1	Discussion on FTEs Office of Academic Affairs and CPD November 19, 2003
2	Full Time Equivalents: Two Ways the Term is Used Used to define number of credits generated by enrolled students (also known as full year equivalents, or FYEs) Used to define number of faculty assigned to a department or program
3	Full Time Equivalents Student FTE(FYE) Based on credit hours taken/generated Undergraduates: 1 FTE = 30 credits Graduates: 1 FTE = 20 credits Faculty FTE Describes number of faculty in a program/department Includes full-time and part-time probationary, fixed-term, and adjunct appointments Part-time restated as percentage of full-time
4	Student FTE as a Measure of Enrollment (Credits Generated) Student FTE Using “FTEs” to describe enrollment figures converts very large numbers (such as 129,304) into a manageable frame (such as 4379). Using “FTEs” to talk about credits can be compared to using dollars to talk about pennies. Rather than explaining something costs twelve hundred pennies, it is easier to explain it costs twelve dollars.
5	Measures of Student Enrollment Student FTE Represents credits generated, not students Every 30 credits = 1 FTE Last year, BSU generated 129,304 credits and reported 4379 FTEs Student Headcount Represents students, not credits Includes full-time and part-time students Last year, BSU enrolled 4945 students, and reported 4945 headcount
6	Calculation of University’s 4379 Student FTEs Conversion Credits Factor FTE UG 125,163 30 4172 Grad 4,141 20 207 Total 129,304 4379
7	Details on the University’s 4379 Student FTEs in 2002-2003 The University’s enrollment measures are based on summing the details of enrollments at the department/program level. These department/program level details are included in various reports, including: 1) BSU’s Data Book 2) MnSCU’s Instructional Cost Study. The University’s enrollment data is reported in federal IPEDs reports.
8	Departmental Calculation of Student FTE Assume a Department of Pharmacy offers the following courses both fall and spring semesters: Class A: 3 credits, 30 enrolled Class B: 3 credits, 22 enrolled Class C: 3 credits, 20 enrolled Class D: 3 credits, 15 enrolled Class E: 3 credits, 45 enrolled Class F: 3 credits, 28 enrolled Class G: 3 credits, 37 enrolled Class H: 3 credits, 52 enrolled
9	Departmental Calculation of Student FTE Class A: 3 credits * 30 students = 90 credits Class B: 3 credits * 22 students = 66 credits Class C: 3 credits * 20 students = 60 credits Class D: 3 credits * 15 students = 45 credits Class E: 3 credits * 45 students = 135 credits Class F: 3 credits * 28 students = 84 credits Class G: 3 credits * 37 student = 111 credits Class H: 3 credits * 52 students = 156 credits Semester Credits = 747 Annual Credits = 1494 Departmental Student FTE = 49.8 (or 1494 / 30)
10	MnSCU’s Use of BSU’s Enrollment Data MnSCU’s Allocation to campuses is based partially on campus FTE. MnSCU’s Instructional Cost Study includes measures of BSU’s Student FTEs by Department/Program. MnSCU is intending to include its Instructional Cost Study as one basis for future allocations to campuses.
11	Faculty FTE as a Measure of Institutional Resources The term FTE is also used to describe the number of faculty in a particular program, department, or college in terms of “full time equivalents.” Faculty FTE is based on the number of full-time and part-time probationary, fixed-term, and adjunct faculty appointments. Faculty FTE does not distinguish between instructional and non-instructional load.
12	Calculation of Partial FTEs for Faculty Probationary and fixed-term appointments can be part-time FTEs. For example: .50 AEP faculty = .50 faculty FTE .75 fixed-term = .75 faculty FTE
13	Calculation of Partial FTEs for Faculty (continued) Adjunct appointments are converted to full-time equivalents using a base of 24 credits to represent “full-time”. For example: 3 credits adjunct faculty appointment equals .125 faculty FTE (3/24 = .125)
14	Details of University’s Faculty FTE For 2002-2003, BSU’s faculty complement was calculated as 185.05.
15	Departmental Calculation of Faculty FTE Assume the Department of Pharmacy has the following faculty complement: 2 probationary faculty Two three-credit courses taught by adjuncts during the year Faculty FTE Computation = 2.25
16	Comparing Student FTE and Faculty FTE A ratio of Student FTE to Faculty FTE can be computed as Student FTE / Faculty FTE
17	Calculation of Student FTE to Faculty FTE example The Student FTE to Faculty FTE for the Pharmacy department is: 49.8 student FTE / 2.25 faculty FTE Or 22.13
18	Details on BSU’s Student FTE to Faculty FTE Computation The Student FTE to Faculty FTE in the BSU Data Book reflects only on-campus activities. On-campus student FTE = 3515 On-campus faculty FTE = 185 On-campus Student FTE/Faculty FTE = 19.
19	BSU’s Student FTE to Faculty FTE (Departments range from 7.55 to 40.54. University avg = 19.00)
20	Factors affecting the Student FTE to Faculty FTE ratio The factors influencing this ratio include: Number of students taught by each faculty member Influenced by class limit Influenced by curriculum design Influenced by course structure Other influences Amount of faculty load spent on noninstructional activities Influenced by size of department Influenced by other assignments Other influences
21	What Can Student FTE/Faculty FTE Tell Us? Within a department, a longitudinal examination of Student FTE/Faculty FTE can indicate changes in enrollments, staffing, curriculum, course delivery, reassignments, other. Across departments, an examination of Student FTE/Faculty FTE can indicate differences between departments on these same issues.
22	What Student FTE to Faculty FTE ratio does not tell us does not reflect faculty salaries, which may vary by faculty seniority and faculty discipline does not indicate cost for equipment or other resources does not reflect other (nonteaching) activities in which faculty are engaged
23	Where do we go from here? A future discussion of BSU’s academic “economic engine” could include: Discussion of Direct Instructional Costs, contribution margins, and cross-subsidies Discussion of Majors and Graduates by Department Discussion of Curriculum Proposals and their impact on these measures Discussion on how we can learn more about our activities by using the comparison data available in MnSCU’s instructional cost study
24	Where do we go from here? (cont.) We may wish to also include the noninstructional components of the university in this discussion. We may wish to examine how we re-engineer our administrative and service components to improve quality and reduce costs. We should ask how all parts of the university impact retention and, thus, the economic engine.
25	What other discussions do we wish to initiate?
26	Resources BSU Data Book 2002-2003 Jim Collins, 2002, Good to Great William Massey, 2003, Honoring the Trust MnSCU Instructional Cost Study