Student Experience Survey Spring 2009 Report

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
South Dakota Accountability System – Year 2 School Performance Index Guyla Ness September 10, 2013.
Advertisements

2006 Student Opinion Survey Summary November 2006 GUSTO Town Meeting on Accreditation & Assessment Genesee Community College Presented by: Carol Marriott.
Student Satisfaction Geneva College Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI: Noel-Levitz) 1997 to 2013.
Student Profile Brooklyn College Office of Institutional Planning, Research, and Assessment 2010.
STUDENT SATISFACTION AND DEMOGRAPHICS SURVEY 2013 Office of Institutional Planning and Department of Student Affairs.
2007 Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey Bruce Schultz, Dean of Students and Associate Vice Chancellor for Student Development Michael Votava, Associate.
The Results of The Current Curriculum Student Survey Spring 2002 Department of Planning and Research.
What is the Focus?  Round 2 Analysis observed trends in student perception after first survey.  Allows us to recognize improvements of lower measures.
ACCOUNTS It is important to activate ( and check your WIU regularly. Financial Aid information, mid-term and semester grades,
ARCC /08 Reporting Period Prepared by: Office of Institutional Research & Planning February 2010.
Centennial Elementary School Parent Opinion Inventory 1 Ocean City Public Schools Parent Opinion Inventory Summary Analysis November 2007 Prepared by the.
Why do so many students choose to start their college education at NOVA? Open Access – no SAT scores or high school grades required for admission (18 years.
What is Dual Enrollment?. Dual Enrollment courses are offered to Bedford County high school students through Central Virginia Community College. A student.
APPLICATION POOL Fall 2011 Applications Received : FTF – 15,483 Number Admitted – FTF – 9,352 Number Enrolled – FTF – 2,925 Average GPA and Test Scores.
Student Satisfaction Survey Administered to 213 randomly selected lecture & lab courses, including courses from all campuses and all levels (response.
Spring 2013 Student Opinion Survey (SOS) Take it Seriously… YOUR OPINION COUNTS!!!
10/17/2015 State Board of Education 1 ANNUAL REPORT ON GIFTED AND TALENTED EDUCATION Academic Year
ACUHO-IEBI Resident Study 2009 Highlights from the Executive Summary.
Brooklyn College Office of Institutional Planning, Research, and Assessment 2012.
College Comparisons. Mean Total Score by College (Possible Score Range 400 to 500) SSD = Total Scores for Colleges of Business, Education, Health and.
Student Orientation Seminar Student Services. College Catalog The Jefferson College Catalog is printed annually and is your official source of information.
SAMPLE REPORT. Introduction A team of Administrators, Registrar, and Counselors teamed up with a representative from the Riverside County Office of Education.
Faculty Demographics Faculty Demographics Table 8 Faculty Demographics Prof. Ed. Faculty in Initial Teacher Preparation Programs*
STUDENT RESOURCES By: Joe & Stephanie. EMPLOYMENT CENTER  Students can take resume classes  They have a list of jobs that students can apply on and.
Ohlone Community College District Fremont & Newark, CA Serving Fremont, Newark, Union City & More!
Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey University of Louisville Fall of 2002.
Impact of Campus Recreational Sports on African American College Students Dr. Robert Lindsey and Georgia Willis, Health and Human Performance Department.
UTILIZING INSTITUTIONAL RESEARCH IN GREEK LIFE KAYLA MUNCIE AND CRAIG THIS.
USU Student Climate for Diversity
Capital Community College 2014 Graduate Survey
NCAA Initial-Eligibility Requirements
MySuccess Enhancements
ACT Student Opinion Survey Results
Equality and Diversity Survey
NCAA Eligibility Basics
Director of Institutional Accreditation and Assessment
Society of Women Engineers
Accommodations at UNO; What You Don’t See
ACCOUNTS It is important to activate ( and check your WIU regularly. Financial Aid information, mid-term and semester grades,
Move On When Ready (MOWR)
Demographic and Outcome Trends for Planning
IPEDS COMPARISON FALL 2010 – FALL 2014
High School 101 Redhawks Style
2003 Student Satisfaction Survey
The 2015 COACHE Survey YORK COLLEGE Faculty Satisfaction
Dental Laboratory Technology Total Enrollment by Race, to (1 of 2)
Dental Laboratory Technology Total Enrollment by Race, to (1 of 2)
UNTHSC Fall Enrollment by Program: Asian/ Pacific Islander
Engagement Survey Results: Demographics
Student Satisfaction: Undergraduate Spring 2010
Exploring Colleges Career Project –.
Inge Bond Presentation to College Council November 4, 2011
SCC Recent High School Graduates: Number & Ethnic Profile
Characteristics of All Students (N=20,822) Fall Census 2016
Graduate Ethnicity by Gender
First Generation College Students:
PMHS Registration Presentation
Strategies that Promote Success Among First-Year Hispanic Males
SCC Recent High School Graduates: Number & Ethnic Profile
McPherson College, Fall 2017
Institutional Research and Planning
The New Move On When Ready
SCC Student Ethnicity Profile (Fall 2012 to Fall 2016)
Student Satisfaction Survey Spring 2018 Undergraduate Trends
Student Satisfaction Survey Spring 2019 Undergraduate Trends
UNC Charlotte Score Card
College of Business Scorecard
College of Computing & Informatics Scorecard
College of Health & Human Services Scorecard
College of Education Scorecard
Presentation transcript:

Student Experience Survey Spring 2009 Report Prepared by the Office of Institutional Research & Assessment 05/07/2009 Final Version

Methodology Student Surveys administered Online and Paper The survey was sent out to 1302 students in 54 sections of Eng 125 and Eng 200. Paper return: 53.3% (344/646) Online return: 8.2% (41/501) 155 invalid or missing emails not included Total response rate: 33.6% (385/1147)

