DOCUMENT RESUME HE 031 985 ED 430 426 Jewett, Frank AUTHOR BRIDGE: A Simulation Model for Comparing the Costs of TITLE Expanding a Campus Using Distributed Instruction versus Classroom Instruction. Documentation and Instructions. California State Univ., Seal Beach. Office of the INSTITUTION Chancellor. National Inst. on Postsecondary Education, Libraries, and SPONS AGENCY Lifelong Learning (ED/OERI), Washington, DC.; EDUCAUSE, Washington, DC.; State Higher Education Executive Officers Association. 1998-00-00 PUB DATE NOTE 27p. R309f60088 CONTRACT Chancellor's Office, California State University, P.O. Box AVAILABLE FROM 3842, Seal Beach, CA 90740-7842; Tel: 562-985-9156. Non-Classroom (055) Guides PUB TYPE MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE College Instruction; Colleges; *Computer Simulation; DESCRIPTORS *Computer Software; Cost Effectiveness; *Cost Estimates; Costs; *Distance Education; Educational Finance; Educational Planning; Higher Education; Models; *Traditional Schools; Universities ABSTRACT These instructions describe the use of BRIDGE, a computer software simulation model that is designed to compare the costs of expanding a college campus using distributed instruction (television or asynchronous network courses) versus the costs of expanding using lecture/lab type instruction. The model compares the projected operating and capital costs of the two types of campuses over a period of years, with cost projections based on the values of approximately 100 parameters that describe the general context of the simulation, and the resource requirements and associated costs of the lecture/lab and mediated campuses. The instructions provide a step-by-step guide to using the BRIDGE software, including the adjustment of default settings. Five appendixes provide information on the implications of various combinations of remote sites and campus course-sharing options, average section enrollment versus average annual enrollment, faculty salary calculations, distribution of faculty effort, and BRIDGE the web site. (MDM) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** BRIDGE: A Simulation Model for Comparing the Costs of Expanding a Campus using Distributed Instruction versus Classroom Instruction Documentation and Instructions PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION BEEN GRANTED BY CENTER (ERIC) document has been reproduced as Cr<his Frank Jewett received from the person or organization originating it. CA State Univ 0 Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) Points of view or opinions stated in this document do not necessarily represent 1 official OERI position or policy. 'The BRIDGE model is a component of a project entitled Case Studies in Evaluating the Benefits and Costs of Mediated :Instruction and Distributed Learning. The project is funded through a Field-Initiated Studies Educational Research I"Gpintby the National Institute on Postsecondary Education, Libraries, and Lifelong Learning, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education (grant award no. R309f60088) with additional funding prciVfdeil by Information Resources and Technology in the Chancellor's Office of the California State University. The project is jointly sponsored by the California State University, the National Learning-Infrastructure Initiative of EDUCAUSE, and the State Higher Education Executive Officers. Frank Jewett, Director Research Projects, Information Resources and Technology Chancellor's Office, California State University NA P.O. Box 3842, Seal Beach, California 90740-7842 telephone: 562-985-9156 , e-mail <[email protected]> Copyright ©1998 California State University BEST COPY AVAILABLE 2 BRIDGE 2 Acknowledgments The BRIDGE model is a component of a project entitled Case Studies in Evaluating the Benefits and Costs of Mediated Instruction and Distributed Learning. The project is funded through a Field-Initiated Studies Educational Research Grant by the National Institute on Postsecondary Education, Libraries, and Lifelong Learning, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education (grant award no. R309f60088) with additional funding provided by Information Resources and Technology in the Chancellor's Office of the California State University. The project is jointly sponsored by the California State University, the National Learning Infrastructure Initiative of EDUCAUSE, and the State Higher Education Executive Officers. The idea for the BRIDGE model arose from a conversation with Edmund Cranch, Senior Fellow, New England Board of Higher Education. The structure of the model is based upon the project director's earlier work on the costs of year-round operation (Year-Round Operation and the California State University, CSU, Long Beach 1992). The programming and design of BRIDGE was accomplished by Désirée Davis. Sam Smolker assisted with final programming modifications. Alicia Campbell installed the program at the benefit cost project website. An early version of BRIDGE was discussed at a systemwide meeting of the CSU Vice President and Provosts (Sacramento, October 1997). Versions of it have also been presented at several professional meetings: the National Learning Infrastructure Initiative (New Orleans, January 1998), Syllabus (Pomona and Sonoma, CA, March and July. 1998 respectively), the State Higher Education Financial Officers (Newport Beach, August 1998), the CSU Media Directors (Tiberon, August 1998), and the Western Interstate Cooperative for Educational Telecommunications (Reno, October 1998). These discussions and presentations provided an invaluable sounding board that importantly affected the direction of the model's development. Russell Utterberg's discussions with the author concerning how to initially structure the simulation were very helpful. Several individuals have reviewed BRIDGE and made valuable suggestions regarding its content and format, in particular, Frank Young, Mike McLean, and Gordon Smith (all from Information Resources and Technology in the CSU Chancellor's Office), Chuck Schneebeck from the Center for Distributed Learning at Sonoma State University, and last, but by no means least, members of the project's Steering, Review, and Oversight Committee: Tony Bates, Director of Distance Education and Technology, University of British Columbia; Dennis Jones, President of NCHEMS; Jim Mingle, Executive Director of SHEEO; Carol Twigg, Vice President (emeritus), EDUCAUSE, and Tom West, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Information Resources and Technology, CSU Chancellor's Office who not only provided critical comments and suggestions but also encouragement and support for the effort. Frank Jewett BRIDGE 3 Contents page Acknowledgments 2 BRIDGE - Documentation and Instructions 4 Parameters 1. 4 Default Values Main Page - Changing Parameters 2. 5 Final enrollment Distribution Course Sharing Course Enrollment Broadcast Course Specifications Asynchronous Network Course Specifications Graph File Menu 3. 8 Parameters Menu 4. 8 Broadcast Course Costs Operating 8 Broadcast Course Costs Capital 9 Asynchronous Network Course Costs - Production and Maintenance 10 Asynchronous Network Course Costs Computer Related 12. Asynchronous Network Course Costs Capital 12 Student Support Costs 13 Budget Expenditures 14 Campus Growth 16 View and Print Menus 5. 17 Appendix A Notes on Remote Sites and Course Sharing 18 Appendix B Average Section Enrollment in Broadcast Courses vs. Average Annual Enrollment in Asynchronous Network Courses 19 Appendix C How a Fully Loaded Faculty Salary is Calculated 20 Appendix D Distribution of Faculty Effort 21 Appendix E Materials from the BRIDGE website 22 4 BRIDGE 4 Documentation and Instructions BRIDGE is a simulation model designed to compare the costs of expanding a campus using distributed instruction (television or asynchronous network courses) vs. expanding using lecture/lab type instruction. The model compares the projected operating and capital costs of two campuses over a period of years. Both campuses are assumed to begin with same initial FTE, academic programs, and physical facilities. Both grow by the same amount of FTE over a given period of years. One campus accommodates all of its FTE in classroom-type (lecture/lab) instruction. The other campus accommodates its FTE in a changing mix of classroom, television/broadcast, and asynchronous network type courses. The values for initial (beginning) FTE, ending FTE, and the length of the growth or simulation period are specified by the user. The final mix of FTE for the mediated campus among classroom, broadcast and asynchronous courses is also specified by the user. 1. Parameters The cost simulations produced by BRIDGE are based upon the values of approximately 100 parameters that describe the general context of the simulation (time period, growth, and mix of courses) and the resource requirements and associated costs of the "lecture-lab" and the "mediated" campuses. Users are encouraged to modify the parameter values: (a) to better describe their own particular situation and (b) to experiment with the model. Some of the more interesting parameter values from an experimental or "what if" perspective can be changed using the arrow buttons on the Main Page of the model as described below. The "Parameters" menu provides access to the other parameters not shown on the Main Page. Default Values BRIDGE contains a set of default parameter values that serve as a starting place for the model simulations. The default values are derived from a wide range of sources, some represent CSU systemwide averages, e.g., expenditures per FTE as shown in the "Budget Expenditures" window; others are based upon one or two observations, e.g., number of studio classrooms per control room as shown in the "Broadcast Course Capital Costs" window; and some are estimated from a set of assumptions that seem reasonable, e.g., the average number of hours per week a student enrolled in an asynchronous network course spends on-line as shown in the worksheet accessed via "Asynchronous Network Course Production and Maintenance Costs" window. None of the default values should be interpreted as representing policy or a recommendation regarding the "correct" value of the parameter. At best, the default values represent observations of actual situations, at the least they represent estimates derived from a set of assumptions about which reasonable individuals might differ. 