Various aspects of faculty workload are reviewed, with emphasis on definitions of workload and on major problems in developing workload formulas. Attention is also given to the erosion of parietal policies, the quality versus quantity issue, and the effect of collective bargaining on workloads. For most instructors, the important factors are the number of credit or contact hours assigned per week and the number of students in each class, with credit or contact hours having greater significance to the faculty. Although workload formulas have been developed, they still approximate the number of weekly contact hours. Hourly loads are lower today than they were in the 1950's and earlier. Faculties object strenuously to the practice of equating workload to quantitative criteria, particularly number of contact hours, student-faculty ratios, and average class size. Parietal regulations are still found in many statements of college policies, and are based on the principle that teaching is a full-time occupation. In light of the strong tradition equating low or moderate workloads with quality, administrators face a formidable task in their efforts to increase the loads. Within the limits set by state laws and state administrative regulations, faculty are participating in the initial determination and subsequent reappraisal of workloads, as recommended by the 1969 AAUP Statement of Faculty Workload. New teaching methods and technologies have made it necessary to modify the faculty load formulas. Faculty fear that the major purpose of introducing the new teaching/learning modes is to increase faculty productivity, which will, in turn, lead to the use of fewer instructors. (DB)