FTES, FTEF, SFR

Cal State L.A. logo and University Seal - Link back to main page

Department of English

Engineering & Technology A604
Contact us: (323) 343-4140

Program Review 2008 (Appendix O)

FTES, FTEF, SFR

Analysis of FTES/FTEF/SFR for CSU English Departments

FTES

 

Lower Division

Upper Division

Year

Dept.

College

University

Dept

College

University

2001

692.1

1639.2

5563.1

259.4

1207.5

9141.1

2002

707.5

1776.8

5929.0

246.1

1288.2

9411.8

2003

681.4

1830.6

5559.2

229.4

1421.1

9802.2

2004

629.2

1811.2

5569.7

261.2

1548.3

8228.9

2005

641.0

1853.5

5673.5

266.4

1464.0

8366.4

2006

721.3

1902.3

5857.0

250.3

1417.8

8217.1

AVG.

678.7

1802.3

5691.9

252.1

1391.1

8861.3

 

 

Undergraduate

Graduate

Total

Year

Dept.

College

Univ.

Dept.

College

Univ.

Dept.

College

Univ.

2001

951.5

2846.7

14704.2

20.5

116.5

1744.3

971.9

2963.2

16448.5

2002

953.6

3065.0

15340.9

24.7

116.7

1816.9

978.3

3181.6

17157.8

2003

910.8

3251.6

15361.5

28.9

123.6

1861.0

939.7

3375.2

17222.4

2004

890.4

3359.5

13798.6

23.7

105.0

1273.8

914.1

3464.5

15072.4

2005

907.4

3317.5

14039.9

27.5

106.4

1350.7

934.9

3423.9

15390.6

2006

971.6

3320.1

14074.1

30.1

104.4

1340.8

1001.7

3424.5

15414.9

AVG.

930.9

3193.4

14553.2

25.9

112.1

1564.6

956.8

3305.5

16117.8

FTEF

 

Lower Division

Upper Division

Year

Dept.

College

Univ.

Dept

College

Univ,

2001

32.1

71.5

197.2

13.5

64.6

392.7

2002

28.2

72.2

224.6

10.7

71.3

399.7

2003

27.5

69.1

192.0

9.6

69.9

413.8

2004

25.1

67.4

198.3

12.6

81.4

368.3

2005

26.8

78.1

232.4

14.5

93.2

390.4

2006

31.8

87.0

235.6

12.0

93.6

399.0

AVG.

28.6

74.2

213.3

12.1

79.0

394.0

 

 

Undergraduate

Graduate

Total

Year

Dept.

College

Univ.

Dept.

College

Univ.

Dept.

College

Univ.

2001

45.5

136.1

589.9

2.9

16.5

166.1

48.4

152.6

756.0

2002

38.9

143.5

624.3

2.8

16.6

153.0

41.7

160.1

777.3

2003

37.1

139.0

605.8

2.0

13.9

147.1

39.1

152.9

752.9

2004

37.8

148.7

566.6

2.4

15.1

115.5

40.1

163.8

682.1

2005

41.3

171.3

622.8

2.8

15.4

125.6

44.1

186.7

748.4

2006

43.8

180.6

634.6

3.5

16.0

133.8

47.3

196.6

768.4

AVG.

40.7

153.2

607.3

2.7

15.6

140.2

43.4

168.8

747.5

SFR

 

Lower Division

Upper Division

Year

Dept.

College

University

Dept

College

University

2001

21.6

22.9

28.2

19.3

18.7

23.3

2002

25.1

24.6

26.4

23.1

18.1

23.5

2003

24.8

26.5

28.9

24.0

20.3

23.7

2004

25.0

26.9

28.1

20.7

19.0

22.3

2005

23.9

23.7

24.4

18.4

15.7

21.4

2006

22.7

21.9

24.9

20.9

15.1

20.6

AVG.

23.8

24.4

26.8

21.0

17.8

22.5

 

 

Undergraduate

Graduate

Total

Year

Dept.

College

Univ.

Dept.

College

Univ.

Dept.

College

Univ.

2001

20.9

20.9

24.9

7.1

7.1

10.5

20.1

19.4

21.8

2002

24.5

21.4

24.6

8.8

7.0

11.9

23.4

19.9

22.1

2003

24.6

23.4

25.4

14.5

8.9

12.7

24.1

22.1

22.9

2004

23.6

22.6

24.4

10.1

7.0

11.0

22.8

21.2

22.1

2005

22.0

19.4

22.5

9.8

6.9

10.8

21.2

18.3

20.6

2006

22.2

18.4

22.2

8.6

6.5

10.0

21.2

17.4

20.1

AVG.

