Directorate for Joint Force Development (J-7), The Joint Staff

Unclassified

1

Directorate for Joint Force Development (J-7), The Joint Staff

Dr. Jerry West, JS J7 JEB Education Advisor

Student to Faculty Ratio Study

8 February 2012(Draft Briefing)

Unclassified

2

• Purpose– Respond to DJS request for rationale for OPMEP S/F

Ratio Standard– Present recommendations for further study

• BLUF: – No changes recommended in the OPMEP S/F Ratio

Introduction

Unclassified

3

Background

Historic Rationale:

Congressman Ike Skelton Panel Recommendation: Skelton Report, 1989 • “…Small group seminar method used at the service and joint colleges

warrants a relatively low student/faculty ratio overall ranging between 3 and 4 to 1 with the lower ratios at the senior schools…

• “… the SECDEF, with the advice of the Chairman, JCS, should assure comparability of the joint and service school student/faculty ratios.

Unclassified

4

External View – US News and World Report Rankings

• OPMEP student-to-faculty ratio standard cannot be modeled after top tier US Graduate Schools.

Formula Weighting Value

Variables Weights

Faculty resources for 2010-2011 academic year

20%

Faculty compensation

35%

Percent faculty with top terminal degree in their field

15%

Percent faculty that is full time 5%

Student/faculty ratio 5%

Class size, 1-19 students

30%

Class size, 50+ students

10%

US News And World Report Formula for Ranking US Colleges and Universities

Unclassified

5

Findings

• A steady state teaching environment built on a dedicated and highly qualified faculty remains the bedrock of high quality in-residence, graduate level education.

• Pedagogy Model

• (Socratic, Seminar-based, Small Class Sizes)Pedagogy Model

(Socratic, Seminar-based, Small Class Sizes)

Faculty Model(Teaching

Expertise,Relevant Experience, Professional

and Academic Credentials)

Student/FacultyRatio

Student Model (Competitive, Well-educated,Functional

Expertise)

Unclassified

6

Findings: Internal Assessment of Steady State Faculty Requirements

Core curriculum faculty requirements:· Total# of students divided by # of students/seminar = A: (# of seminars for each core course)· # of core courses x # of seminars/core course = B:(# of seminar leads/year for core courses) · # of faculty leads/Per Field Studies seminars = C:(# of FS leads/year)• Core and FS Curriculum Faculty Required = B + C (FTEs)

Standard faculty annual teaching load = (# of core course & electives)+ Curriculum/course development+ Student advising/counseling/mentoring/evaluation+ Management/administrative duties+ Outreach, research/publication

Available faculty resources: Total faculty Authorized = D (Based on OPMEP Guidance)

- X (new faculty @ half load)- Y (academic leadership @ Part-time load)

FTE Adjusted = E @ full load: (X+Y) @ part-time load

Can Maximum FTEs Available meet Faculty Required?Is OPMEP S/F Ratio acceptable

Unclassified

7

AWC USAWC CNW USMCWAR NWC ICAF JAWS

Students 242 368 251 27 221 321 42

Seminar Size 15 16 14-16 or 10-12

13 13 15-16 13

Seminars required 16 23 18 2 17 21 3

Faculty per Seminar 2 3-4 2 1 1 1(note 1) 1

Total Faculty Required 72.5 114 158*** 11 64 93 12

Teaching Faculty Req’d 66

96 140***

11 64 87 12

Non-Teaching Faculty Req’d 0

10 0 0 0 6 0

Part-time Faculty Req’d 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

Adjunct FTEs Req’d 6.5

8 18*** 0 0 0 0

Total Faculty Authorized 64 75 150*** 11 64 80(note 2) 12

Total Faculty Assigned 66 79 11 95(note 3) 12

Teaching Positions Filled via MOA/MOU

23

STFR (Unadjusted*) 3.78:1 4.13:1 -- *** 2.4:1 3.45:1 3.69:1 3.5:1

STFR (Adjusted**) 3.33:1 3.23:1 -- *** 2.4:1 3.45:1 3.45:1 3.5:1

What it is? AY 10-12

*Unadjusted STFR includes assigned teaching faculty and excludes adjuncts, part-time, non-teaching faculty.

**Adjusted STFR includes assigned, adjuncts, part-time, non-teaching faculty.

***One Faculty for both ILC/SLC

1. 1 faculty per course, w/teaching team of 5 faculty(fall) & 3-4 faculty in spring2. Includes 13 Faculty DOD MIPR funded (8 DAU + 5 DSLDP)3. Includes 23 Faculty provided via MOA/MOU and 13 DOD MIPR funded(note 1)

Senior Level College Assessment

Unclassified

8

AWC USAWC CNW USMCWAR NWC ICAF JAWS

Students 242 380 249 52 221 252(note 1) 42 JAWS

Seminar Size 15 16 14-16 or 10-12

13 13 12 13

Seminars required 16 24 18 4 17 21 3

Faculty per seminar 2 3-4 2 1 1 1(note 2) 1

Total Faculty Required (FTEs) 114 158*** 15 64 93

Teaching Faculty Req’d 66

96

140***

15 64

87 12

Non-teaching Faculty Req’d

0

10

0

0 0

6 0

Part-time Faculty Req’d 0 0

0

0 0

0 0

Adjunct Faculty Req’d 6.5 8

18***

0 0

0 0

Total Faculty Authorized 66 77 15 64 80 12

Total Faculty Assigned TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD


23

STFR (*Unadjusted) 3.78:1 4.17:1 -- *** 3.47:1 3.45:1 2.90:1 3.5:1

STFR (***Adjusted) 3.33:1 3.28:1 --*** 3.47:1 3.45:1 2.71:1 3.5:1

What it should be? (AY 13-15)


1. Based on # of seminars and ideal # of students/seminar2. 1 faculty per course, w/teaching team of 5 faculty(fall) & 3-4 faculty in spring3. Includes 13 Faculty DOD MIPR funded (8 DAU + 5 DSLDP)4. Includes 23 Faculty provided via MOA/MOU and 13 DOD MIPR funded(note 1)

