Provision of Courses

The first FTE measure we need to consider is one based on the inputs made available to ODL students relative to those provided in conventional schools, colleges or universities. These inputs are normally measured in terms of course, subject or module enrolments, since those studying through ODL may not have as heavy a course load (i.e. take as many courses per year) as their counterparts in full-time education. Regardless of whether students make use of what is available to them or complete the courses they have registered for, ODL institutions would argue that they have incurred the bulk of expenditure per student through the provision of course materials and the scheduling of tutorials.(br> STEPS in applying this method: EQUATION:	FTEPC 	= 	TSEODL ÷ (ASEFT × YFT) Where:	FTEPC  	=	FTE Measure – Provision of Courses 	TSEODL	=	Total Course/Subject/Module Enrolments by ODL students	ASEFT  	=	Average Course/Subject/Module Enrolments by Full-Time students	YFT 	=	Number of Years FT Students must study before sitting exam
 * 1) 	Identify the total number of course/subject/module enrolments by ODL students.
 * 2) 	Identify average number of courses/subjects/modules taken by FT students per year.
 * 3) 	Multiply b above by the number of years required to complete the course in conventional education.
 * 4) 	Divide a by c.

Exercise 8.1 (Insert link to common worksheet for all exercises in this unit.)

Sample Answer (Insert link to common answer sheet for all exercises in this unit.)

The main advantage of this approach to establishing FTE is that it is straightforward and easy to calculate from data that is readily available from the ODL institution’s own student records database. However, it does not account for student drop-outs. In general, the rate of early termination (drop-out) is higher for courses offered through ODL, though it can also be quite high in traditional institutions. Likewise, in many cases, the rate of examination failure among ODL students is higher than for those in conventional education, but this approach does not account for this difference in the two modes of provision.