Arizona Regents says statewide course names will cost $67M (renaming college courses)

[The Straight Story]

Arizona Regents says statewide course names will cost $67M
by Connor Mendenhall - SFPA Contributor on January 27, 2011

I nearly blindsided a longboarder on my way to class as I read today’s Daily Wildcat article on common course numbering. (Protip: don’t read and walk). A quick summary: the Arizona Students Association called for identical identifiers between core courses at state universities and community colleges, the legislature passed a bill instructing the Board of Regents to figure out something among themselves, ABOR convened a committee, prepared a few cost estimates, and ultimately picked the cheapest option: creating a new, separate set of numbers to identify classes across Arizona colleges. And what a deal it is. Watch out for rolling bros while you read this part, because you might be blindsided, too:

ASA used research from other institutions to recommend the common course numbering system, which would create a universal set of course prefixes and numbers throughout the state. For instance, an English 101 course would be identified the same way at all Arizona institutions.


Regents instead selected the Shared Unique Number system to implement, citing cost as their main concern. The common course numbering system would cost an estimated $67,059,931 to implement, while the estimated cost of the Shared Unique Number system is $4,689,053 to implement, according to an executive summary from the Arizona Board of Regents Academic Affairs Committee.

How much does it cost to get a room full of academics to agree to call first year English “Freshman composition?” About as much as Governor Brewer’s entire proposed budget cut for the University of Arizona—$67 million dollars.



http://www.studentfreepress.net/archives/6436

[Karia]

1. It is the software

Getting academics to agree on anything is dicey, but in this case, it is most likely the software. Many colleges and universities have contracts that require them to hire the software company (at very high rates, little of which is ever seen by the techs who do the actual work) to make any changes.

[LiberalFighter]

3. You are probably right.

Unless they utilize one database for all of the universities and colleges it is more difficult.

And if all of the universities and colleges involved are under the auspice of the State of Arizona then there should only be one common resource.

Otherwise, if it is too expensive then leave it alone until they can figure it out.

[NashVegas]

4. Isn't That Just Awesome?!?

All hail the paperless office.

[LiberalFighter]

2. All of the Arizona Regents and others involved need to be fired.

It shouldn't even cost anywhere near $4 million.

Just tell each of the universities and colleges what the identifiers they need to use.

[Xithras]

5. You also have to look into SLO articulation.

All courses are not created equal. University #1 may have one set of educational requirements for their English 101 course, while Community College #2 has a completely different set. That community college English 101 course may only meet the requirements for an English 50 course at the university.

So you have to compare, college by college, all of the Student Learning Outcomes for all of the courses. Then you have to get EVERYONE to agree what English 101 SHOULD be to establish the baseline requirements, and renumber all of the various English courses in relation to that baseline.

That kind of work requires a LOT of human time (thousands of hours per college) which drives the price up.

After you get them all synchronized, you'll need to work out a system to keep them that way. English 101 may teach "X" nowadays, but what happens in five years when the English department in University #2 decides to alter their local SLO's a bit and instead emphasize a different version of "X"? You'll need to have a permanent system in place that can reevaluate the new course content to determine whether it still qualifies as a transferrable English 101 course credit.

[Karia]

6. According to the pdf report

They will need to hire at least two more people to work on the software.

Another big expense comes from a part of the plan under which they temporarily take some of the tenured profs out of the classroom to work on making courses equivalent (this IS time-consuming, by the way) and hire a lot of temporary adjunct faculty. Adjunct faculty salaries (and benefits?) are the main "faculty" portion of the expense.