Senior Level College Assessment Cont’d

Unclassified

9

ACSC CGSC CNCS MCCSCJCWS

Students 514 1390(note 1) 322 204 255

Seminar Size 12-13 16 10-16(note 2) 14-15 18-19

Seminars required 40 86-92 18 14 15

Faculty per seminar 1 4 2 2 3

Total Faculty Required 129 366(note 3) 105*** 50.25

Teaching Faculty Req’d 115 319 87 40 63.75

Non-teaching Faculty Req’d 0 47 0 0 0

Part-time Faculty Req’d 0 0 0 0 0

Adjunct Faculty Req’d 13.75 0 18 10.25 0.75

Total Faculty Authorized 115 366 150 40 63

Total Faculty Assigned


STFR (*Unadjusted) 4.46:1 4.35:1 3.98:1 5.1:1 4.0:1

STFR(**Adjusted) 3.99:1 3.8 3.33:1 4.05:1 4.0:1

What it is? AY 10-12

NOTES:1. Ranged from 1375 to 14392. Varies by trimester: Either 10-12 or14-16 for core courses3. Ranges between 344-368


Intermediate Level College Assessment

Unclassified

10

ACSC CGSC CNCS MCCSC JCWS

Students 514 1400 (note 1) 322 208 255

Seminar Size 12-13 16 10-16(note 2) 13 16

Seminars Required 40 89-92 18 16 15

Faculty per Seminar 1 4 2 2 3

Total Faculty Required (FTEs) 129 366 (note 3) 105*** 49.5 63.75

Teaching Faculty Req’d 115 319 87 49.5 63

Non-teaching Faculty Req’d 0 47 0 0 0

Part-time Faculty Req’d

Adjunct Faculty Req’d 13.75 0 18 0 .75

Teaching Faculty Authorized 115 366 150 49.5 63

Teaching Faculty Assigned TBD TBD TBD TBD TBD


STFR(*Unadjusted) 4.47 4.38:1 3.98:1 4.2:1 4.0:1

STFR(Adjusted**) 3.99:1 3.8 3.33:1 4.2:1 4.0:1

What it should be? AY 13-15


NOTES:1. Ranges between1375 to

14392. Varies by trimester:

Either 10-12 or14-16 for core courses3. Ranges between 344-368

Intermediate Level College Assessment Cont’d

Unclassified

11

AWC USAWC CNW MCWAR NWC ICAF JAWS0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

3.784.17

3.50

5.02

3.33 3.28

3.50 3.473.45 3.49 3.50

Senior Level Colleges(Ideal S/F Ratio)

Without Adjuncts

With Adjuncts

Stu

den

t F

acu

lty

Rat

io

Findings: Maintain OPMEP S/F Ratio for SLC

3.5OPMEP Standard

Unclassified

12

ACSC CGSC CNCS MCCSC JCWS3.7

3.8

3.9

4

4.1

4.2

4.3

4.4

4.54.46

4 4

4.2

4.05

3.99

4.00 4.00

4.00

Intermediate Level Colleges(Ideal S/F Ratio)

Without Adjunct

With Adjunct

Stu

den

t F

acu

lty

Rat

io

Findings: Maintain OPMEP S/F Ratio for ILC

OPMEP Standard

Unclassified

13

Recommendations for Future Study

• Retain the long-standing OPMEP S/F ratio standards of 3.5:1 or less for senior level JPME and 4.0:1 or less for intermediate level JPME.

• Task the MECC WG to examine whether establishing class size

standards would potentially improve academic quality, and if so, would it be practical to do this, at what cost, and what would those standards be?

Unclassified

14

Supplemental Slides

Case Study Results

Unclassified

15

MECC WG Participants

The Joint Staff Joint Education Branch wishes to acknowledge the contributions of the following members of the MECC WG for their contributions to the study.

• COL Thomas Santoro, JS J7 Joint Education Branch Chief• Dr. Harry Dorsey, Industrial College of the Armed Forces• Dr. David Tretler, National War College• Dr. Mark Conversino, Air War College• Dr. Jeff Reilley, Air Command and Staff College• Dr. Linda McCluney, Joint Forces Staff College• Dr. Ken Pisel, Joint Forces Staff College• Dr. Robert Mahoney, Marine Corps War College• Dr. Jerre Wilson, Marine Corps Command and Staff College• Dr. John Persyn, Army Command and General Staff College• Dr. William T. Johnsen, Army War College• Dr. William Spain, College of Naval Warfare• Dr. Brenda Roth, National Defense University• Dr. Charles McKenna, Marine Corps Command and Staff College• Dr. Suzanne Logan, Spaatz Center for Officer Education• Dr. Leslie Cordie, Air University• Dr. Hank Dasinger, Air University• Dr. Jerry West, JS J7 Joint Education Branch, Study Advisor• Mr. Jack Roesner, JS J7 Joint Education Branch

Unclassified

16

Approach

Assumptions:• Rationale must comply with the law (10 USC) and JPME policy (OPMEP).• Rationale must be consistent with fiscal policy constraints (current and projected)• Rationale must be evidence-based and reflect a consensus position from MECC

WG leads. • The overall quality of JPME will not be degraded.• Rationale must preserve active learning (seminar-based et al) in the context of a

professional education environment.

External

View (15 Mar

-15 Aug11)

J7 JEB

Survey

(15 Aug-18 Oct

11)

Case Studi

es(19 Oct-1 Dec11)

Synthesis

2 Dec11 -15 Jan

12

MECC

Brief8 Feb 12

Phase I Phase II Phase III

Unclassified

17

Challenge: Services are challenged to meet JMPE requirements for resourcing sufficient quantity and quality of students and faculty to JPME schools in a period of prolonged fiscal austerity which threatens compliancy to and enforcement of the OPMEP student-faculty ratio standard (SFRS).