5 BRIDGE 5 2. Main Page - Changing Parameters (The following materials should be read while viewing the main screen of the BRIDGE model.) The Main Page of BRIDGE appears following the BRIDGE title page and an introductory page entitled "What BRIDGE Does." The Main Page consists of a set of colored panels, a graph, and a set of pull-down menus. The contents of each is described below. Final Enrollment Distribution (red panel) The left side arrows on this panel determine the final distribution between lecture/lab courses and mediated courses for the mediated campus. For example, a 50/50 percent split between lecture/lab and mediated means that at the end of the simulation period, half of the campus FTE will be taught in lecture/lab format and half will be mediated. (This could also be interpreted as a campus with all of its courses offered as a 50/50 mix of mediated and lecture components). The right side arrows determine the ending distribution of the mediated courses between broadcast and asynchronous network. The number shown is the percentage of the total campus FTE to be accommodated by each type. Through the use of these four arrows, any final combination of lecture/lab, broadcast and asynchronous network courses can be specified. Additional enrollment specifications including initial FTE, ending FTE and the length of the simulation period can be accessed in the Parameters menu under "Campus Growth." Course Sharing (dark green panel) # of campuses sharing: This is the number of campuses that have established an arrangement for sharing their mediated courses. The sharing arrangement is assumed to be completely reciprocal, i.e. each campus is providing the same number of courses to the sharing arrangement and that all mediated courses are being shared. For broadcast courses, this means that each sharing campus originates an equal percentage of courses (e.g., for 2 campuses sharing, 50 percent; for 3 campuses sharing 33 percent, etc.) and receives all the courses being broadcast from the other sharing campuses. For asynchronous network courses, each sharing campus contributes equally to the start-up and maintenance cost of all courses and all courses are then available to students at each sharing campus. (Appendix A contains a discussion of course sharing in conjunction with remote sites). Course Enrollment (purple panel) Average Section Enrollment (BC): The average section size of broadcast courses. Enrollment over the maximum studio enrollment is accommodated at remote sites or in on-campus classrooms receiving the broadcast. Average section enrollment is used to determine how many broadcast course sections 6 BRIDGE 6 are needed each year to accommodate the specified amount of FTE in broadcast courses. Average Annual Enrollment (AN): The average annual enrollment of asynchronous network courses. This is used to determine how many asynchronous network courses must be developed each year to accommodate the specified amount of FTE in asynchronous network courses. Note: Average section enrollment for BC courses may be less than average annual enrollment because some BC courses may be repeated during the year. Since Broadcast costs are based on the number of broadcasts, average section enrollment is the appropriate parameter. An Asynchronous Network course that is produced and made available on a server does not have a section enrollment, only an annual enrollment. Thus a BC average section size of 50 is not equivalent to an annual AN course enrollment of 50. (Appendix B provides more discussion of this topic.) Broadcast Course Specifications (dark red panel) % of Position for preparing and presenting course: This is the percentage of a full-time faculty position assigned for preparing and presenting a broadcast course. If a full-time position teaches eight regular classroom courses per year on average, 1/8 or 12.5% percent of a position is allocated to a single course section. The percentage of a position allocated to a broadcast course may be different for several reasons. An instructor teaching a live broadcast class may need more time to prepare material. This can translate to an instructor being assigned fewer courses to teach in a given term or year, e.g., 7 or 6 or 5 or instead of 8 courses. Such assignments are represented by a ... larger percentage of a position, e.g., 17 if the annual course load is 6. The percent of position value entered here is applied to the fully-loaded faculty salary to determine the average instructor cost for preparing and presenting a single broadcast course. (Appendix C contains a description of how "fully loaded faculty salary" is calculated.) Note: The "percent of position" value entered here does not include time spent outside of class interacting with students or evaluating student assignments or assigning grades. This latter cost is covered under the Parameters menu item "Student Support Costs" discussed below. Distribution Cost: The average transmission cost of a course, this could be for satellite transmission, ITFS, local cable feed or two-way compressed video. (At the campus level, current means of television delivery are unlikely to provide sufficient channels to accommodate all the broadcast courses necessary to accommodate, e.g., 10,000 FTE. Additional BC course specifications are found in the Parameters menu under - Operating" and "Broadcast Course Costs Capital." "Broadcast Course Costs 7 BRIDGE 7 Asynchronous Network (Course) Specifications (green panel) Course Production Cost: The cost of designing, developing, and producing an asynchronous network course. This parameter includes a broad range of costs for subject matter faculty, instructional design professionals, media professionals, computing specialists, copyright clearance, and specialized equipment (e.g., for ADA compliance). (It could also be interpreted as an initial licensing fee for courseware provided by a third-party.) Basically, course production cost represents the initial costs involved in making an asynchronous course available to students. This parameter value can be changed from the Main Page. A