23.0

21.0

24.0

9.8

7.2

11.1

22.1

19.7

21.6

 

Analysis of FTES/FTEF/SFR for CSU English Departments

Summary

In 2002-2005, the SFR for the CSULA English Department was

o

the third highest in the CSU (when compared with that of other CSU English Departments),

o

more than 12% higher than the systemwide average, and

o

greater than 1 standard deviation from the rest of the CSU.

In 2002-2005, the difference between the ranks assigned to CSULA’s FTES total and FTEF total was greater than 1 (i.e. a significant difference in the two ranks, which should be equal), a difference exceeded only by Bakersfield and San Luis Obispo.

In 2003 (the last year of reliable APDB data in this category), the SFR related to graduate classes in English at CSULA was

o

the highest in the CSU,

o

nearly double the systemwide average, and

o

nearly 3 standard deviations from the rest of the CSU

In 2002-2005, the average class size for all CSULA English classes was

o

the seventh highest in the CSU, and

o

more than 6% higher than the systemwide average.

In 2003 (the last year of reliable APDB data in this category), the average class size for graduate CSULA English classes was

o

one of the highest in the CSU,

o

nearly 20% higher than the systemwide average

Comparison of SFR

The following analysis makes use of public data available from the CSU APDB data reporting system. Table 1 lists English Department FTES by campus and year for the last four years. The final column provides the average for the period 2002-2005.

Table 1: English Department FTES by Campus and Year

Campus

2002

2003

2004

2005

Average

BAK

700.5

720.9

741.9

743.4

726.7

CHI

788.1

709.7

714.5

720.3

733.2

CI

73.0

180.2

199.4

250.4

175.8

CLX

38.6

33.0

33.6

29.4

33.7

DH

667.2

703.3

750.4

690.5

702.9

EBY

752.3

699.1

696.8

631.1

694.8

FRE

935.2

997.2

879.5

863.9

919.0

FUL

1002.6

996.9

1028.2

1105.7

1033.4

HUM

443.3

416.2

395.6

372.2

406.8

LA

989.8

939.7

914.1

934.9

944.6

LB

1137.5

1205.8

1252.8

1248.7

1211.2

MA

46.6

53.2

52.2

49.2

50.3

NOR

1327.5

1328.6

1236.4

1316.8

1302.3

POM

1090.9

1011.5

913.2

1004.7

1005.1

SAC

1242.9

1235.6

1229.3

1201.1

1227.2

SB

1072.4

1113.2

1160.8

1059.0

1101.4

SD

691.1

640.5

622.0

607.3

640.2

SF

1560.8

1613.3

1662.8

1715.2

1638.0

SJ

913.5

825.4

796.6

844.5

845.0

SLO

1136.6

1126.7

1143.7

1131.2

1134.6

SM

170.1

244.9

231.0

208.9

213.7

SON

503.6

481.0

398.3

379.0

440.5

STA

397.1

408.0

417.9

444.7

416.9

ALL

17681.1

17683.8

17471.1

17552.2

17597.1

Table 2 lists English Department FTEF by campus and year for the last four years. The final column lists the average for the period 2002-2005.

Table 2: English Department FTEF by Campus and Year

Campus

2002

2003

2004

2005

Average

BAK

29.5

31.4

26.4

30.7

29.5

CHI

41.1

36.4

33.7

35.2

36.6

CI

6.2

9.5

13.5

17.0

11.6

CLX

2.7

2.4

2.4

1.9

2.4

DH

31.2

32.3

33.8

29.3

31.7

EBY

41.4

35.2

31.8

32.5

35.2

FRE

54.8

45.8

51.7

49.6

50.5

FUL

48.5

43.4

45.5

50.7

47.0

HUM

25.7

23.5

23.4

23.5

24.0

LA

43.7

40.7

40.1

44.1

42.2

LB

65.3

65.1

61.5

71.8

65.9

MA

3.1

3.1

2.8

2.9

3.0

NOR

68.2

67.7

67.7

66.3

67.5

POM

53.2

51.7

47.7

47.7

50.1

SAC

64.9

63.1

61.2

60.1

62.3

SB

55.8

52.7

50.9

48.8

52.1

SD

33.5

29.8

28.6

30.7

30.7

SF

89.0

88.8

93.1

94.0

91.2

SJ

48.2

46.6

43.9

44.0

45.7

SLO

51.1

50.2

47.0

51.9

50.1

SM

10.1

11.5

9.5

10.5

10.4

SON

25.7

22.6

18.2

22.0

22.1

STA

24.1

24.3

23.8

26.2

24.6

ALL

916.8

877.8

858.1

891.5

886.1

Table 3 lists SFR by campus and year for the last four years. The final column provides an average for 2002-2005 calculated by dividing the total of FTES for 2002-2005 by the total of FTEF for 2002-2005.