– Academic Year 1987-88, student-to-faculty ratios ranged from 2.1:1 (College of Naval Command and Staff) to 7.7:1 (Marine Corps Command and Staff College)

– 1989 Skelton Report: recommended student-faculty ratios for JPME schools to be maintained between 3:1 and 4:1 with the lower ratio associated with senior level colleges (SLC) and the higher ratio with intermediate level colleges (ILC)

– 1990 to Present- CJCS Military Education Policy Documents formally established and preserved the student-faculty ratio standard (STFRS) as part of goal to deliver high quality JPME • Senior-level– not more than 3.5:1• Intermediate-level and Armed Forces Staff College--- not more than 4:1

– Feb 2011 MECC: DJS tasked the MECC to develop a rationale to justify the student-faculty ratio standard introduced by the Skelton Panel

Background

West, Jerry CIV JCS J7 JEDD

Unclassified

18

APPENDIX A

Stage 1. Literature Review

Unclassified

19

External View – US News and World Report Rankings

• OPMEP STFRS cannot be modeled after top tier US Graduate Schools

Formula Weighting Value

Variables Weights

Faculty resources for 2010-2011 academic year

20%

Faculty compensation

35%

Percent faculty with top terminal degree in their field

15%

Percent faculty that is full time 5%

Student/faculty ratio 5%

Class size, 1-19 students

30%

Class size, 50+ students

10%

US News And World Report Formula for Ranking US Colleges and Universities

Unclassified

20

External View Cont’d

Categories Professional Military Education US Graduate School Education

S/F Ratios JPME schools rely on S/F ratio as the primary organizational metric to maintain steady-state high quality in-residence professional educational.

Civilian schools use S/F ratio primarily for marketing purposes; S/F ratios published by schools are used by US News and World Report (USNWR) to rank schools based on reputation and prestige. JPME schools are not ranked.

Curriculum Development No curriculum developers; since faculty members may be teaching outside their area of expertise, collaborative course development is required

Individuals are experts in the areas they teach and develop their own curricula

Teaching Assistants Faculty responsible for all teaching Teaching assistants occasionally available in masters’ programs

Research and Writing Faculty responsible for all research and writing Research Assistants often provided

Project and Field-Studies Advisors Faculty members Faculty members

Preparation and Development Much required due to high faculty turnover Minimal required due to small turnover of core faculty

Higher Headquarters’ Support Requirements Significant Typically limited to the areas of grant application/execution

Direct Support to Deployed Forces Required Not Required

Deployments Required Not Required

Research and Project Support to Senior Leaders

Required Research is required but at the discretion of the faculty

Functional Area of Expertise Faculty often times teach outside areas of specialization

Faculty members teach within their areas of specialization

Classroom Experience Faculty members routinely assigned with no prior teaching experience

More stable faculty means few faculty members are without prior teaching experiences

PME vs US Graduate School Faculty Considerations

Unclassified

21



Student Profile Students are 18-25 year professionals; Therefore requires higher level of faculty preparation.

Students are between 23 and 30 years old with fewer than 5 years of professional experience

Contact Hours Multi-disciplinary programs require students to work outside their academic backgrounds. This requires greater student-faculty interaction than in a single discipline program.

Single discipline focus

Learning Environment Laptop and I-Pads maybe Social Engineering/ Mobile Devices probable

Products Project Term Papers Thesis

Headquarter(HQ) Demands Administrators required to support HQ calls for data and project support.

No HQ exists which allows administrators to focus primarily on managing programs in support of the faculty and students

Administrative Requirements Administrative requirements (e.g., all mandatory annual Service training, such as safety, EEO, Information Assurance, SAEDA; having to act as your own personnel, time, pay, transportation clerks; contracting)


External Support Faculty requested to support requests from external oversight bodies (such as: MECC, MECC WG, USAWC Board of Visitors, DA Historical Advisory Committee, Army Learning Coordination Council)

Minimal support to external bodies required

PME vs US Graduate School Student Considerations

Unclassified

22



Headquarter(HQ) Demands Administrators required to support HQ calls for data and project support.

No HQ exists which allows administrators to focus primarily on managing programs in support of the faculty and students

Administrative Requirements Administrative requirements (e.g., all mandatory annual Service training, such as safety, EEO, Information Assurance, SAEDA; having to act as your own personnel, time, pay, transportation clerks; contracting)


External Support Faculty requested to support requests from external oversight bodies (such as: MECC, MECC WG, USAWC Board of Visitors, DA Historical Advisory Committee, Army Learning Coordination Council)

Minimal support to external bodies required

Selection of Military and Possibly Agency Faculty Members

Limited control on selection. Personnel system-dependent. Results in increased teaching burden and decreased development time for core faculty.

Faculty are selected for their expertise in the particular discipline.

Technology Transformation Often severely limited because of accessibility of desired technology and information assurance requirements.

Technology becoming more available and faculty development on use of technology is available.

PME vs US Graduate School Administration Considerations

Unclassified

23

Bibliography

• Bedard, K., & Kuhn, P. (2008). Where Class Size Really Matters: Class Size and Student Ratings of Instructor Effectiveness. Economics of Education Review, 27(3), 253-265. doi: 10.1016/m.econedurev.2006.08.007

• Brehman, G. E., Jr. (1978). A Study of Faculty Workload in Pennsylvania State-owned Institutions of Higher Education, 1975-77 (pp. 28). Harrisburg, PA: Pennsylvania State Dept. of Education

• Burnsed, B. (2011). Liberal Arts Colleges with Lowest Student-Faculty Ratios. US News and World Report, (April 26, 2011). Retrieved from http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/04/26/liberal-arts-colleges-with-lowest-student-faculty-ratios

• Cartter, A.M. (1966). An Assessment of Quality in Graduate Education. Washington, DC: American Council on Education.

