Towards Estimating & Monitoring Academic Staff Workloads at UKZN G R Barnes, MSc Agric, MGSSA Management Information, UKZN September 2005.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Rgu: Information management Management of target student numbers Working group.

Advertisements

Site-Based Decision Making Campus Planning. Restructuring A process through which a district or school alters the pattern of its structures (vision, rules,

Important Points The SWF stands for Standard Workload Form. Workload is covered by Article 11 in the collective agreement. Your SWF is your personal contract.

M & E for K to 12 BEP in Schools

Outcomes and impact of the Project at the Cape Peninsula University of Technology, and remaining challenges.

School of Earth and Environment’s Academic Workload Model Ray Ryken-Rapp School Manager School of Earth and Environment.

Important Points The SWF stands for Standard Workload Form. Workload is covered by Article 11 in the collective agreement. Your SWF is your personal contract.

Campus Improvement Plans

Ohio Improvement Process (OIP) August Core Principles of OIP  Use a collaborative, collegial process which initiates and institutes Leadership.

Workshops for implementing the Strategic Plan for Biodiversity through the National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans Module 2 The Biodiversity.

Training for Participants Date, Location, Venue 1 Welcome! Welcome to PEM 2 Module!

Date or reference Workload allocation and balancing: the Salford model UCML workshop, 13 March 2009 Janet Lloyd School of Languages University of Salford.

Quality Enhancement Cell Dr. Dawar Hameed Mughal Director.

Grahame Cooper The Workload Balancing Model: Feedback and Review Background to the Model.

SWF Training Session Local 138 Welcome!. Important Points  The SWF stands for Standard Workload Form.  Workload is covered by Article 11 in the collective.

Grahame Cooper 1 The Development of the Salford Workload Balancing Model / Process Grahame S Cooper University of Salford.

Empowering Staff Through Institute Planning (ESTIP) Executive Workshop Institute Name: XXXXXX Presenter: XXXXXX Date: XXXXXX.

ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PLAN

IS Consulting Process (IS 6005) Masters in Business Information Systems 2009 / 2010 Fergal Carton Business Information Systems.

Setting Course Enrollment Maximums: Process, Roles, and Principles Adopted Spring 2012 The Academic Senate of the California Community Colleges.

Superintendent Goals Update. District Level Leadership Research McRel Internationally recognized private, non-profit organization in Denver,

Transportation leadership you can trust. presented to NCHRP Project Panel presented by Cambridge Systematics, Inc. with PB Consult Inc. Texas Transportation.

Do it pro bono. Strategic Scorecard Service Grant The Strategy Management Practice is presented by Wells Fargo. The design of the Strategic Scorecard Service.

Quality Improvement Project March Now Future.

Financial Viability Model Petro Kok 21 November 2013.

University of Warsaw The Office for Quality of Education 11th of December th of December 2008.

Successfully Aligning Resources With Planning League of Innovation Conference March 10, 2013 Greg Nelson Vice President of Administrative Services Tammeil.

Recognition for teaching Dr Joyce Harper Chair SLMS Education Domain Institute for Womens Health University College London.

1 1. Workload Management – Dept Maths & Stats A. Weekly Contact Hour Model (before 2011)  Standard load: 15 hrs  Allowance for Res/Adm and Other activities.

Enrollment Management Institute Peralta Community Colleges Goals, Objectives and Expected Outcomes.

Bangkok September, Economic Integration 2 Bangkok September, 2012.

Careers Education in Estonian Schools Tiina Trampärk Careers education specialist.

Campus Forum: Resource Allocation at UKZN in 2008 Glen Barnes Director, Management Information (for the Budget Working Group)

Comprehensive Educator Effectiveness: New Guidance and Models Presentation for the Special Education Advisory Committee Virginia Department of Education.

We’re All in This Together: A School/Mental Health Collaboration Norm Walker, M.Ed. Summer Institutes June 2010.

Effective Grade Level Teams Minnesota RtI Center Conference March 26, 2009 Kerry Bollman St Croix River Education District.

University of Idaho Successful External Program Review Archie George, Director Institutional Research and Assessment Jane Baillargeon, Assistant Director.

UKZN Resource Allocation Model Presentation to Senate 4 th April 2007 Glen Barnes Director, Management Information, UKZN.

Subcommittee on Design New Strategies for Cost Estimating Research on Cost Estimating and Management NCHRP Project 8-49 Annual Meeting Orlando, Florida.

The Work of the Coach Identify target students and populations Maintain data on each interaction with students and families | Contact Summary Provide.

1 Joint EAIE/NAFSA Symposium Amsterdam, March 2007 John E Reilly, Director UK Socrates-Erasmus Council.

INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT AND PLANNING FOR SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 1 Click to edit Master title style 1 Evaluation and Review of Experience from UNEP Projects.

Ministry of Education and Higher Education (MEHE) - Lebanon EGM on ICT Indicators Adoption and Data Collection. Cairo, Egypt 13 – 15 February 2007 Cairo,

The TUNING Russia project outcomes Maria Seninets DSTU Tuning Centre.

School Development Implementation and Monitoring “Building a Learning Community”

Enhancing capacity in the Child & Youth sector through situated supported distance learning Building Capacity through a Participatory Institutional Assessment.

Climate Change Impacts and Adaptation: The Prairie Adaptation Research Cooperative Mark Johnston Forest Ecosystems Branch, Environment and Resource Management.

The New Funding Formula for Higher Education Presentation to the Portfolio Committee on Education, Cape Town, Tuesday 24 August 2004.

University of Warsaw. The quality of education assurance and enhancement system at the University of Warsaw.

Interview Design Four Focal States Connecticut, Indiana, North Carolina, Massachusetts Additional States Arizona, Utah, Washington State Interview Protocol.

Resources for Program Monitoring and Review Institutional Research and Effectiveness.

Overview of the handbook Chapter 5: Levee inspection, assessment and risk attribution.

King Saud University, College of Science Workshop: Programme accreditation and quality assurance Riyadh, June 13-14, 2009 III.1 The accreditation report:

What is a Service Level Agreement? Service level agreements are part of a quality approach to help teams identify and agree what ‘good quality’ looks like.

Road Investment Decision Framework

Student Learning Time (SLT).  Effective learning time or student effort of learning in order to achieve the specified learning outcomes.  Inclusive.

Towards Estimating Academic Workloads for UKZN Glen Barnes (MSc Agric, MGSSA) Director, Management Information, UKZN May 2006.

1 Establishing a New Gallaudet Program Review Process Pat Hulsebosch Office of Academic Quality CUE – 9/3/08: CGE – 9/16/08.

Title of the Change Project

Where the CBA Meets Curriculum

PRESENTATION OF FINDINGS GRANTEES NEED ASSESSMENT

Student Learning Time (SLT)

Outcome Monitoring and Evaluation Using LQAS

Helene Skikos DG Education and Culture

Tuning South East Asia - TASE

Student Learning Time (SLT)

Committee # 4: Educational Program For The MD

Finalization of the Action Plans and Development of Syllabus

Technical and Advisory Meeting

Fort Valley State University

Presentation transcript:

Towards Estimating & Monitoring Academic Staff Workloads at UKZN G R Barnes, MSc Agric, MGSSA Management Information, UKZN September 2005

Objective Summary To quantify academic staff workloads To quantify academic staff workloads –Teaching –Research –Community outreach & administration To incorporate these into a decision support framework To incorporate these into a decision support framework –School Planning Decision Support System (SPDSS).

Procedure We consider We consider –What we teach (subjects and delivery) –How we teach it (preparation, supervision and assessment) –Who is currently doing the teaching –What research is being done

Aim to provide An estimate of the number of academic staff needed to support the teaching and research objectives An estimate of the number of academic staff needed to support the teaching and research objectives Report ratios and indicators to measure the current status relative to our targets Report ratios and indicators to measure the current status relative to our targets

Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 4 Teaching and Research Teaching rate (%)36 45 Research rate (%) Admin/Outreach rate (%) TOTAL (%) All Academic Staff Adjusted Staff (FTEs) Students per Academic (FTEs) Research output (PUs) Productivity per Academic (PUs) Scenario Outputs Constant Increase Decrease

Data Integration Scenario outputs become inputs into: Scenario outputs become inputs into: –Affordability model –Academic viability model –School Business Plan

Thank you …

Conclusions An attempt to address the very sensitive issue of staff workloads An attempt to address the very sensitive issue of staff workloads Considered the limitations of previous investigations and propose enhancements Considered the limitations of previous investigations and propose enhancements Through a collaborative approach assist the School planning process Through a collaborative approach assist the School planning process Facilitate a system of monitoring into the future Facilitate a system of monitoring into the future

Teaching and Research Teaching rate (%)36 Research rate (%)23.5 Admin/Outreach rate (%)15 TOTAL (%)74.5 All Academic Staff Adjusted Staff (FTEs)11.9 Students per Academic (FTEs)23.7 NSH per Academic (hrs)1369 Research output (PUs)565 Productivity per Academic (PUs)47 Margin over Compensation (1000s)2995 Scenario Two – revised Admin/Outreach Constant Increase Decrease

Scenario Four – institutional targets Teaching and Research Teaching rate (%)45 Research rate (%)40 Admin/Outreach rate (%)15 TOTAL (%)100 All Academic Staff Adjusted Staff (FTEs)12.8 Students per Academic (FTEs)22 NSH per Academic (hrs)1275 Research output (PUs)768 Productivity per Academic (PUs)60 Margin over Compensation (1000s)2771 Constant Increase Decrease

Objectives To estimate academic staff workloads into defined areas of academic endeavour To estimate academic staff workloads into defined areas of academic endeavour To facilitate a more objective method of estimating the staff teaching load To facilitate a more objective method of estimating the staff teaching load –module notional study hours (NSH) To identify & quantify additional parameters To identify & quantify additional parameters To incorporate these into a decision support framework To incorporate these into a decision support framework –School Planning Decision Support System (SPDSS).