 

Table 3: English Department SFR by Campus and Year

Campus

2002

2003

2004

2005

Average

BAK

23.7

23.0

28.1

24.2

24.8

CHI

19.2

19.5

21.2

20.5

20.1

CI

11.8

19.0

14.8

14.7

15.1

CLX

14.3

13.8

14.0

15.5

14.4

DH

21.4

21.8

22.2

23.6

22.2

EBY

18.2

19.9

21.9

19.4

19.8

FRE

17.1

21.8

17.0

17.4

18.3

FUL

20.7

23.0

22.6

21.8

22.0

HUM

17.2

17.7

16.9

15.8

16.9

LA

22.6

23.1

22.8

21.2

22.4

LB

17.4

18.5

20.4

17.4

18.4

MA

15.0

17.2

18.6

17.0

17.0

NOR

19.5

19.6

18.3

19.9

19.3

POM

20.5

19.6

19.1

21.1

20.1

SAC

19.2

19.6

20.1

20.0

19.7

SB

19.2

21.1

22.8

21.7

21.2

SD

20.6

21.5

21.7

19.8

20.9

SF

17.5

18.2

17.9

18.2

18.0

SJ

19.0

17.7

18.1

19.2

18.5

SLO

22.2

22.4

24.3

21.8

22.7

SM

16.8

21.3

24.3

19.9

20.6

SON

19.6

21.3

21.9

17.2

20.0

STA

16.5

16.8

17.6

17.0

16.9

ALL

19.3

20.1

20.4

19.7

19.9

Over the last four years, the CSULA English Department has the third highest SFR in the system, surpassed only by the Bakersfield and San Luis Obispo campuses. Figure 1 shows the SFR for all English Departments in the system.

Figure 1: English Department SFR by Campus

Over the last four years, the English Department SFR has exceeded the systemwide average SFR for English departments by over 12%. The significantly higher than average SFR suggests a mismatch between FTES and FTEF relative to one another. Table 4 lists the rank of each English Department’s FTES and FTEF totals when compared to other campuses in the system. The campus with the highest FTES total is ranked 1, the campus with the second highest total is ranked 2, and so on. The same ranking scheme is used for FTEF. The difference shown in the final column suggests mismatches between FTES and FTEF.

In a perfectly balanced system, the difference for each campus would be zero. As it is, the differences point to significantly imbalances. The difference between the FTES and FTEF ranks for sixteen of the twenty-three campuses is one or zero. For seven campuses the difference is greater than one. The FTES rank for Bakersfield and San Luis Obispo is three less than the FTEF rank for those campuses, suggesting a significant mismatch between FTES and FTEF. That mismatch is further illustrated by the high SFR for both campuses—Bakersfield and San Luis Obispo being the only English departments in the CSU with higher SFRs than Los Angeles over the past four years. The FTES rank for Fullerton, Los Angeles, and Sonoma is two less than the FTEF rank for those campuses, also suggesting a considerable mismatch between FTES and FTEF.

 

Table 4: Rank of Department's FTES Compared to Rank of FTEF

 

Campus

Rank of Department’s FTES in CSU

Rank of Department’s FTEF in CSU

Difference Between FTES Rank and FTEF Rank

BAK

13

16

-3

CHI

12

12

0

CI

21

20

1

CLX

23

23

0

DH

14

14

0

EBY

15

13

2

FRE

10

6

4

FUL

7

9

-2

HUM

19

18

1

LA

9

11

-2

LB

4

3

1

MA

22

22

0

NOR

2

2

0

POM

8

7

1

SAC

3

4

-1

SB

6

5

1

SD

16

15

1

SF

1

1

0

SJ

11

10

1

SLO

5

8

-3

SM

20

21

-1

SON

17

19

-2

STA

18

17

1

SFR related to graduate classes shows a similar mismatch between FTES and FTEF. The 2004 and 2005 APDB data related to graduate classes appears to be in error for the Los Angeles campus (it appears that some upper division classes were reported as graduate classes, greatly inflating the graduate FTES and FTEF and reducing that reported for upper division English classes). However, data from 2003, the last year of reliable data for graduate FTES, shows that SFR related to graduate classes is significantly higher at CSULA. Table 5 lists the graduate FTES, FTEF, and SFR from 2003.