• Chapman, L., & Ludlow, L. (2010). Can Downsizing College Class Sizes Augment Student Outcomes? An Investigation of the Effects of Class Size on Student Learning. Journal of General Education, 59(2), 105-

• De Paola, M., & Scoppa, V. (2011). The effects of Class Size on the achievement of college students. The Manchester School, 79(6), 1061-1079. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9957.2010.02208.x

• Edmonson, J. B., & Mulder, F. J. (1924). Size of class as a factor in university instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 9(1), 1-12.

• Englehart, J. (2007). The Centrality of Context in Learning from Further Class Size Research. Educational Psychology Review, 19(4), 455-467.

• Hinrichsen, B. B., Jackson, J. E., Johnson, C. E., Templeton, R. A., Flannigan, P. N., Lawrence, B. J. (2002). A Study of Faculty Workload as a Means of Improving the Student Learning Environment. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Eduational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED470577

• Hofmann, J. M., & et al. (1994). Adult Learners: Why Were They Successful? Lessons Learned via an Adult Learner Task Force. Paper presented at the Adult Learner Conference, Columbia, SC. http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED375269

• Imel, S. (1999). Using Groups in Adult Learning: Theory and Practice. Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions, 19(1), 54-61.

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/04/26/liberal-arts-colleges-with-lowest-student-faculty-ratios

http://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/articles/2011/04/26/liberal-arts-colleges-with-lowest-student-faculty-ratios

http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/detail?accno=ED470577



Unclassified

24

Bibliography Cont’d

• Jaciw, A. (2011). The Use of Moderator Effects for Drawing Generalized Causal Inferences (pp. 10). Evanston, IL: Society for Research on Educational Effectiveness (SREE)

• Johnson, I. Y. (2010). Class Size and Student Performance at a Public Research University: A Cross-Classified Model. Research in Higher Education, 51(8), 701-723. doi: 10.1007/s11162-010-9179-y

• Kokkelenberg, E. C., Dillon, M., & Christy, S. M. (2008). The Effects of Class Size on Student Grades at a Public University. Economics of Education Review, 27(2), 221-233. doi: 10.1016/j.econedurev.2006.09.011

• McKeachie, W. J. (1980). Class Size, Large Classes, and Multiple Sections. Academe, 66(1), 24-27. • National Council of Teachers of English, U. I. L. (1998). NCTE Position on Class Size and Teacher Workload,

K-College (pp. 10). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English• Redlinger, L. J., & Valcik, N. A. (2008). Using return on investment models of programs and faculty for

strategic planning. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2008(140), 93.108. doi: 10.1002/ir.272• Shea, C. (1998). Do smaller classes mean better schools? Economists aren't so sure. The Chronicle of

Higher Education, 44(30), A17-A18. • Sibley, J., & Parmelee, D. X. (2008). Knowledge Is No Longer Enough: Enhancing Professional Education

with Team-Based Learning. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 2008(116), 41-53. doi: 10.1002/tl.332• Sweitzer,Kyle, & Volkwein, Fredericks(2009). Prestige Among Graduate and Professional Schools:

Comparing the U.S. News’ Graduate School Reputation Ratings Between Disciplines,

Unclassified

25

Appendix B. Internal View

Unclassified

26

Findings Cont’d

• First and Second Order Effects of Changing the Standard• Reduced quality of seminar-based education as a result of increase in

number of students per seminar.

• Forced larger class sizes which could not be accommodated with a number of colleges already operating at the limits of active, adult based learning.

• May require shifting personnel from other organizations into a greater teaching load, thereby degrading their ability to perform their primary missions.

• Affect curriculum development and evolution will suffer with fewer faculty.

• Reduce the opportunities for faculty and students of the Services’ schools to support the overall mission of the school.

• Diminish faculty development opportunities.

• All of the above will have an adverse effect on the ability to recruit and retain quality faculty.

Unclassified

27

Findings Cont’d

• Survey concerns include:

– Large class sizes( 7 of 12 Schools reported class sizes of 15-16 students)

– Ability of services to provide faculty with the requisite qualifications

– Services ability to fill authorizations (JFSC authorizations filled at only 75% to 80%)

– Agency budget cuts resulting in sustained losses in faculty provided by agencies and requirement to fill agency vacancies with Title 10 hires

– Selective Early Retirement Board (SERB) actions which reduce core faculty

Unclassified

28

JPME Intermediate Level College Surveys

CGSC CNCS ACSC USMCCSC JFSC

1. What is your student to faculty ratio during a typical classroom period for one seminar?

16:1 The ratio is 12 or 13:1 depending on the seminar size (i.e., AY 12 has a total of 514 students divided among 40 seminars

7-to-1. 14 students per seminar. Two faculty members usually attend a seminar.

JAWS/ 5.25:1-14:1JCWS/ 4.25:1-17:1

2. What is your preferred student to faculty ratio during an ideal classroom period for one seminar?

16:1 JAWS/ 5.25:1-14:1JCWS/ 4.25:1-17:1

3. How do you determine your student to faculty ratio?

OPEP + SOP dated 8 Sep 10




4. Who counts as a fulltime equivalent (FTE) at your school?

FTE teaches core and electives, curriculum development and research

Faculty members conducting full-time teaching, curriculum development, research. Fulltime faculty who conduct only teaching duties must teach at least three courses to be considered a FTE.

Full time faculty members include personnel assigned full-time as faculty

Those that teach core and electives and curriculum developers count as one FTE.

Unclassified

29

JPME Intermediate Level College Surveys Cont’d

CGSC CNCS ACSC USMCCSC JFSC

5. How do you use adjunct faculty members?

SMEs who teach IA part-time electives .2 FTE

Adjuncts teach core and elective courses

We do not count adjunct faculty external to Marine Corps University

Primarily to teach electives

6. What other positions are used to determine your ratio?

Basic Instructor: 1.00 Teaching FTE

Faculty who are assigned to ACSC’s Research Department or are conducting full time research count as one FTE. Deployed resident faculty count as one FTE.

