Tools and Tips for Workload Calculations

I’m glad you’re joining me once again; this week, we’ll continue our discussion of the new ARC-PA requirement for workload calculation. Last week, we covered the “what” and the “why,” so now let’s take a look at “how” these calculations can be done.

While ARC-PA does not mandate a calculator, they require that the workload be reasonable and demonstrable. Programs should adopt/document their own workload model, show audits/oversight, and integrate this into their accreditation evidence.

How do other programs do it?

ARC-PA’s publicly available materials do not single out a standardized calculator tool for the PA program workload. However, there are many examples and best practices in higher education that we can consider. Below are some approaches used by other programs.

Please note that I present these only as illustrations; as time passes, we may discover or develop a better option for PA program workload calculation.

• Credit/Contact Hour Model: Assign load based on number of credit hours taught (or contact hours) plus preparation and follow-up time. E.g., 1 credit lecture = 1 load unit; labs might count as 0.7 load units, clinical supervision might be 0.5 per student, etc. (See examples: one policy gives lab hours = 0.67 teaching load credit per hour; one-on-one supervision = 0.5 load credit per student). Texas Tech University+2Pima Community College+2

• Workload Unit (WTU) Model: Some institutions define a full-time faculty load as 12 WTU of direct teaching plus 3 WTU of indirect teaching (preparation, advising, committee). California Faculty Association

• Points or Dashboard Model: Create a dashboard that assigns points for various tasks (teaching, service, research) and calculates each faculty’s total load relative to a standard 100-point full load. This allows factoring differences in course type (large enrollment vs small seminar), new course prep, large clinical supervision loads, etc. American Council on Education

• Percentage FTE Model: Break down expected full-time (1.0 FTE) into buckets: e.g., 40% teaching, 30% clinical supervision, 20% service/admin, 10% scholarship. Then calculate actual assignment for each faculty and show percentage of FTE.

• Hybrid Model: For a PA program in particular, one might combine teaching (didactic), curriculum development, student advising/mentoring, clinical/preceptor site coordination, SCPE (supervised clinical practice experiences) coordination, program administration, committee/service, and scholarship. Assign each task an estimated hour or unit, sum them, and compare the total to the benchmark.

• Spreadsheet/Template Tool: Use Excel or a similar tool to map each faculty/staff member: list tasks, hours or units, comments, total load, and % of full load.

What makes a “good” tool?

Since ARC-PA expects workload assignments to be “within defined institutional and program workload expectations,” we can interpret this to mean that a program must define what “full workload” is at your institution (or use an institutional benchmark) for faculty and staff who support the PA program.

The program must document how each faculty/staff member’s assignment contributes to program operations (teaching, but also clinical supervision, site coordination, preceptor development, student advising, assessment/data analysis, curriculum work, accreditation/admin tasks). The program must show that those assignments are reasonable (i.e., workloads do not consistently exceed full‐load benchmarks without compensation or release time) and sustainable.

To accomplish all of this, a workload calculation tool should be:

• Transparent: clear categories of tasks, explicit unit conversions.

• Fair: recognizes differences in effort (large-enrollment courses, labs vs lecture, clinical supervision vs classroom)

• Flexible: accommodates unique aspects of PA education (e.g., clinical site coordination, preceptor development, remote/telehealth instruction).

• Monitored: Show mechanisms for oversight and adjustment (e.g., when new responsibilities are added, overloads must be accounted for or redistributed).

• Documentable: you can produce a summary that shows faculty have been assigned load, noted when adjustments were made, and that the program monitors and balances loads.

• Linked to full-time target: There is a clear institutional/program definition of “full-load,” so you can interpret each individual’s assignment relative to that target.

Practical guidance for workload calculation

When approaching workload calculation, following these steps can simplify and streamline the process.

1. Define your internal benchmark: e.g., “Full time faculty = 1.0 FTE = 40 hours/week or equivalent 100 units/year.”

2. Catalogue all roles/tasks for faculty/staff supporting the PA program (didactic teaching, labs/sim, telehealth instruction, clinical site coordination, preceptor oversight, student advising, assessment/data, accreditation/self-study, committees/service).

3. Assign units/hours to each role (e.g., 1 credit lecture = X hours prep + Y hours contact; supervision 1 student in SCPE = Z hours; admin coordination = W hours).

4. Summarize actual assignment: For each person, map their workload units/hours, compute % of full load, highlight when above or below benchmark, and how this is managed (release time, overload pay, etc.).

5. Document the process: how often assignments are reviewed, who approves overloads, how release time is recorded, and how adjustments are made when new tasks appear.

I hope that this information has helped you understand the mechanisms behind workload calculation. While it may not feel intuitive to break our calling down into hourly increments, we can make things feel more intuitive by understanding the purpose of doing so and what information ARC-PA wants to learn from our calculations.

Next week’s blog

Next week, we’ll look at one of the more worrisome aspects of the new ARC-PA Standards: the 1500-word limit on SSR responses. I’m inviting a writer friend of mine to give us some advice on coping with this new rule. Be sure to join us then!