Demographic Information Gender % Male 31.1 Female 68.9 Age % Under 24 88.5 24 to 39 9.6 Above 40 1.9 Ethnicity % White Non Hispanic 4.9 Black/African American, Caribbean 49.6 American Indian 0.5 Asian, Pacific Islanders or Filipino 13.6 Hispanic/ Latino 21.8 Other 9.5 Class % Freshmen 71.3 Sophomore 22.3 Junior 4.0 Senior 0.8 Other 1.6

Summary 5 Most Satisfied* 5 Most Dissatisfied** Library Facilities – 67.9% Study area – 64% Library services – 62.9% Computer lab hours – 56.5% Library collections – 56.5% 5 Most Dissatisfied** Registration procedure – 38.1% Financial aid services – 33.8% Food services – 32.3% Availability of computers on campus – 29.1% Parking – 27% * Combine very satisfied & satisfied ** Combine very dissatisfied & dissatisfied

Academic Support Services 2008 % 2009 % % change Academic advising Very Dissatisfied + Dissatisfied 24.8 17.0 -7.8 Very Satisfied + Satisfied 46.8 44.2 -2.6 Tutoring services 19.8 11.0 -8.8 49.7 53.4 3.6 Library facilities 8.0 9.4 1.5 66.7 67.9 1.3 Library services 6.5 9.3 2.7 68.1 62.9 -5.1 Library collections 13.7 7.9 -5.8 58.5 56.5 -2.0 Science laboratories 13.4 12.3 -1.1 41.6 40.1 -1.5 Learning labs 12.0 8.1 -3.9 49.1 56.0 6.8 Study areas 21.5 10.7 -10.8 64.0 10.6

Student Services Personal counseling Athletic facilities 2008 % 2009 % % change Personal counseling Very Dissatisfied + Dissatisfied 23.5 12.6 -11.0 Very Satisfied + Satisfied 32.4 42.3 10.0 Athletic facilities 11.9 -1.9 47.6 55.4 7.9 Intramural athletic offerings 10.2 13.0 2.9 33.1 38.0 5.0 Career planning and placement 23.8 18.1 -5.8 30.5 38.6 8.1 Student health services 16.7 11.4 -5.2 35.7 42.1 6.4 Child care services 12.5 10.1 -2.4 22.7 33.3 10.6

Student Services (continued) 2008 % 2009 % % change Services for students with disabilities Very Dissatisfied + Dissatisfied 5.8 12.9 7.1 Very Satisfied + Satisfied 34.9 33.1 -1.8 Services for international students 22.1 11.5 -10.6 26.3 36.7 10.4 Veteran services 4.2 7.2 3.0 23.9 28.8 4.9 Women's center 8.0 8.2 0.2 32.0 38.4 6.4 Men's center --  7.7 38.5 Student government 15.7 14.4 -1.2 31.3 32.8 1.5

Administrative Services 2008 % 2009 % % change Registration procedure Very Dissatisfied + Dissatisfied 23.6 38.1 14.5 Very Satisfied + Satisfied 56.1 37.6 -18.5 Testing office 12.0 14.4 2.4 46.5 45.0 -1.6 Financial aid services 30.8 33.8 3.1 42.1 39.2 -2.9 Billing and payment procedures 16.2 20.5 4.3 56.0 47.1 -8.9 Admissions process 17.8 24.3 6.5 56.8 44.1 -12.6

Computer Services Campus computing in general Computer lab hours 2008 % 2009 % % change Campus computing in general Very Dissatisfied + Dissatisfied 15.7 14.4 -1.3 Very Satisfied + Satisfied 61.2 51.6 -9.5 Computer lab hours 10.5 11.0 0.4 67.9 56.5 -11.5 Availability of computer labs on campus 22.8 22.6 -0.1 53.6 47.9 -5.6 Availability of computers on campus 29.7 29.1 -0.5 46.3 45.4 -1.0 Availability of wireless internet access 15.2 23.1 7.8 49.0 52.6 3.5

Other Services Condition of buildings and grounds Campus security 2008 % 2009 % % change Condition of buildings and grounds Very Dissatisfied + Dissatisfied 19.1 16.3 -2.8 Very Satisfied + Satisfied 47.8 50.4 2.6 Campus security 14.1 17.6 3.5 54.8 49.0 -5.8 Food services --  32.3 37.8 Parking 27.0 44.9

PMP – 1 3.02 2.94 2.88* 2.89 2.56 2.45* Academic Support Services 11  Academic Support Services (Library services, Science laboratories, Learning labs) 2009 2008  PMP PMP 3.02 2.94 2.88* Student Services (Personal counseling, Career planning and placement, Student health services) 2009 2008  PMP PMP 2.89 2.56 2.45* * Numbers appeared on the PMP 2008 report. The indicators were weighted to compensate for response bias. The weight formula is different every year. The 2008 PMP was weighted based on college attendance, admission type, full-time/part-time status, gender, ethnicity, age, citizenship, language spoken at home, and cumulative GPA. 11

PMP – 2 2.87 2.84 2.82* 2.63 2.76 2.67* Computer Services 12 Computer Services (Campus computing in general, Computer lab hours, Availability of computer labs on campus, Availability of computers on campus) 2009 2008  PMP PMP 2.87 2.84 2.82* Administrative Services (Registration procedure, Testing office, Financial aid services, Billing and payment procedures) 2009 2008 PMP 2.63 2.76 2.67* * Numbers appeared on the PMP 2008 report. The indicators were weighted to compensate for response bias. The weight formula is different every year. The 2008 PMP was weighted based on college attendance, admission type, full-time/part-time status, gender, ethnicity, age, citizenship, language spoken at home, and cumulative GPA. 12