Course directors, dean, director, deputy director/dean of students, and war-gamming personnel. Only faculty members who teach electives or a series of classes are counted in the partial count of faculty.

Chairs, Senior Fellows, adjuncts, and others count a variable amount determined by the amount of time dedicated to JCWS, JAWS, and AJPME.

7. How do you determine the % each non-full time faculty counts in your ratio?

Curriculum Developer: .33 Teaching FTE, .67 CD FTELeader Digital Development Center (CPOF, and simulations education): .33 Teaching FTE;.67 non-Department Director: .67 Supervisory FTE, .33 Teaching FTELibrary Support: 1.00 Research FTE, 0 Teaching FTE

ACSC CF, Dean, and Director of Joint Education count as a FTE; Adjuncts receive a part time equivalent (PTE) credit of .25 for every core course or elective they teach.

Partial count is awarded to personnel who teach electives and classes. Their contribution ranges from 0.25 to 0.75. MCU scholar teaches one elective he/she will count as 0.25.

Faculty member teaches only an elective or only part of the year: .2 FTE

Unclassified

30


CGSC CNSC ACSC CSC JFSC

8. What has the trend been for the overall student/faculty ratios at your school over the last three years?

AY 2011: 3.80:1AY 2010: 3.86:1AY 2009: 3.93:1AY 08 4:01:1 (highest)AY 04 3.42:1

AY 12/ 3.99:1AY 11 (ratio reported last year) 4.88:1AY 10 (ratio reported year before last) 4.54:1

AY 12/ 4.1: 1AY 11/4:1AY 10/ 4:1

The only trend has been variability. JFSC has been in and out of compliance with the OPMEP standard

9. Do you feel the ratio is appropriate for your school?

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes, with full manning

10. If you could change it, what would you propose as justification?

No Change. Current ratio provides sufficient manning to support quality education

Recommend this study to determine whether the status quo, some adjustment, or a change would be in order

No Change. I would not change the ratio, but allow for flexibility in counting personnel who develop, assess, or assist in the delivery of the curricula.

No change. A change would only alter the threshold of failure

11. Is there pressure from your parent organization to raise the ratio

No Yes. This entire study has its roots in a collaborative effort by the OPNAV staff and the Air Force staff to raise the issue of the CJCS requirement and its rationale

No Indirectly. the increase in student without an increase in authorized faculty.

No

12. Are you expecting your budget to be reduced this academic year? Next year?

Yes. Unknown USNWC took an end-strength decrement of 22 for FY 11 with more decrements planned for the out-years.

Yes. Yes. Not so much this year, but definitely next year.

Unknown in both cases.

13. Are you enhancing your current residence course this academic year through the use of multimedia, online materials, or social media?

Yes. On-going Yes. Exploring more effective means of leveraging multimedia and online materials to enhance student learning.

Yes, except for social media

Have been for years.

Unclassified

31


CGSC CNCS ACSC USMCSC JFSC


Yes. On-going Yes. Exploring more effective means of leveraging multimedia and online materials to enhance student learning.

Yes, except for social media

Have been for years.

14. Would you consider adding blended learning opportunities to your course in the coming year if it could be moved from the non-resident section of the OPMEP to be acceptable additions to a resident course?

N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

15. What potential challenges do you see that would threaten your ability to meet the required STFR next year?

Replacing civilian faculty losses from normal attrition with active duty military faculty

Increase of 50 USN students in CNC&S (ILC) over the next three academic years. Faculty shortfalls will eventually occur.

Non-forecasted SERB or RIF

CMC has directed an increase in student attending resident ILS and CLS. Without additional faculty, CSC will not have sufficient faculty to meet the 4-to-1 ratio.

Services filling authorizations at only 75% to 80%

16. What has been your greatest challenge for meeting the STFRS for the last 3 years

Limited availability of active duty military faculty

Meeting the 60:40 military mix required for a large faculty that teaches both ILC & SLC

Filling rated billets. ACSC can expect 78% fill. ACSC can normally plan on a 90% entitlement fill of support officer billets.

Obtaining qualified officers/USMC included) to deliver the curriculum. Lack of expertise to deliver a quality seminar to a very experienced group of students.

JFSC has been in and out of compliance with the OPMEP standard. Services filling authorizations at only 75% to 80%

Unclassified

32


CGSC CNCS ACSC CSC JFSC

17. What would be affected if the ratio were to be 5:1

Change would detract from accomplishment of the faculty domains

USNWC would lose significant faculty billets; Faculty development and then curricula development would likely diminish; the institutional mission capacity would be degraded

ACSC could not perform its curriculum development or research duties

The obvious answer is that we would lose 10 faculty members. As far as second and third order effects, faculty would work harder, fewer electives would offered, faculty professional development off-sites (sabbaticals) would disappear—ultimately, some faculty would probably quit

If we go to 5:1 and are manned at 80% we have the same problem, only more severe

18. Are you expecting student throughput to change significantly this AY? Next AY

No. No. 8 more international students for ILC. Additionally, the Navy determined this past summer that it would grow the CNC&S (ILC) student body by 50 students over the next three fiscal years. In total, this would add 4 seminars to our ILC program.

Reduction of 20 students per year for AY 12-13.

Not this academic year. As described above we will increase 38 Marine students over the next four years.

No. No.

Unclassified

33

JPME Senior Level Colleges Survey

USAWC AWC CNW MCWAR


Core: 16:1Electives: 1-56:1

Core: 15:1; Electives: 6-12:1

Core: Varies between 5:1 and 14:1 depending on curriculum and TrimesterElectives: 7.5-15:1

27 total students divided into two seminars.


16:1 15:1 10-16:1 13-14:1

3. How do you determine your student to faculty ratio?

OPMEP; SOP Dtd. Jan 08 OPMEP; SOP Dtd. Sep 10

JS J-7 SOP of 9 Jan 2008 Metrics from the OPMEP.