Table 5: FTES, FTEF and SFR for Graduate English Classes (2003)

 


Campus

2003 FTES

2003 FTEF

2003 SFR

BAK

13.6

1.8

7.6

CHI

26.8

3.8

7.1

DH

31.4

4.1

7.7

EBY

42.7

3.7

11.5

FRE

46.6

4.4

10.6

FUL

23.8

3.2

7.4

HUM

22.3

2.5

8.9

LA

28.9

1.8

16.1

LB

60.8

8.4

7.2

NOR

43.2

4.5

9.6

POM

30.9

2.8

11.0

SAC

70.9

7.0

10.1

SB

64.5

7.0

9.2

SD

64.8

8.4

7.7

SF

116.4

14.9

7.8

SJ

48.4

5.6

8.6

SLO

16.4

2.3

7.1

SM

14.1

2.1

6.7

SON

14.2

0.9

15.8

STA

14.3

2.2

6.5

ALL

794.9

91.5

8.7

The SFR for graduate level classes at CSULA is nearly twice the system average, and except for the Sonoma campus is nearly 50% greater than any other campus in the system.

Comparison of Average Class Size

APDB also reports average class size for departments and for instructional level (graduate, upper division, lower division and all). Most interesting are the average class sizes for all classes and the average class sizes for graduate classes. Table 6 lists the average class sizes for all English classes for each campus in the CSU over the past four years.

 

Table 6: Average Class Size for All English Classes by Campus

 

Campus

2002

2003

2004

2005

Average

BAK

24.7

22.5

26.3

21.8

23.8

CHI

24.8

24.7

27

26

25.6

CI

17.7

21.4

20

20.1

19.8

CLX

23.9

27.5

20.8

21

23.3

DH

24.6

24.6

25.6

26.7

25.4

EBY

20.9

22.3

24.4

21.4

22.3

FRE

20.9

21.7

22.5

22.1

21.8

FUL

25.9

26.9

27

26.8

26.7

HUM

20.1

20.2

19.9

18.6

19.7

LA

25.2

25.7

25.8

24.6

25.3

LB

23.1

24.5

24.5

23.1

23.8

MA

21.2

26.6

23.7

22.4

23.5

NOR

23.2

22.8

22.7

23.5

23.1

POM

22.5

21.1

22.8

22.4

22.2

SAC

22.7

22.7

23.3

23.1

23.0

SB

23

23.7

25.9

24.3

24.2

SD

30.2

34.5

35.5

32.9

33.3

SF

21.6

22.3

22.2

21.8

22.0

SJ

22.7

22.6

23.7

24.3

23.3

SLO

26.3

27.9

28.7

25.6

27.1

SM

29

36.9

34

29.8

32.4

SON

21.8

24.9

24.5

23.3

23.6

STA

20.9

21.3

21.6

19.7

20.9

ALL

23.2

23.8

24.5

23.6

23.8

CSULA has the seventh highest average class size in English in the CSU and since the late 1990s the CSULA average has always been higher than the systemwide average, as much as 9% higher and 6% higher on average. Figure 2 shows the relationship between the average class size for a CSULA English class and the average class size for an English class in the CSU system.

Figure 2: Relationship Between CSU and CSULA Average Class Sizes in English

When only graduate classes are considered, CSULA has one of the highest average class sizes in the CSU. Table 7 lists average class sizes for graduate classes in English at each campus in the CSU over the past four years. (While the FTES and FTEF totals for graduate classes at CSULA in 2004 and 2005 are suspect, the average class size figures seem in line with both prior years and with other campuses.)

Table 7: Average Class Sizes for Graduate English Classes in the CSU

 

Campus

2002

2003

2004

2005

BAK

11.7

12.7

16.5

15.5

CHI

10.4

11.6

11.2

10.8

DH

13.8

11.8

14.7

11.7

EBY

15.5

17.6

17.1

16.9

FRE

10

11.6

11.1

11.5

FUL

12.7

11.5

13.7

14.4

HUM

17.3

12.9

8.0

8.1

LA

12.6

16.5

17.7

16.7

LB

11.4

14.5

15.4

14.3

NOR

15.2

15.9

14.9

16.2

POM

10.3

12.7

15.8

14

SAC

14.5

15.5

13.5

12.8

SB

14.7

13.4

14.6

12.7

SD

14.1

17.4

15.4

13.4

SF

13.1

13.4

15.1

14.5

SJ

14.9

13.9

14.2

13.2

SLO

12.5

10

12.4

11.8

SM

16.5

24.5

14

15.3

SON

10.8

24.7

17

14.5

STA

9.8

9.7

9.7

10.3

ALL

13.2

13.9

14.6

13.7

Over the past two years CSULA has the highest average class size for graduate courses in English in the entire system. At about 17 per class, the CSULA average is over 20% higher than the CSU average for graduate classes in English. Figure 3 shows the relationship between the average class size for a CSULA graduate English class and the average class size for an English graduate class in the CSU system.

Figure 3: Relationship Between CSU and CSULA Average Graduate Class Sizes in English