Where Are Your

lavishgradeSoftware and s/w Development

Nov 25, 2013 (3 years and 6 months ago)

63 views

Where Are Your
Heavyweights?

Identifying Unrealized Formula
Funding Opportunities Through

Semester Credit Hour Analysis

Presentation to TAIR

By Kristi D. Fisher

The University of Texas at Austin

March 4, 2009

1

Overview


What and why?


David Prior’s work at TAMU


where to look


Employing UT’s B.I. tools


What the cube shows us


Next steps

2

What and Why

We are:


Analyzing student level, course level and discipline
combinations by our institution relative to formula matrix
weighting factors

Because:


More funding mechanisms are being shifted to formulas


Understanding cost study and funding formulas key to
maximizing state funding


In tough financial times we need to squeeze out every last
drop… not just analyze the big
-
ticket items


3

Project Background


Project IQ

Course Enrollments (CE) Cube Developed
in 2005 Provided SCH by Discipline, etc.


David Prior’s (Texas A&M) Formula Funding Analysis


Created Tables to Hold “Rules” and “Weights”


Modified CE Cube to include Funding Area, Funding
Level, Weighted SCH, and Formula Funding Amount


Prototyped for Executive Leadership in May 2008


Presented completed cube in December 2008

4

David Prior’s Analysis:

Formula Funding Factors


Factor One:

Combinations of course/student levels
producing SCH


Factor Two:

Weight assigned to the resulting SCH
level for the funding area


Factor Three:

Tenure/Tenure
-
track teaching
supplement


percent of UG SCH
(***going away)


5

THECB Funding Level Rules

6

Course Level

Student Level

Funding Level

Lower Division

All Levels

Lower Division

Upper Division

Lower Classmen

Lower Division

Upper Division

Upper Classmen & Above

Upper Division

Masters

Lower Classmen

Lower Division

Masters

Upper Classmen*

Upper Division*

Masters

Post
-
Bac
. & All Graduate

Masters

Doctoral

Lower Classmen

Lower Division

Doctoral

Upper Classmen

Upper Division

Doctoral

Post
-
Bacc., Master, & Prof.

Masters

Doctoral

Doctoral

Doctoral

* Exception: Seniors with more than 108 hours enrolled in masters
-
level course
generate masters level funding.

THECB Weights Matrix (08
-
09)

7

Prior’s Key Data to Investigate


Number and $ of upper division students taking lower
division courses


Number and $ of graduate students taking undergraduate
courses


Number and $ of PhD students taking masters courses


Funding area weight relative to SCH production trends


Funding area WSCH and $ “difference” trends from year to
year


Number WSCH and $ unrealized due to credit hour caps


Number WSCH and $ unrealized due to repeatability limits


Percent undergraduate SCH production taught by
Tenured/Tenure
-
Track faculty


8

UT Rules Table

9

UT Weights Table


10

How Project IQ Works



11

The products of IQ are “cubes” and reports.

Business Intelligence Tools


Transactional Systems:
ADABAS/Natural


ETL tools:

IBM Data Stage; Treehouse tRelational /
DPS


RDBMS
:

Oracle 9i/10g, SQL
-
Server


O/S
:

Sun Solaris RAC, IBM Z/OS, Windows 2003


BI tools:

Cognos Powerplay 7.4, Impromptu 7.4,
Cognos 8.2/8.3 (new)


Named User Accounts:

1,250

12

IQ Data Integrity





13

Legacy
Systems
(revised)

Course

Cube

ORACLE
(warehouse)

Student
Cube

COGNOS

Faculty
Cube

Enrollment
Report

Legacy
Systems
(original)

Four


way data validation:

1.
Mainframe to Mainframe

2.
Mainframe to Oracle

3.
Oracle to Cubes

4.
Cubes to Mainframe

Formula Funding Cube

14

Measures


SCH


Weighted SCH


Enrollment (Seats Taken)


Number Unique Sections


Average End Class Grade


Formula Funding Amount

15

Dimensions


Offering College / Department


Year / Semester


Funding Level


Funding Area


Funding Status


Course Level


Student Level


Student Major College / Department


Tenure Status


Primary Instructor Rank


Semester Group


16

Can Answer Questions Like…


What is the recent trend in weighted SCH production
by (major/offering) College?


What is the trend in formula funding amounts
generated by College?


How has the overall SCH production varied by
funding area and level since 2005?

17

And…


How many SCH and $ are generated, by student level
and course level?


What are the funding area WSCH and $ change
trends from year to year


How many WSCH and $ were unrealized due to
repeatability limits?


What percent of undergraduate SCH production was
taught by Tenured/Tenure
-
Track faculty?


18

Disclaimers


Limitations:


Fiscal Year vs. Base Period Year


108 hour rule for seniors in masters courses


Doctoral students over the 99 hour limit


Some funding area mismatches w/ THECB area


Data will not match SCH provided by THECB


Completed cube is 95% validated; not yet moved to
production; not yet used campus
-
wide

19



DEMO

20

What is the recent trend in weighted SCH
by college?

21

What is the trend in funding amount?


22

How has SCH by funding area and level
changed?

23

How many SCH and $ are generated by
student and course level?

24

What are the funding area WSCH and $
change trends from year to year?

25

How many WSCH and $ unrealized due to
repeatability limits?

26

What percent of undergraduate SCH
production was taught by TT faculty?

27

Initial Results 07
-
08 Pilot Data


$417k+ in lost funds due to excess hours


$468k+ in lost funds due to repeatability rules


Graduate students in undergraduate courses

28

Questions?

Kristi D. Fisher

University of Texas at Austin

Office of Information Management and Analysis

kfisher@austin.utexas.edu

(512)471
-
3833

29