[LDeprez]

So I could translate points 1 and 2 for outgoing LA to:
1 = there is at least one approved version AND

• OR this approved version is the last version
• OR the approved version is not the last version AND (the sending HEI received an approval on the last version OR the sending HEI did not receive an evaluation on the last version).

2 = there is at least one approved version AND this version is followed by at least one version for which sending HEI received an approval or not receive any evaluation.

Questions:
For 1: LA's where the latest version is evaluated with a comment by the receiving HEI are excluded from the statistics. For 2: LA's where the approved version is only followed by versions where the receiving HEI provided comments are excluded. Could you explain the business logic behind this choice please?

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

I understand your point. For outgoing we do not count rejected LAs. On the contrary for incoming we count them. This is not consistent. From the business perspective may be the most interesting is how many LAs which have once been approved do not need further processing or the final state of LAs. So may be this is what IROs would like to have?

LAs for outgoing (sending HEI):

1. (only before the mobility) Number of LAs with one version approved by the receiving HEI which has not been followed by any other version.
2. (before and during the mobility) Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the receiving HEI and with some versions after the approved one.
3. Number of LAs with the latest version approved by the receiving HEI.
4. Number of LAs with the latest version rejected by the receiving HEI.
5. Number of LAs with the latest version awaiting receiving HEI’s approval.

Does it make sense?

[pleys]

Statistics where discussed at BPO meeting on 12/07. Some feedback:

• It would be useful to add a notion of how many LAs are shared in total and have percentages for the proposed statistics;
• Academic year seems an important and relevant element when it comes to LA statistics.

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

Good idea. The latest description:

LAs for outgoing (sending HEI), all statistics grouped and ordered by the academic year

1. Number of LAs
2. (only before the mobility) Number of LAs with only one version approved by the receiving HEI which has not been followed by any other version.
3. (before and during the mobility) Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the receiving HEI and with some versions after the approved one.
4. Number of LAs with the latest version approved by the receiving HEI.
5. Number of LAs with the latest version rejected by the receiving HEI.
6. Number of LAs with the latest version awaiting receiving HEI’s approval.

LAs for incoming (receiving HEI), all statistics grouped and ordered by the academic year

1. Number of LAs
2. Number of LAs with at least one version approved by the receiving HEI.
3. Number of LAs with the latest version approved by the receiving HEI.
4. Number of LAs with the latest version rejected by the receiving HEI.
5. Number of LAs with the latest version awaiting receiving HEI’s approval.

In case that helps to get some idea, this is how we do it. In the admission system in which we handle LAs for incoming, cycles must be taken from XML, because we do not keep them in a separate column.

-- 1. Number of LAs for incoming.
SELECT COUNT(la.id),
(xpath('//n:receiving-academic-year-id/text()', la.content::XML, ARRAY[ARRAY['n', 'https://github.com/erasmus-without-paper/ewp-specs-api-omobility-las/blob/stable-v1/endpoints/get-response.xsd']]))[1]::TEXT academic_year
FROM irk_learningagreement la
WHERE (la.id IN (
SELECT DISTINCT ON (la2.sending_hei_id, la2.omobility_id) la2.id
FROM irk_learningagreement la2
ORDER BY la2.sending_hei_id ASC, la2.omobility_id ASC))
GROUP BY academic_year
ORDER BY academic_year;

[Belenchusky]

I have a question for this section:
"5- Number of LAs incoming with the latest version awaiting receiving HEI’s approval"
Some of the LAs are waiting because after receiving a CNR we cannot properly GET the LA due to technical reasons from the student's university. Should I include those LAs in this number?

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

Some of the LAs are waiting because after receiving a CNR we cannot properly GET the LA due to technical reasons from the student's university. Should I include those LAs in this number?

I think so, you do not have the approval in your system yet.
Does this situation persist? Have you contacted your partner? Do you need assistance in getting in touch?

[Belenchusky]

Some of the LAs are waiting because after receiving a CNR we cannot properly GET the LA due to technical reasons from the student's university. Should I include those LAs in this number?

I think so, you do not have the approval in your system yet. Does this situation persist? Have you contacted your partner? Do you need assistance in getting in touch?

Yes, we have contacted and sometimes there is no response. Other times, we get inquiries from people who are not IT people and it is very difficult to make them understand what is happening and what we need.
I would like to say that EWP is consuming a lot of resources after we have implemented it, having to contact each of the partners to solve the problems. It's not being easy at all.

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

Yes, we have contacted and sometimes there is no response. Other times, we get inquiries from people who are not IT people and it is very difficult to make them understand what is happening and what we need.

There will be relationship managers hired in the project who will help us to resolve such issues faster.

I would like to say that EWP is consuming a lot of resources after we have implemented it, having to contact each of the partners to solve the problems. It's not being easy at all.

The same is true for every deployed IT system. This particular system is deployed on a very large scale. It takes time, yes, but I am optimistic.

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

Formal specification is discussed in erasmus-without-paper/general-issues#42.

[Belenchusky]

I have a problem with the statistics of LA. For example, this month I have less OUT LA than the previous month depending on the criteria I take into consideration. This is due to the fact that the LA, although a CNR has already been sent to be signed through EWP and at the time was accounted for as a new LA, has been reconverted to traditional for technical reasons attributable to the other partner and has not been able to be resolved.
So, if I count the CNR that I sent as an agreement because it is consistent with what I already sent the previous month, this agreement, once converted to traditional, will never have an approval through EWP. I don't know if I'm explaining myself.

On the other hand, we have many IN LA that have been initially approved but many universities are not prepared to negotiate the modifications with EWP, which in addition to causing us many problems, can distort the statistics.

And finally, what to do with the LA of the students who resign?

[kamil-olszewski-uw]

The statistics we collect are primarily intended to take into account the workload incurred by both parties, network traffic, etc. and not the final state as such (e.g. we don't want to report the current number of approved LAs for non-canceled mobilities only).

If the student resigns, but the LA has been previously signed by all parties, then we should include it in the statistics.

If the first version of LA has been rejected and no new proposal has been created, LA should also be included in the statistics.

But if the first version of LA was shared via EWP and then deleted without receiving partner's approval or rejection, then it should not be included in the statistics because the receiving HEI was unable to make a decision about that LA.

[janinamincer-daszkiewicz]

LAs Outgoing Stats endpoint: https://github.com/erasmus-without-paper/ewp-specs-api-omobility-las/blob/stable-v1/endpoints/stats.md.
LAs Incoming Stats endpoint: https://github.com/erasmus-without-paper/ewp-specs-api-omobility-la-cnr/blob/stable-v1/endpoints/stats.md.