APSU Course Enrollment Cap Review Process
How to Use This Roadmap: Work through each step in sequence. For decision points, click YES or NO to display context-specific guidance on the right. Use that guidance to document your department's rationale.
Do physical, safety, or equipment constraints limit the cap?
Clinical: 6–10 | Lab Sciences: ≤25 | Writing-Intensive: 15–20
Studio: 5–15 | Online: ~20 (Undergrad), 8–15 (Grad)
Are pedagogical best practices considered?
Adjust based on resources or student demand?
Guidance Panel
Select a step or decision branch to view detailed documentation requirements and APSU-specific guidance.
Step 1: Scheduled Review
Use your department's curriculum or assessment committee to lead a structured review of enrollment caps on a three-year cycle.
Step 2: Identify Level & Modality
Document the course level (1000–8000) and modality (CON, WEB, HYB, CLN, PRA). Pull DSIR data for historical enrollments and fill rates.
Step 3: Hard Limits & Safety
Apply hard limits from fire code, accreditation, and safety requirements. These limits override other considerations when they are lower than proposed caps.
Step 4: Instruction Method Guidelines
Use the 2024–2025 Faculty Senate Academic Red Committee Report guideline ranges for your course type as the starting point. Adjust within that range to balance quality and practicality.
Step 5: DSIR Data Comparison
Review enrollment patterns for similar courses (level, modality, discipline) to ensure your caps are consistent and data-informed.
Step 6: Finalize & Align
Finalize the cap and record your rationale, including constraints, pedagogy, workload, student access, and DSIR evidence. Ensure alignment with APSU Policy 2:001.
Decision: Constraints Apply
Physical space, safety requirements, or equipment availability set a hard maximum. Your cap should not exceed these limits unless an institutional exception is granted.
Decision: No Hard Constraints
Fire code and physical/technological constraints are not the primary drivers. Focus on pedagogy, workload, and access to determine appropriate caps.
Decision: Pedagogical Consideration
The course requires intensive feedback, high interaction, or specialized learning activities (e.g., writing-intensive, labs, studio). Use smaller guideline ranges to protect quality.
Decision: Limited Pedagogical Constraints
Course structure does not rely heavily on individualized feedback or intensive interaction. Caps can be shaped more by resources and student access needs.
Rationale: Resources/Workload
Faculty time, grading load, or available support staff cannot support larger enrollments without harming quality. A lower cap is warranted and should be documented.
Rationale: Student Access
Students face barriers enrolling, and you can maintain quality at a slightly higher cap. Consider a modest, documented increase to support student progression.