4. Who counts as a fulltime equivalent at your school?

1 FTE teaches core and electives, curriculum development and research

All assigned faculty count as 1 FTE including Deans and Dept Chairs

Faculty principal duties for developing and teaching ILC & SLC PME are counted as 1.0 FTE.

Each faculty member is counted as a full-time equivalent, including the Director, Dean and Associate Dean.

5. How do you use adjunct faculty members?

Teach part-time electives Teach electives and advise on research projects

Teach electives and perform research

We use outside faculty members for some classes. Not counted in the ratio

Unclassified

34

JPME Senior Level Colleges Survey Cont’d

USAWC AWC CNW MCWAR

6. What other positions are used to determine your ratio?

Dean (1 FTE)Dept. Chairs(1 FTE)Director Institutional Assessment (1 FTE)

Occasionally, we may include Vice Commandant

Dean of Academics, our Associate Dean of Academics for Electives and Directed Research and our Institutional Research Professor meet the OPMEP definition and SOP requirements: However, not counted in ratio

None.

7. How do you determine the % each non full-time faculty counts in your ratio?

those who teach part-time electives .2 FTE

adjuncts are rated at .25 up to .50

Adjunct faculty teach in the elective program count as 0.25 for each Trimester

Non full-time faculty not counted in ratio


FY 12/ 3.23:1FY 11/ 3.46:1; FY 10/ 3.28:1

AY 12/ 3.4:1AY 11/ 3.38:1AY 10/ 3.42:1

Number of faculty available exceeds the number required, i.e.AY 11 < 3.5AY 10 << 3.5AY 09 <3.5

Steady.

9. Do you feel the ratio is appropriate for your school?

Depends on Counting Rule:

Faculty filling staff and administrative requirements are counted in STFR

Yes. Faculty is fully employed and USNWC has adjusted workload expectations

Yes.


Before applying SOP 5:1; Applying SOP 3.5;; Seminar-based with seminar ratio of 16:1

Requires further study; AWC has only 64 Authorized faculty billets; Requires 70 FTE to support student throughput of 240-245

Requires study; civilian-military faculty mix has changed significantly since 1989; statutory and policy expectations have grown accordingly

Wouldn’t. It is fine as is.

Unclassified

35


USAWC AWC CNW MCWAR


Yes. 8:1 or seminar Moderate: Alternatives considered including Navy Model which would result in loss of 70 Slots. Rejected by CSAF

This entire study has its roots in a collaborative effort by the OPNAV staff and the Air Force staff to raise the issue of the CJCS requirement and its rationale

No.


No. Unknown Yes. 35% budget cut expected

USNWC took an end-strength decrement of 22 for FY 11 with more decrements planned for the out-years.

No for this year. Yes for next.


Yes. On-going Yes We currently use IPADs, electronic and paper readings, and the Blackboard learning management system within our academic program.

We use blackboard to deliver our entire curriculum and Microsoft Office for the calendar


N/A Different topic for a different time

Different topic for a different time

Unclassified

36


USAWC AWC CNW MCWAR


Services fail to provide JPME II faculty; 60:40 military faculty ratio; balance of military and Title 10 faculty

Reliance on Academic Centers at Air Univ to meet faculty requirements. Officer force reductions

Balancing operational currency with CJCS requirements for SLC faculty; Recent SERB will affect a significant number of the USNWC faculty

Large budget crunch that could cause outside services/agencies to withdraw their faculty


Services fail to provide JPME II faculty; 60:40 military faculty ratio; balance of military and Title 10 faculty

Force drawdowns such as O-6 Selective Early Retirement Board (SERB) and on-again, off-again freezes against Title X hiring

Meeting the 60:40 mix required for a large faculty that teaches both ILC & SLC and meet SLC military faculty requirements.

Budget shortfalls

17. What would be affected if the ratio were to be 4:1 Could lose 40 Faculty; program destroyed

Could sustain the core but reduce outreach, slow curriculum changes, reduce number and variety of electives and actually force further reductions in our ability to respond to taskings

USNWC would lose significant faculty billets: faculty development and curricula development would likely diminish as Dept. Chairs would have less flexibility: institutional mission capacity would be degraded; only one (educational) of four vital mission functions of the college could be achieved.

If we went to 4:1, we would possibly use more guest speakers


Yes. Current increase in 17 IF. Next year plus 13 IF; Could increase US Army students by 20 and still meet OPMEP and Law

None. Remain at 245 students

None. None None. None

Unclassified

37

JPME Senior Level Colleges

NWC ICAF


13:1 15:1


13:1 12:1

3. How do you determine your student to faculty ratio? IAW OPMEP IAW OPMEP.

4. Who counts as a fulltime equivalent at your school? Everyone assigned to the NWC faculty counts as “1” FTE. Includes the Dean of Faculty, Associate Deans, Department Chairs, Course Directors and International Affairs Adviser

Everyone assigned to the ICAF faculty counts as "1" FTE, although not allFTEs teach. Includes the Dean of Faculty, Associate Deans, DepartmentChairs, Course Directors and International Affairs Adviser.

5. How do you use adjunct faculty members? Not used. ICAF does not use adjunct faculty members.

6. What other positions are used to determine your ratio? None None.

7. How do you determine the % each non-full time faculty counts in your ratio? the Commandant, Chief of Staff/Dean of Students, and Director of Institutional Research and Assessment not counted in ratio

Per ICAF business case.


AY 12 /3.35:1AY11 /3.45:1AY10 /3.68:1

FY 11/ 3.5:1FY 10/3.4:1FY 09/3.5:1

9. Do you feel the ratio is appropriate for your school? We believe 3.5:1 is appropriate for National War College

Yes.

Unclassified

38


NWC ICAF


Would not change it No Change.


No. Yes. July 2010 SecDef budget efficiency cuts. Projected POM 13-17 cuts


Unsure. Reduced ≈5% from FY10 to FY11─Programmed to reduce another ≈8% from FY10 levels in FY13, but may be directed to take that reduction this FY─ After FY 13, programmed to reduce another ≈3% from FY10 levels

AY 11 - 12: Amount TBD. AY 12 - 13: $1.18M out of current 2.8. Impact – 3 faculty members and on support staff


Yes; moving to deliver all our course materials via BlackBoard; Additionally continuing exploitation of a variety of multimedia applications as appropriate

Yes; ICAF is moving to deliver all course materials via Blackboard


N/A N/A


Budget reduction and/or hiring freeze; Reduction in faculty from the Services and/or Agencies (e.g., State Department); NDU decision to shift military and/or agency faculty normally assigned to National War College for duties elsewhere within the University; Increase in student load without provision for proportional increases in faculty staffing

ICAF faculty is funded from nine independent sources. Processes and cuts are not coordinated and have multiplier impact.

Unclassified

39


NWC ICAF


Title 10 retirements/resignations coupled with Title 10 hiring delays/freezes imposed by NDU and/or DOD; Vacancies created by Title 10 retirements/resignations must be filled via new Title 10 hires because we can get no additional military or agency faculty

Maintaining the number of MOU/MOA civilian agency faculty to ensure 3.5:1 ratio

17. What would be affected if the ratio were to be 4:1 Increasing our ratio to 4:1 would damage the quality of our educational program: Force us to assign new faculty as primary seminar leaders before they were ready─ And/or force us to increase the number of students per seminar; -would also significantly reduce, or even eliminate, opportunities for faculty sabbaticals

First impact would be on amount of time available of professional development and research. Second impact would be to shift some current seminars to lectures. Would prefer to see throughput reduced after that to maintain the essential nature of current program.


Yes. reduce the number of Navy students in next year's class by 5. without replacements from USMC or Coast Guard leave us well short of the OPMEP requirement that we must have approximately equal representation. DCPMS might pull all 13 of the DSLDP students. If so must offsite with other agencies in the national security arena

AY 11-12: No. AY 13-17 reductions in DSLDP students.

Unclassified

40

SLC In-Residence Seminar-based

InstructionFaculty

(1-4 Faculty per Seminar)

NWC, ICAF, JAWS( 1/3,

1/3,1/3)Military

JFSC(100% Military

with ILC or SLC

graduates with relevant joint experience

(Services) 60/40

Host/non-host; non-

host equally divided

(Services)75 % with

SLC Degree or

JQO

Faculty Student Ratio

=3.5:1

Students(13-16 Students per Seminar)

NWC, ICAF, JAWS,

(1/3,1/3,1/3)Military

(Services) 60/40

Host/non-host

(Services/Seminars)

>1 officer from each non-host

Dept.

JPME In-Residence Student Faculty Model(Senior Level Colleges)

Unclassified

41

ILC In-Residence Seminar-based Instruction

Faculty(1-4 Faculty per Seminar)

(Services) Non host

>5% each)

JFSC Military Mix

(1/3,1/3,1/3)*

(Services) 75 % ILC or SLC graduates or

JQOs **

Faculty Student Ratio=4.0:1

Students(12-16 Students per Seminar)

JCWS(Allocated in accordance with

Services JDAL billets)

(Services/Seminars)

>1 officer from each non-host Military Depts

*For JFSC, all military faculty should be graduates of an ILC or SLC program and have comparable joint experience**In PME institutions where a single faculty is indistinguishably responsible for both intermediate and senior JPME curriculum, total host military department faculty shall be no more than 60 percent of the total military faculty whose primary duty is student instruction of JPME; 75% of the military faculty should be graduates of a senior-level PME program or be JQOs…OPMEP

JPME In-Residence Student Faculty Model(Intermediate Level Colleges)

Unclassified

42

APPENDIX C

Stage 3. Case Studies

Case Studies are available at https://jdeis.js.mil/jdeis/index.jsp?pindex=0

https://jdeis.js.mil/jdeis/index.jsp?pindex=0



Unclassified

43

Findings: Internal ViewSteady State Faculty Requirements

Core curriculum faculty requirements:· Total# of students divided by # of students/seminar = A: (# of seminars for each core course)· # of core courses x # of seminars/core course = B:(# of seminar leads/year for core courses) · # of faculty leads/Per Field Studies seminars = C:(# of FS leads/year)• Core and FS Curriculum Faculty Required = B + C (FTEs)

Standard faculty annual teaching load = (# of core course & electives)+ Curriculum/course development+ Student advising/counseling/mentoring/evaluation+ Management/administrative duties+ Outreach, research/publication

Available faculty resources: Total faculty Authorized = D (Based on OPMEP Guidance)

- X (new faculty @ half load)- Y (academic leadership @ Part-time load)

FTE Adjusted = E @ full load: (X+Y) @ part-time load

Can Maximum FTEs Available meet Faculty Required?Is OPMEP S/F Ratio acceptable

Faculty Workload (Typical)

DutiesMan-hours

(per yr)Man-hours

(per wk)

Instructional Tasks 1147.0 22.9

Curriculum Development 136.0 2.7

Student Counseling 406.2 8.1

Faculty Development 388.0 7.8

Miscellaneous/Admin 553.2 11.1

Teaching Team 112.4 2.2

Additional Tasks 56.0 1.1

Total 2798.8 56.0

MAR 05

OCT 05 OCT 06 MAR 07

SEP 07 MAR 08

SEP 08 MAR 09

SEP 09 MAR 10

SEP 10 MAR 11

SEP 112.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

3.87

3.42

3.54

3.82 3.793.94 4.01

4.18

3.93 3.973.86

3.713.80

CGSC Resident ILE/JPME-IOPMEP Student-to-Faculty Ratio

OPMEP standard is ≤ 4:1 for Intermediate-Level Colleges

National War College

Faculty Staffing Requirements

Core curriculum faculty requirements 221 students @ 13/seminar = 17 seminars/core course

