The University of Delaware's Office of Institutional Research and Planning conducts a national study of academic productivity and costs. These studies allow for comparisons -- at the departmental level -- with similar departments in similar universities. Because many of our departments are unique in their interdisciplinary approaches, we do not always have ideal comparators. Wherever possible, we have included multiple disciplines to capture the disciplines covered by our departments.

This report presents MSU's submitted scores and comparisons between MSU's departments and the closest comparator matches among participating institutions. All MSU data are based on Fall 2013(instructional data) and FY 2014 (fiscal data) compiled in the Office of Planning and Analysis in January 2014. Please see the Delaware Study of Instructional Costs and Productivity Definitions for more information.

Report Format

  1. The first Classification of Instructional Program (CIP) code listed in the top left box indicates the code used to submit MSU's departmental data. The remaining CIP code(s) indicate the comparison discipline(s).
  2. The first column describes the measure of cost or productivity. The second column presents the mean for participating research institutions within the comparison CIP code, printed in bold. If there is more than one comparison CIP code, the bold column represents a weighted mean score across the disciplines. The first column that appears in bold print serves as the benchmark. The remaining columns on all tables detail MSU's data and department scores relative to the benchmarks. Shaded columns present prior years' data. Please note that ranks can change because of changes in the comparators' data, the comparison group, or the MSU department.
  3. Relative scores are calculated as follows: MSU department score/benchmark score. A score below 100% indicates the MSU department scored lower than the mean for research institutions.
  4. No relative score is calculated when the comparison group mean is zero or all MSU departments score zero.
  5. Ranks within MSU are calculated for the MSU department scores relative to the benchmarks. Highest relative scores are ranked 1. Departments with no score or a zero in the comparison group are excluded from the rankings.
  6. Abbreviations:
    • SCH = Student Credit Hours
    • FTE = Full Time Equivalent
    • T/TT = Tenured/Tenure-Track
    • OCS = Organized Course Section
  7. Faculty FTE and teaching productivity are reported for several categories:
    • Total FTE is all Tenured/Tenure-Track FTE, visiting faculty FTE (not separately shown in this report), and Adjunct FTE as recorded in Banner, plus graduate student FTE calculated according to the definitions. Non-instructional FTE is included in this number. For example, the Math department had 48.75 FTE on the payroll as faculty or teaching graduate students.
    • T/TT Total FTE is the full FTE of tenured/tenure-track faculty recorded in Banner, including Extension, Research, and Experiment Station faculty on the tenure-track. Again using Math as an example, 27 of the above FTE were T/TT.
    • T/TT Instr FTE is the full FTE of tenured/tenure-track faculty minus any non-instructional component, as identified by fiscal program through which the faculty is paid. This accounts for faculty with course buyouts from grants or administrative duties or tenured/tenure-track Extension, Experiment Station, and Research Faculty. Math had almost two separately budgeted T/TT FTE faculty that fall, leaving 25.06 instructional T/TT FTE.
    • Adj Faculty Instr FTE is the full FTE of adjunct faculty. For adjuncts teaching in more than one department, FTE is split according to the funding split. Math had 10.27 FTE Adjunct faculty.
    • TAs (cred. bear.) Instr FTE is initially calculated as the number of course sections taught by graduate students, divided by 4 (Delaware's definition of 1.0 FTE). Non-credit bearing TAs are not reported here. This group is responsible for grading, non-credit labs, etc. If a department shows graduate students on the instructional payroll but assigns no credit bearing courses to them, their FTE is counted and reported separately, however they are included in the total for all instructional faculty below. Math had 11.48 FTE TAs teaching credit-bearing sections, calculated according to the number of sections taught.
    • All Faculty Instructional FTE is the sum of instructional FTEs of Tenured/Tenure-Track, Adjunct, and Visiting (not separately reported here) Faculty, credit-bearing TAs, and non-credit bearing TAs (not separately reported here). The final section of the report is essentially a weighted average of all instructional faculty categories, not the sum of all categories. In the Math example, there were no visiting faculty or non-credit bearing TAs, so the sum of the T/TT, Adjunct, and credit bearing TA FTE yields the total instructional FTE of 46.81.
  8. Expenditure data will not match the KPIs. Please see the complete definitions of those reports for clarification.

Please direct any questions to Becca Belou in the Office of Planning and Analysis, x4339 or