Description:
The charts below allow the modeling of modes for curriculum delivery. The top three tables contain sliders which can be moved to reflect different ideas for curriculum delivery.

The tool allows planners to adjust the sliders for the number of each type of instructors, the average number of sections taught by each instructor type, and the average number of seats in each section by each instructor type.

Using the ratio between actual course seats and total enrollment for FY 2009, the model projects a total enrollment for any combination on the sliders. The model then calculates the total salary cost excluding fringe benefits for instruction at each combination.

Finally, assuming that FY 2009 ratios between total instructional salaries (excluding fringe benefits) and both revenues excluding state funds and expenditures are constant, the model projects the revenues excluding state funds and expenditures associated with each combination of sliders.

We make the following assumptions:
1) All dollar values are based on FY 2009.
2) Constant ratios between salaries (excluding fringe benefits), revenues (excluding state funds) and expenditures. This implies a stable mix of student types (i.e., in-state, out-of-state, graduate, undergraduate, foreign, domestic).
3) A stable administrative and research structure with constant relationships between expenditures and revenues excluding state funds.
4) A constant ratio between full and part time students.
This model is only an estimation, but it should help planners envision the university curriculum delivery system at each enrollment level.

All other relationships are calculated. To adjust values move the sliders or click on the Restore Default Values button to reset actual Spring 2009 values. Place the mouse pointer over a bar in any chart to see values.

Note: Financial Metrics chart reflects preliminary numbers as of 7/29/2009. Revenue does not include government appropriations.

The model is based on Spring 2009 Faculty Load Report data and pre-audit financial data for FY 2009.

Relationships among variables and metrics are simplified to offer a rough estimate or a “big picture”.

The formulas used in the models are explained below. Actual numbers are taken for Spring 2009.

Note: zero credit, zero load hours, zero enrollment course sections were eliminated from Spring 2009 Faculty Load Report data.
Physical Education sections were not included.