Calibrating Student Workload

As per the Course and Subject Design (Coursework) Procedure, an exemption approved by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning) is now required for subjects that do not meet these requirements. The exemption is required for all subjects in Session 2 2024 and onwards and will only be granted in limited circumstances for subjects with explicit professional accreditation assessment requirements or prescribed Work-integrated learning (WIL) hours.

Process for requesting an exemption:

Please download and fill in the following exemption form:

Workload Exemption Request

This form will need review and approval by your:

• Head of School, and
• Associate Dean (Academic)

with final approval by the Pro Vice-Chancellor (Learning and Teaching).

The exemption is valid for 12 months (from the date of approval) or until a professionally accredited course undergoes review/revision.

Introduction

Benchmarking across the sector has been completed to provide an evidence-informed approach based on synchronous and asynchronous learning experiences and assessment workload. It is important to consider comparability across subjects to consider the whole student workload (i.e., full time study of 4 subjects = 40 hours). This metric includes all the expected learning activities (including the preparation for and completion of assessment). As there may be differentiation between subjects and student cohorts, academic judgement will be vital in setting student workload (e.g., in Work Integrated Learning subjects). As a result, there are often subjects where the assessment workload is different and variation is acceptable, but the total hours of student workload still need to be factored in.

In a report to Academic Senate (2010), The Charles Sturt Subject Working Party (26 May Late paper, item 4.2), determined that it was very important to students that they have clearly defined study expectations, as it gives them a framework to help them manage their time (p.9). A Charles Sturt 8 point Subject was designed with the expectation that a student will normally spend between 140-160 hours engaged in specified learning and assessment activities (Recommendation 3, p.6). It was also noted that Student Administration preferred the student workload be calculated as hours/week, as this aligned with reporting requirements for Centrelink. Recent external benchmarking completed by DLT has found that hours/week for calibrating student workload is used widely across the sector.

Time-based Model

Student workload for an 8 point subject translates into a weekly workload of 10 hours/week (i.e., full- time student workload of 4 subjects = 40 hours/week). This includes ALL learning activities and assessment (preparation and completion).

• Assessment workload for an 8-point subject should be approximately 30% of the learning hours, or 42-48 hours (Bloxham & Boyd, 2007). However, the learning time allowed for assessment may scale to the capability of the students to allow additional time for students to develop their capacity for academic skills and discipline knowledge. In this model this translates to approximately 3 hours/week.
• External benchmarking shows that 3 hours/week for the subject should be contact learning experiences (synchronous/F2F).
• The remaining 4 hours would be dedicated to self-directed learning experiences (asynchronous).

Table One – Indicative student workload for an 8 point subject (hours/week)

Lab-based subjects must reflect the practical elements of the planned learning in the Subject Learning Outcomes.

Assessment workload

Word-based model

For some disciplines word count is an appropriate method of calculating assessment workload for subjects. The following table provides indicative word counts by level of subject, using the generic essay word count:

Table Two – Indicative word counts by credit point and level

As not all assessment items will be essay-based the following equivalencies table provides a more structured approach to calibrating student workload. The equivalences may vary according to the complexity of the assignment and other criteria outlined above.

Table Three – Suggested equivalents for essay word counts (assessment type aligned with CDAP categories)

Notional learning hours for assessment could also be scaled based on the complexity of learning. The volume or number of assessment tasks would be consistent, but more hours could be allocated to students to encompass preparation and completion of the assessments to acknowledge the developing expertise, knowledge, and skills of the students.

Table Four – Example of notional learning hours for different levels of study

It is vital to obtain feedback from students in relation to the time spent on assessment tasks (preparing and completing), as this will enable Subject Coordinators to utilise an evidence- informed approach to refine the task according to the workload required to complete the task. For example, time spent preparing for an assessment task (study for a test or researching an essay topic) should be considered part of the student workload. A quick Padlet or Mentimeter survey of your students regarding the time they spent on a specific assessment activity could be used to provide this feedback.

References

Bloxham, S and Boyd, P., 2007. Developing Effective Assessment in Higher Education: a practical guide, England: Open University Press.

Charles Sturt University (2010). The CSU Subject. Report to Academic Senate from the CSU Subject Working Party (26 May 2010; Item 4.2; Late paper).

See full paper:

CS Calibrating Student Workload Framework PDF

Guidelines for Calibrating Student Workload in Non-Professionally Accredited Work-integrated Learning (WIL) subjects

This paper provides guidelines for non-professionally accredited work-integrated learning (WIL) subjects, as an addition to the Calibrating Student Workload.

These guidelines are positioned as a useful tool for staff when considering and developing WIL learning experiences.

See full paper:

Calibrating Student Workload in Non-Professionally Accredited Work-integrated Learning (WIL) subjects