Page 64 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 64 of 137 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
56
teaches is more important than what is taught, in addition to their own observation of
an economies of scale effect with added FTES.
Finally, Rose and Sengupta present disaggregated cost data based on MSAs to
account for wage difference. This method of disaggregation is critical for creating a
series of comparable institutions in regard to instructional costs, as well as devising a
cost benchmark for the purposes of comparative analysis. They focus on the dominant
factor in instruction: wages, and the wide variation of wages due to local labor
markets. They also elucidate the economies of scale effect by additional students to
both existing faculty and existing administration.
These various examples provide some valid forms of methodology and can be
combined to create a framework of expenditure analysis and cost benchmarking of
instructional costs at the CCC. In particular, correlation analysis was used by Rose and
Sengupta, as well as Watkins. The Delaware Study relied on analysis of variance
(ANOVA), while the Kansas Study utilized multivariate regression analysis. Data
presented via the Accounting and Budgeting Manual can be used within this research
framework for three fiscal years, which was the same span of time used in the
Delaware Study. The purpose of using three years of data is to account for any single
year anomalies. The precise methodology and framework based the literature review is
discussed in the methodology chapter. This discussion includes criteria used for the
sample population, the instrumentation, (such as the Fiscal Data Abstracts which serve
as one source of data), and data analysis based on the framework of the research cited,
Object Description
| Title | Finance in the California community college: Comparative analysis and benchmarking of instructional expenditures |
| Author | Karamian, Martin |
| Author email | martinsfsu@netzero.com; karamim@piercecollege.edu |
| Degree | Doctor of Education |
| Document type | Dissertation |
| Degree program | Education (Leadership) |
| School | Rossier School of Education |
| Date defended/completed | 2011-03-17 |
| Date submitted | 2011 |
| Restricted until | Unrestricted |
| Date published | 2011-04-26 |
| Advisor (committee chair) | Picus, Lawrence O. |
| Advisor (committee member) |
Melguizo, Tatiana Vega, William |
| Abstract | The goals of this empirical study of community colleges are to 1) create a benchmark for per student instructional expenditures; and 2) account for variations in instructional expenditures among a peer group of community colleges in Southern California. The peer group sample included 22 single campus community college districts in the Los Angeles area. Using data for three fiscal years a refined mean benchmark value for instructional expenditures of $2,676.71 per full-time equivalent student (FTES) was estimated with a standard deviation of $326.54. Using Pearson product-moment correlation coefficient, 11 variables were correlated with instructional costs per FTES. The largest and only statistically significant determinant included the number of part-time instructors (-0.424). While other variables were correlated, none were statistically significant at the 95% confidence interval. The results from the sample suggest that larger colleges have lower instructional costs per FTES despite higher faculty pay. Expanding credit student enrollment within the funding growth limits set by the State, along with additional part-time instruction within the limits set by the State will likely result in lower instructional costs per FTES and an economy of scale effect. The effect of increased institutional size on quality of education was not assessed. |
| Keyword | finance; California; community college; comparative analysis; benchmarking; instructional expenditures; economics; higher education; spending; instruction; education; economy of scale |
| Geographic subject (state) | California |
| Geographic subject (country) | USA |
| Coverage date | 1990/2010 |
| Language | English |
| Part of collection | University of Southern California dissertations and theses |
| Publisher (of the original version) | University of Southern California |
| Place of publication (of the original version) | Los Angeles, California |
| Publisher (of the digital version) | University of Southern California. Libraries |
| Provenance | Electronically uploaded by the author |
| Type | texts |
| Legacy record ID | usctheses-m3775 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Rights | Karamian, Martin |
| Repository name | Libraries, University of Southern California |
| Repository address | Los Angeles, California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Filename | etd-Karamian-4454 |
| Archival file | uscthesesreloadpub_Volume23/etd-Karamian-4454.pdf |
Description
| Title | Page 64 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 56 teaches is more important than what is taught, in addition to their own observation of an economies of scale effect with added FTES. Finally, Rose and Sengupta present disaggregated cost data based on MSAs to account for wage difference. This method of disaggregation is critical for creating a series of comparable institutions in regard to instructional costs, as well as devising a cost benchmark for the purposes of comparative analysis. They focus on the dominant factor in instruction: wages, and the wide variation of wages due to local labor markets. They also elucidate the economies of scale effect by additional students to both existing faculty and existing administration. These various examples provide some valid forms of methodology and can be combined to create a framework of expenditure analysis and cost benchmarking of instructional costs at the CCC. In particular, correlation analysis was used by Rose and Sengupta, as well as Watkins. The Delaware Study relied on analysis of variance (ANOVA), while the Kansas Study utilized multivariate regression analysis. Data presented via the Accounting and Budgeting Manual can be used within this research framework for three fiscal years, which was the same span of time used in the Delaware Study. The purpose of using three years of data is to account for any single year anomalies. The precise methodology and framework based the literature review is discussed in the methodology chapter. This discussion includes criteria used for the sample population, the instrumentation, (such as the Fiscal Data Abstracts which serve as one source of data), and data analysis based on the framework of the research cited, |