Procedure Initial pilot study Initial pilot study Special Senate Task Team Special Senate Task Team –Identify the important variables –Determine a set of default values Roll out to Schools Roll out to Schools –Establish ‘buy-in’ of the Schools –Foster ownership of the data Integration with other tools Integration with other tools

Inputs & Assumptions High-level Assumptions High-level Assumptions Module Enrolment Data Module Enrolment Data Detailed Module Assumptions Detailed Module Assumptions Staff Assumptions Staff Assumptions Research Data Research Data Graduate Data Graduate Data

Default Values & Norms Quantified by the Senate Task Team Quantified by the Senate Task Team Initial deployment of the system Initial deployment of the system Form the basis of comparison Form the basis of comparison –Determine differences between Schools –Evaluate inputs from the Schools

Outputs & Reports Time & Staff estimates Time & Staff estimates School Summary Analysis School Summary Analysis –Summary Tables –Four Scenarios –Scenario summary

Outputs & Reports Time & Staff estimates Time & Staff estimates School Summary Analysis School Summary Analysis –Summary Tables –Four Scenarios –Scenario summary

Academic Endeavours Teaching Teaching Research Research Community Development & Outreach Community Development & Outreach Administration Administration

Inputs & Assumptions High-level Assumptions High-level Assumptions Module Enrolment Data Module Enrolment Data Detailed Module Assumptions Detailed Module Assumptions Staff Assumptions Staff Assumptions Research Data Research Data Graduate Data Graduate Data

Institutional Targets Working year : 219 days Working year : 219 days Working day : 8 hours Working day : 8 hours Proportional allocation Proportional allocation –Teaching : 45% –Research : 40% –Admin/Outreach : 15% Research productivity : 60 PUs/yr Research productivity : 60 PUs/yr Minimum SAPSE proportion : 50% Minimum SAPSE proportion : 50%

Inputs & Assumptions High-level Assumptions High-level Assumptions Module Enrolment Data Module Enrolment Data Detailed Module Assumptions Detailed Module Assumptions Staff Assumptions Staff Assumptions Research Data Research Data Graduate Data Graduate Data

Inputs & Assumptions High-level Assumptions High-level Assumptions Module Enrolment Data Module Enrolment Data Detailed Module Assumptions Detailed Module Assumptions Staff Assumptions Staff Assumptions Research Data Research Data Graduate Data Graduate Data

Inputs & Assumptions High-level Assumptions High-level Assumptions Module Enrolment Data Module Enrolment Data Detailed Module Assumptions Detailed Module Assumptions Staff Assumptions Staff Assumptions Research Data Research Data Graduate Data Graduate Data

Outputs & Reports Time & Staff estimates Time & Staff estimates School Summary Analysis School Summary Analysis –Summary Tables –Four Scenarios –Scenario summary

Time & Staff estimates Module ContactPreparationAssessmentConsultingGroupTeachTotalAcad LevelCountEnrolhrs (%)hrsStaff (10%)527 (8%)5075 (81%)90 (1%) (12%)763 (16%)2645 (54%)881 (18%) (14%)640 (13%)3367 (71%)104 (2%) (17%)182 (19%)608 (63%)21 (2%) (100%) (100%) (11%)2111 (11%)11694 (63%)2619 (14%)0 (0%) Acad Staff estimate based on 45:40:15

Outputs & Reports Time & Staff estimates Time & Staff estimates School Summary Analysis School Summary Analysis –Summary Tables –Four Scenarios –Scenario summary

Teaching Allocation (hrs) Contact (2004: 2500) 1658 (16%) Preparation 2065 (20%) Assessment (2004: 9862) 5833 (58%) Consulting (2004: 1218) 535 (5%) Group teaching 0 (0%) TOTAL (2004: 13580) Summary Tables...

Staff number estimates (FTEs) Planned Academic 16 Planned Support 4 Academic to Support Staff Ratio 4 Modules per Academic 3 Credits per Academic 102 Teaching hrs per week 12 Summary Tables …

Teaching and Research Teaching rate (%)36 Research rate (%)49 Admin/Outreach rate (%)15 TOTAL (%)100 All Academic Staff Adjusted Staff (FTEs)16 Students per Academic (FTEs)17.6 NSH per Academic (hrs)1020 Research output (PUs)1176 Productivity per Academic (PUs)73 Margin over Compensation (1000s)2101 Scenario Three – revised Admin/Outreach & Research Constant Increase Decrease

Academic Staff (FTEs) Scenario 116 Scenario Scenario Scenario Productivity (PUs) Scenario 1565 Scenario 2565 Scenario Scenario 4768 Margin over Compensation (1000s) Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Scenario Summary