Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comprehensive approach to student sectioning

  • Published:
Annals of Operations Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Student sectioning is the problem of assigning students to particular sections of courses they request while respecting constraints such as course structures, section limits, and reserved spaces. Students may also provide preferences on class times and course alternatives. In this paper, three approaches to this problem are examined and combined in order to tackle it on a practical level: student sectioning during course timetabling, batch sectioning after a complete timetable is developed, and online sectioning for making additional changes to student schedules. An application and some practical results of the proposed solutions based on actual data are also included.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Amintoosi, M., & Haddadnia, J. (2005). Feature selection in a fuzzy student sectioning algorithm. In E. Burke & M. Trick (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science : Vol. 3616. Practice and theory of automated timetabling, selected revised papers (pp. 147–160). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aubin, J., & Ferland, J. (1989). A large scale timetabling problem. Computers and Operations Research, 16(1), 67–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banks, D., van Beek, P., & Meisels, A. (1998). A heuristic incremental modeling approach to course timetabling. In Canadian conference on AI (pp. 16–29).

  • Bent, R., & Van Hentenryck, P. (2005). Online stochastic optimization without distributions. In ICAPS 2005, Monterey, CA, 2005.

  • Busam, V. A. (1967). An algorithm for class scheduling with section preference. Communications of the ACM, 10(9), 567–569.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, M. W. (2001). A comprehensive course timetabling and student scheduling system at the University of Waterloo. In E. Burke & W. Erben (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science : Vol. 2079. Practice and theory of automated timetabling III (pp. 64–82). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, Michael W., & Laporte, G. (1998). Recent developments in practical course timetabling. In E. Burke & M. Carter (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science : Vol. 1408. Practice and theory of automated timetabling II (pp. 3–19). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Feldman, R., & Golumbic, M. C. (1990). Optimization algorithms for student scheduling via constraint satisfiability. The Computer Journal, 33(4), 356–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hertz, A., & Robert, V. (1998). Constructing a course schedule by solving a series of assignment type problems. European Journal of Operational Research, 108(3), 585–603.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laporte, G., & Desroches, S. (1986). The problem of assigning students to courses in a large engineering school. Computers and Operations Research, 13(4), 387–394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Müller, T. (2005). Constraint-based timetabling. PhD thesis, Charles University in Prague, Faculty of Mathematics and Physics.

  • Müller, T. (2010). Constraint solver library. GNU Lesser General Public License, SourceForge.net. Available at http://cpsolver.sf.net.

  • Müller, T., Barták, R., & Rudová, H. (2004). Conflict-based statistics. In J. Gottlieb, D. Landa Silva, N. Musliu, & E. Soubeiga (Eds.), EU/ME workshop on design and evaluation of advanced hybrid meta-heuristics. University of Nottingham: Nottingham.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murray, K., Müller, T., & Rudová, H. (2007). Modeling and solution of a complex university course timetabling problem. In E. Burke & H. Rudová (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science : Vol. 3867. Practice and theory of automated timetabling, selected revised papers (pp. 189–209). Berlin: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Rudová, H., Müller, T., & Barták, R. (2005). Minimal perturbation problem in course timetabling. In E. Burke & M. Trick (Eds.), Lecture notes in computer science : Vol. 3616. Practice and theory of automated timetabling, selected revised papers (pp. 126–146). Berlin: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sabin, G. C. W., & Winter, G. K. (1986). The impact of automated timetabling on universities a case study. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 37(7), 689–693.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sampson, S. E., & Weiss, E. N. (1995). Increasing service levels in conference and educational scheduling: a heuristic approach. Management Science, 41(11), 1816–1825.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schaerf, A. (1999). A survey of automated timetabling. Artificial Intelligence Review, 13(2), 87–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 47907, USA

    Tomáš Müller & Keith Murray

Authors
  1. Tomáš Müller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Keith Murray
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tomáš Müller.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Müller, T., Murray, K. Comprehensive approach to student sectioning. Ann Oper Res 181, 249–269 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-010-0735-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-010-0735-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation