Page 107 |
Save page Remove page | Previous | 107 of 137 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large (1000x1000 max)
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
99
effect, which has been found in other studies. Larger campuses, in terms of both
students and faculty, experience economies of scale as they spread costs over a larger
student population. This is particularly evident if the growth of faculty is focused on
PT faculty instead of FT faculty. FTES non-credit is not correlated with dollars per
FTES; this is due to the fact that within the 22 colleges, FTES credit account for 91%
of enrollment, while FTES non-credit account for only 9% of enrollment. The colleges
in this study enroll far more credit students than non-credit students.
The correlation between all enrollment figures (FTES total, FETS credit, and
FTES non-credit) is not surprising. As the enrollment of a college increases, all three
measures are expected to increase. Simultaneously, correlation between Group 1
(Enrollment) and Group (Faculty) is also not surprising. A larger student population
will require a larger number of faculty, both PT and FT; a larger college has both a
large number of students as well as a large number of faculty.
Correlation exists between Group 3 (Pay) and both Group 1 (Enrollment) and
Group 2 (Faculty). The larger the size of the college, in terms of both students and
faculty, the higher the teacher pay, particularly for PT instructors. It would be simple
to conclude that higher teacher pay will translate to higher instructional costs in terms
of dollar per FTES, however, larger colleges experience lower instructional costs.
Clearly another factor must be not only offsetting the higher costs of higher pay at
larger colleges, and possibly decreasing overall instructional costs by a small amount.
A suspect variable that may be causing this affect is the student to faculty ratio.
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 107 |
| Contributing entity | University of Southern California |
| Repository email | cisadmin@lib.usc.edu |
| Full text | 99 effect, which has been found in other studies. Larger campuses, in terms of both students and faculty, experience economies of scale as they spread costs over a larger student population. This is particularly evident if the growth of faculty is focused on PT faculty instead of FT faculty. FTES non-credit is not correlated with dollars per FTES; this is due to the fact that within the 22 colleges, FTES credit account for 91% of enrollment, while FTES non-credit account for only 9% of enrollment. The colleges in this study enroll far more credit students than non-credit students. The correlation between all enrollment figures (FTES total, FETS credit, and FTES non-credit) is not surprising. As the enrollment of a college increases, all three measures are expected to increase. Simultaneously, correlation between Group 1 (Enrollment) and Group (Faculty) is also not surprising. A larger student population will require a larger number of faculty, both PT and FT; a larger college has both a large number of students as well as a large number of faculty. Correlation exists between Group 3 (Pay) and both Group 1 (Enrollment) and Group 2 (Faculty). The larger the size of the college, in terms of both students and faculty, the higher the teacher pay, particularly for PT instructors. It would be simple to conclude that higher teacher pay will translate to higher instructional costs in terms of dollar per FTES, however, larger colleges experience lower instructional costs. Clearly another factor must be not only offsetting the higher costs of higher pay at larger colleges, and possibly decreasing overall instructional costs by a small amount. A suspect variable that may be causing this affect is the student to faculty ratio. |
