—_________‘ - 5’- tors from Smith-Hughes to Polytechnic funds) using the total figures we find the following: Per pupil cost 88th fiscal year (January 1, 1937) ($132,853 divided by 344 students)................... $415.00 *Per pupil cost 89th fiscal year (January 20,1958) StUdentS)ocoocoocooooocoo From this it is evident that theymx'pupil cost for all purposes is being materially reduced, and that the additional expense necessitated by the increased enrollment is considerably less in proportion than the increased teaching load. Using the enrollment as of January 20, 1938, as a basis; and determining the ** "equivalent fu11‘time registration" by allow; ing one unit of registration fbr each 15 units of instruction for which students are registered, we find the following: Pupil cost per equivalent full-time registration, 89th fiscal year ($167,251.38 divided by 581).........$288.00 In considering costs, whether figured on a basis of actual number of different students enrolled, or on the basis of equivalent full—time registration by counting one unit fbr each 15 for which the men are regis- tered, it must be remembered that the very nature of courses in the state technical and vocational college are based on a high degree of individual instruction. All instruction must be personal and intensive, and the same men responsible for class instruction are likewise responsible for the project operation, which requires almost an equal amount of time. Faculty hours are limited only by the work to be done, and in the livestock and poultry ~divisions, it is not unusual for the instructor to werk from six to seven *Allowance should be made for the fact that enrollment figures in these lines were taken at different times. The current figure includes some winter quarter enrollment not included in the 1936-37 figure. ** See Section III 4 Enrollment