Abstract
This research compares the efficiency and effectiveness of manual versus automated timetabling methods in tertiary higher learning institution (THLI). The study focuses on comparisons of four main aspects: staffing allocation for the creation of the timetable, variety of timetable files created, time spent for creating timetables and classroom utilisation. The results show significant differences between the two approaches. Manual time timetabling approach required a team of 5 to 8 experts, resulting in significant cognitive load and increased likelihood of errors due to iterative adjustments and scheduling complications. In contrast, the automated scheduling approach required only three employees for system setup, maintenance, and validation for the timetable generation significantly reducing human effort post-implementation. In addition, automatic schedule generation created approximately 40 different types of schedule files, providing greater variety and efficiency in resource management, while the manual method only produced three variants. The automated approach significantly reduced the time needed to create timetables, requiring only 3 to 5 days instead of 12 to 15 days with the traditional process. Additionally, classroom utilisation improved significantly, with the manual method achieving less than 40% utilisation while the automated method achieved an efficiency rate of over 95%. The results suggest that automated timetable systems represent a more resource-efficient and effective option compared to manual approaches, enabling improved planning and resource optimization in tertiary higher learning institutions.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call