detailed estimate of this amount can also be made using an ancillary workbook that is accessed via the "Asynchronous Network Course Costs Production and Maintenance" option under the parameters menu. In general, asynchronous network course production cost should not be set above $1 million. % work off-campus: The amount of computer work students in asynchronous courses do on their own computers with their own internet service providers. Students who own computers may also use campus computers. If, for example, 75 percent of the students owned computers, only 70 percent of their computer work may be off-campus. Student computer work done on-campus is assumed to be in open computer access facilities on equipment provided by the campus. Student computer work includes time spent connected to the server as well as time working off-line, writing papers, working on spreadsheets or any other work that would involve the use of a computer by the student. Additional AN course specifications are found in the Parameters menu under "Asynchronous Network Course Costs Production and Maintenance," Asynchronous Network Course Costs Computer Related, and "Asynchronous Network Course Costs Capital." 8 BRIDGE 8 Graph (blue panel) Clicking one of the three buttons on this panel sets the graph to display Operating (support) Costs, Capital Costs, or Total (both) Costs. Capital Costs are somewhat difficult to see on the display because they are small relative to Operating Costs. The title of the graph changes to indicate which of the three cost alternatives is being displayed. The graph displays the number of years in the simulation period along the horizontal axis. The beginning and ending values of FTE are displayed at the bottom of the graph. 3. File Menu About this Program - Returns to the title page. Getting Started Returns to the introductory page "What BRIDGE Does." Initiates a "save" prompt and quits the program. Quit 4. Parameters Menu Parameters Menu: Broadcast Course Costs - Operating The parameters in this window relate to the operating costs involved in producing and distributing a live course in a studio classroom. In-Studio Operating Costs Studio cost/hour (including staff): The average hourly cost for a studio classroom. Factors included here are the cost of a videographer or other technical staff, lease costs (or equivalent) for the studio, basic studio operating expenses (electricity, etc.) and overhead. The course cost estimate is based upon a three semester unit course requiring 45 hours of transmission time. Engineer cost/hour: The average hourly rate for control room functions including set-up, testing, and establishing connections; monitoring, and maintaining the transmission of all programming originating from the studios within the purview of the control room. Other costs: Any other costs or adjustments for a single BC course section. Remote Site Costs These are the costs involved in the operation of off-campus sites that receive broadcast transmissions. Remote Sites?: "Yes" indicates that remote sites are used to accommodate all student enrollments beyond the maximum studio enrollment. "No" indicates that all enrollment above the studio enrollment is receiving the broadcast in campus buildings. (See Appendix A for discussion of Remote Sites in conjunction with course sharing.) 9 BRIDGE 9 Monitor pay/hour: The average hourly rate paid to a site monitor to maintain the site while it is receiving a transmission. Site Lease Cost: The average cost of leasing a site for 45 hours per term (three hours a week for one semester). If the site is used for several courses, the amount entered is the pro rata share of the total lease costs attributed to one course. Enrollment/site: The average course enrollment at a single remote site. Note: Default Settings in the Parameters Menu To facilitate user experimentation without losing the model's "starting place," each window in the Parameters Menu has three buttons that relate to parameter default values as follows: SET AS DEFAULT This button sets the parameter values displayed in the window as the defaults. DEFAULT This button resets the parameters in the window to the previously selected default values (these are either the user determined values selected by using the "set as default" button or the original defaults programmed into BRIDGE). RESTORE DEFAULTS This button restores the original default values programmed into BRIDGE, i.e., it over-rides values selected by the "set as default" button. Parameters Menu: Broadcast Course Costs - Capital The parameters in this window relate to the capital costs necessary to provide facilities to produce and distribute a television based course. Studio conversion cost: The cost of converting a classroom into a broadcast- capable studio including all needed equipment. (The default value is based upon an estimate of CSU conversion costs.) Although conversion of regular classrooms is a fairly common practice, an estimate of new construction cost could also be used here. Control room cost: The cost of converting space into a control room capable of monitoring the broadcast signal of multiple studio classrooms. (The default value is based upon an estimate of CSU conversion costs.) Again, an estimate of new construction costs could also be used here. Maximum studio enrollment: The average number of stations available in studio classrooms. All BC course section enrollment over this number is assumed to be accommodated either at remote sites or in other rooms on campus. 1 0