1 / 23

UT TeleCampus Cost Study (2002-2003)

UT TeleCampus Cost Study (2002-2003). Darcy W. Hardy Rob Robinson Educause 2004. UT System. 15 member institutions Nine academic Six health/medical Over 150,000 students Over 14,000 faculty 37% of all resident students who attend public universities attend a UT school.

nida
Download Presentation

UT TeleCampus Cost Study (2002-2003)

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. UT TeleCampus Cost Study (2002-2003) Darcy W. Hardy Rob Robinson Educause 2004

  2. UT System • 15 member institutions • Nine academic • Six health/medical • Over 150,000 students • Over 14,000 faculty • 37% of all resident students who attend public universities attend a UT school

  3. UT TeleCampus Mission The UT TeleCampus is a service-driven, central support system for online education initiatives among the fifteen universities and health science centers that comprise the U. T. System as they strive to meet the educational needs of Texas, the nation and the world.

  4. TeleCampus Stats • Over 20,000 enrollments to date • 17 fully online programs (degree & certificate) • Over 200 courses in TeleCampus catalog • 116 courses offered in Fall 2004 • Over 220 faculty and instructors served across System • Funded, supported, trained • Course completion rates • 85% (Undergraduate) • 97% (Graduate)

  5. TeleCampus Enrollment Growth

  6. The TeleCampus Model • Course Development • Development grants • Extensive faculty training (required) • Collaboration • Most degree programs are inter-institutional (MBA) • Central Support • Services • TeleCampus Information System (TIS)

  7. The TeleCampus Model • Faculty • Primarily full-time tenure or tenure-track • Adjuncts as necessary to scale • Financial Arrangement • Tuition, fees, and State formula retained by host campus • Annual financial assessment back to the TeleCampus

  8. Financial Impact of UTTC Fall 1999 through Summer 2004 • Direct financial support to campuses for course development (1999-present) - $5.1 M • Revenue generated for campuses by TeleCampus courses (1999-present) - $21.8 M • Tuition, fees, formula funding from TeleCampus enrollments • Approximately 50% are “new” dollars • $6.8 Million in 03-04

  9. The Cost Study • Directed by Board of Regents in 2002 to examine costs of delivery through the TeleCampus model • Presented first round of finding to Regents in March 2003 • Second round of study in 2004, looking at 2003 data.

  10. Study Methodology • Meetings (Developing Co-Conspirators) • Office of Finance • Controller’s Office • Academic Affairs • Eight courses identified for comparison • Single course per campus • Mix of graduate and undergraduate • Taught on-campus and online • Common unit of comparison is one SCH

  11. Problems With Survey • Instrument delivered to Chief Business Officers on each academic campus • Large variance in quality of responses • Instrument not clearly defined • Terms open to interpretation • Varying degrees of “full disclosure” • On to Plan B…..

  12. Study Methodology • Information for on-campus costs from the 2002 Annual Financial Report • SCH numbers from the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Statistical Report for 2002 • Information for TeleCampus costs from the UT TeleCampus budget

  13. Study Methodology • Budget categories in study (Educational & General) • Academic Support • Student Services • Institutional Support • Depreciation & Amortization • Study uses an allocated portion of costs • TotalOpExpE&G/(TotOpExpUniv-InvestPlant) • This factor is applied the total D&A amount to derive a cost applicable to instructional delivery.

  14. Instructional Costs • Instructional costs include faculty salary plus teaching assistant stipends (if any) • Study assumes that instructional costs are equal for on-campus and online delivery for a specific course because both types of courses are taught in-load by faculty

  15. Avg. On-Campus Costs/SCH

  16. TeleCampus Costs/SCH

  17. Delivery Costs Comparison TeleCampus costs vs. campus “bricks & mortar” costs 2002 Total Costs/SCH

  18. Delivery Costs Comparison TeleCampus costs vs. campus “bricks & mortar” costs 2003 Total Costs/SCH

  19. Summary of Study • Average component cost of delivery on-campus (excluding UTB) • $129/SCH for 2002 • $123/SCH for 2003 • TeleCampus cost of delivery • $91/SCH for 2002 • $88/SCH for 2003

  20. Summary of Study • Delivery costs through the TeleCampus are generally lower than the on-campus equivalent (second lowest for both years) • As TeleCampus enrollments continue to grow, costs/SCH will decline over time at a faster rate than on-campus

  21. Conclusions • Online courses can be delivered at a comparable (or lower) unit cost than face to face…AND… • Online courses can be offered with quality and outcomes that are comparable (or better than) face to face [Russell, et. al)

  22. Conclusions/Cautions • Extracting reasonable dollar amounts from budget line items can be tricky. • Use only those applicable to delivery of instruction • Depreciation & Amortization costs should be examined closely. Do not skip these very real costs. • Not everyone will be happy with your results

  23. Contact Us! • Comments, suggestion, etc. are very welcome • Rob Robinson • rrobinson@utsystem.edu • Darcy Hardy • dhardy@utsystem.edu www.uttc.org

More Related