6 core courses x 17 seminars = 102 faculty seminar leads (FSL)/yr

23 Field Studies (FS) @ 2 faculty/FS = 46 FSL/yr TOTAL FSL REQUIRED/YR = 148

Standard faculty annual teaching load = 3 core course & 1-2 electives+ Curriculum/course development+ Student advising/counseling/mentoring/evaulation+ Management/administrative duties+ Outreach, research/publication

Faculty resources available @ 3.5:1 Total faculty required for 221 students = 64 = 192 FSL/yr (@ std

teaching load) Adjusted for faculty @ half load:

≈ 16 new faculty/yr (average) - 24 FSL/yr 13 faculty in academic leadership - 20 FSL/yr TOTAL FSL AVAILABLE/YR @ 3.5:1 = 148 (meets

requirement, best case)

National War College

Steady State STFR Justification

Seminar-based Instruction(6 sequential core courses taught in 17 seminars + 23 Field Studies seminars + 4 electives)

64 Faculty35 @ full load

29 @ half load

221 Students13 students/seminar

1 faculty/seminar

STFR3.45:1

MilitaryLand/Sea/Air

9/9/8

CivilianDoD/Non-DoD

25/13

MilitaryLand/Sea/Air

43/44/43

CivilianDoD/Non-DoD

24/33/34

Facultycontact hrs/wk

13

Justification based on evidence of steady-state conditions satisfied by case study

Instructional ModelSeminar-based Instruction (Staff Groups)

Teaching Teams (12 Instructors per Team, 4 Staff Groups per Team)

Faculty366 Faculty (FTE)

12 Instructors per Team70% Civ/30% Mil (Goal)

74.2% Civ/25.8% (Current)Non-host

RatioSea Svc 8.5%

Air Force 9.2%

JQO Experience 75 % with

ILC or SLC or

S/F Ratio3.80:1 OPMEP5.33:1 Team

16:1 Classroom

Students1390 Students (2 starts)

16 Students per Staff Group

4 Staff Groups per Team87 Staff Groups

Host/Non-host Student

Mix71/29

(Current)

Non-host/SG>1 officer from each

service

S/F Ratio Justification(U.S. Army Command and General Staff College)

United States Army War College

USAWC Steady State Student-Faculty Ratio (AY12)

Seminar-based Instruction(6 Core Courses taught in

23 Seminars114 FTE Faculty (106@ 1 FTE; 8 @ .2 FTE)

Military(Land, Sea ,Air)

( 30, 11, 9)(50 FTE)

Civilian/Int’l(64FTE)

STFR3.23:1

368 Students(16 students @ 1 Faculty per

Seminar)

Military(Land, Sea,

Air) (210,34,32)

Civilians/IFs(DoD, Non-DoD, IFs)(21,4,67)

Faculty Contact Hrs/wk(12 for

planning;15-22 in reality)

Unclassified

50

ACSC Steady State STFRS Justification


40 Seminars)66 Faculty

(40@Full load; 26@ half load)

MilitaryAF/AR/MA/NA/IO)

( 68,8,4,2,3)

Civilian(DoD)(30)

STFR3.99:1

514 Students(12-13 students @ 1 Faculty per

Seminar)Military(AF,

AR,MA, NA)

(341,43,10,30)

Civilian(DoD,Non-DoD,Int’l)(14,1,76)

Faculty Contact Hrs/wk

(15)

Justification provided based on evidence of steady-state conditions satisfied based on case study.

Develop America's Airmen Today ... for Tomorrow

51The Intellectual and Leadership Center of the Air Force

Aim High…Fly – Fight – Win

AWC Steady State STFR Justification


16 Seminars*)64 Faculty

(59@Full load; 5@ half load)

Military(Air, Land,Sea)

( 21, 7, 9, 2 Int’l)

Civilian(DAF,Non-DAF)

(22, 3)

STFR3.78:1**3.33:1***

242 Students(15 students @ 1 Faculty per

Seminar)

Military(Air,

Land,Sea) (132, 34,21)

Civilian(DoD, & Non-

DoD,Int’l)(9, 46)

Faculty Contact Hrs/wk(12-15)

•*Includes Regional and Cultural Studies, with 2 faculty leads each)•** Using faculty AUTHORIZED to AWC; does not include adjuncts;•*** w/adjuncts, 3.33:1

Seminar-based Instruction

154 Faculty Authorized

Non host >5% each)

75 % with ILC or SLC or JQO

Experience

Faculty Student Ratio:

322 Students*

41/36 Host/non-host Military student mix

>1 officer from each non-host

*Includes international students

College of Naval Warfare (CNW), US Naval War College (ILC)

Industrial College of the Armed Forces (SLC)

Seminar-based Instruction

94 FacultyMilitary Faculty( 1/3, 1/3,1/3)

75 % with SLC Degree or JQO

or Joint Exp

Faculty Student Ratio

3.41:1

321 StudentsLand,Sea, Air

(62,61,61)

Civilians(DoD,Non-

DoD,IF,IndF*)(67,36,25,9)

*IF (International Fellows); IndF (Industry Fellows).

JAWS: SLC

Seminar-based Instruction(3 Core Courses taught in 3 Seminars/Individual Thesis

Research12.25 Faculty

Military(Land,Sea,Air)

2/3/2

STFR3.43:1

42 Students(13 Seminar)

Military(Land,Se

a,Air)

9/9/9

Civilian(DoD,Non-DoD,IF)

5/6/3

Faculty Contact Hrs/wk15-20

Justification provided based on evidence of steady-state conditions satisfied based on case study.

JCWS: ILC

Seminar-based Instruction3-instructor team/seminar

63.25 Faculty.75 Adjunct

Military(Land/Sea/Air)

13/19/14

DOD Civilian

17

Academic Dean

.25

STFR4.03:1

255 Students/class4 classes/yearMilitary

(Land/Sea/Air)

298/300/333

DOD Civilian/I

nt’l Fellows

13/72

Faculty Contact Hrs/wk

26

Directorate for Joint Force Development (J-7), The Joint Staff

Documents

Transcript of Directorate for Joint Force Development (J-7), The Joint Staff