U NIVERSITY OF M INNESOTA Measuring Student Perspectives on University Experiences.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Rich Veit Judy Nye Laura Jannone. Why a New First-Year Seminar First-year seminars are offered at more than 95% of American colleges and universities.
Advertisements

MSCHE Annual Conference December st Century Higher Education Projections Increasingly diverse student populations Widely varying levels of secondary.
USING THE CLA TO INFORM CAMPUS PLANNING Anne L. Hafner Campus WASC Faculty Coordinator Winter 2008.
Instructor Teaching Impact. University Writing Program 150 sections of required writing courses per semester, taught by Instructors and GTAs 33 Instructors–
1 Selected Results from UNCG’s Sophomore and Senior Surveys Spring 2000 Office of Institutional Research UNCG Planning Council August 24, 2000 The University.
Higher Education Conference. Engaging Faculty in Retention Issues Part II Presidential Summit on Retention The Need and Scope February 20, 2007 Dr. Richard.
Assessment of the Impact of Ubiquitous Computing on Learning Ross A. Griffith Wake Forest University Ubiquitous Computing Conference Seton Hall University.
Austin Community College Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Inventory Executive Summary.
Student Satisfaction Geneva College Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI: Noel-Levitz) 1997 to 2013.
Five Guiding Themes Provide Civic Leadership through Partnerships --Lead as a civic partner, deepen our engagement as a critical community asset, demonstrate.
Academic Advising Implementation Team PROGRESS REPORT April 29, 2009.
Academic Assessment Workshop: A Review of the Student Satisfaction Inventory Implementation & Implication Liz Baldizan, Ed.D., Assistant Dean, Academic.
Institution Research Update John Porter AIRPO June 20, 2006.
1 Student Characteristics And Measurements of Student Satisfaction Prepared for: The Faculty Council Subcommittee on Retention The Office of Institutional.
EPIC Online Publishing Use and Costs Evaluation Program: Summary Report.
1 Student Learning Assessment Assessment is an ongoing process aimed at understanding & improving student learning Formative Assessment – Ongoing feedback.
Benchmarking Effective Educational Practice Community Colleges of the State University of New York April, 2005.
President’s Recommended FY16 Annual Operating Budget Eric W. Kaler, president Richard Pfutzenreuter, vice president, Finance Board of Regents June 24,
Wendy Urban, CIS Faculty Mike Valenza, Fox Legal Studies Faculty.
Registration Satisfaction Survey FAS Report, Fall Presented by: K. El Hassan, PhD. Director, OIRA.
College of Basic and Applied Sciences Advising/Retention Report.
Students’ feedback - Can higher education quality management systems put it to good use? Babes-Bolyai University, 18 September 2009 Monica Zaharie Melinda.
Assessment Surveys July 22, 2004 Chancellor’s Meeting.
2008 – 2014 Results Chris Willis East Stroudsburg University Office of Assessment and Accreditation Spring 2015
Enhancing Parents’ Role in Higher Education Assessment Anne Marie Delaney Director of Institutional Research, Babson College.
Title III Strengthening the Institution Don Staub, Director.
What is the Focus?  Round 2 Analysis observed trends in student perception after first survey.  Allows us to recognize improvements of lower measures.
Maximizing Results with Minimal Resources Bringing online learning to the mainstream is challenging when resources are limited. That challenge is even.
St. Petersburg College CCSSE 2011 Findings Board of Trustees Meeting.
1 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) 2013 Tiffany Franks Assistant Director, Office of Planning & Analysis October 25, 2013.
2007 Office of the CIO Technology Poll Results Information Technology Questions Office of the Chief Information Officer.
1. Continue to distinguish and clarify between Student Learning Outcomes (SLOs) and Service Area Outcomes (SAOs) 2. Develop broad SLOs/SAOs in order to.
2005 The Ohio State University Poll Results Information Technology Questions Office of the Chief Information Officer.
2006 Office of the CIO Technology Poll Results Information Technology Questions Office of the Chief Information Officer.
The Twelve Enhanced Accountability Measures and Six Performance Funding Measures Annual Report to the Board of Trustees Academic Year
Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey of Classroom and Online Students Conducted Spring 2008.
TULSA COMMUNITY COLLEGE Julie Woodruff, Associate Professor of English Mary Millikin, Director of Institutional Research representing the AtD Data Team.
Student Satisfaction Survey Administered to 213 randomly selected lecture & lab courses, including courses from all campuses and all levels (response.
Bringing Together Survey Results of the UNLV Student Experience
Mapping the Changing Technological Landscape: Faculty and Student Surveys on Educational Technology Cara Lane, Research Scientist Catalyst Research and.
ESU’s NSSE 2013 Overview Joann Stryker Office of Institutional Research and Assessment University Senate, March 2014.
Strategic Plan Presentation to Faculty & Staff Spring 2006.
TNS Proposal – Confidential 1 REACH Realizing Educational and Career Hopes University of Iowa  The University of Iowa REACH Program is conceived as a.
NSSE 2013 How to Use Results (or “Why you should care about NSSE”) 8/26/
2009 Pitt Community College CCSSE Results September 21, 2009 Report to the Campus College CCSSE Results Pitt Community College Dr. Brian Miller, Assistant.
Results from the 2005 Educational Technology Surveys Cara Lane Research Scientist Catalyst Research and Development Office of Learning Technologies.
A Look at the Early Alert System A. Craig Dixon Madisonville Community College New Horizons Teaching.
Support Services for Online & Distance Ed Programs Pace University -- A.S. in Telecommunications Degree FIPSE Learning Anytime Anywhere Partnership (LAAP)
SHORTER COLLEGE Assessment Week Sponsored by the Office of Institutional Effectiveness and Assessment & the Division of Academic Affairs.
What could we learn from learning outcomes assessment programs in the U.S public research universities? Samuel S. Peng Center for Educational Research.
1) INTRODUCTION 2) METHODOLOGY 3) FINDINGS 4) DISCUSSION 5) CONCLUSION.
2004 The Ohio State University Poll Results Information Technology Questions Office of the Chief Information Officer.
The Satisfied Student October 4 th, Today’s Presentation  Present data from Case’s Senior Survey and the National Survey of Student Engagement.
University as Entrepreneur Results of Surveys of ASU Faculty, Students and Staff Spring 2007 Surveys conducted by the Institute for Social Science Research.
2015 Freshman Student Exit Survey American University of Armenia 2015 Freshman Student Exit Survey.
UNDERSTANDING 2012 NATIONAL SURVEY OF STUDENT ENGAGEMENT (NSSE) RESULTS Nicholls State University October 17, 2012.
Student Satisfaction Spring 2007 (long version) Institutional Research and Planning.
1 Results From UNCG’s Spring 1998 Sophomore Survey Office of Institutional Research September 1998 The University of North Carolina at Greensboro.
The Use of Formative Evaluations in the Online Course Setting JENNIFER PETERSON, MS, RHIA, CTR DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SCIENCES.
Foundations of Excellence SHARING THE InFOE. PowerPoint Overview  Survey Overview  Faculty/Staff Survey  Who Responded  Dimension Results  Student.
Berkeley International Office August 9 th All Degree–Seeking Source: University of California / Berkeley International Office (BIO )
UAA Fall 2002 Leadership Retreat “ Focusing on Student Success ” Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey Fall 2001 Results Anchorage Campus.
Institutional Effectiveness at CPCC DENISE H WELLS.
Educational Contexts Chapter 11 Human Communication on the Internet Shedletsky & Aitken.
Perkins End of Year Evaluation Southwestern Community College May 18, 2016.
Summary of VCU Student Satisfaction Fall 2012
Jenn Shinaberger Lee Shinaberger Corey Lee Coastal Carolina University
Director, Center for Teaching, Learning, & Assessment
Derek Herrmann & Ryan Smith University Assessment Services
McPherson College, Fall 2017
Presentation transcript:

U NIVERSITY OF M INNESOTA Measuring Student Perspectives on University Experiences

Measuring Student Perspectives on University Experiences The focus of this report is on Student Experience, as reported in the 2001 Student Experiences Survey (SES). The 2001 SES was administered to a random sample of students enrolled on the four campuses of the University of Minnesota spring semester 2001.

Background During the past 10 years, the University of Minnesota has placed an emphasis upon improving the undergraduate experience on all campuses. Starting in 1997, this emphasis was dramatically strengthened through the enhancement and expansion of existing programs and such new programs as: New Student Convocation Freshman Seminars Academy of Distinguished Teachers

The University’s efforts to measure student perspectives on campus experiences are important to the Compact Planning Process, the University’s Institutional Measures, and the specific goals of the President’s Undergraduate Education Initiative. Background

The Compact Planning Process, which is premised upon a shared responsibility for articulating and realizing measurable outcomes, requires the persistent use of such evaluation and accountability tools as: surveys institutional level performance measures collegiate measures of efficiency and effectiveness These measures initially serve to set performance benchmarks. Subsequently they demonstrate our success in meeting our goals as well as help create informed options for future investment and institutional renewal. Background

2001 Student Experiences Survey Respondents % of Sample Crookston102 (58.3%) Morris145 (64.4%) Duluth294 (58.8%) Twin Cities401 (50.1%) Grad/Prof415 (55.4%) Response Scale 1 = very poor 2 = poor 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent Survey Period: April – May 2001 Methodology: Electronic (Web)

It was just following the administration of the 1999 Student Satisfaction Survey that the University changed to a semester- based academic calendar and a new student information system (PeopleSoft). Students, faculty, and staff are still accommodating themselves to these very significant changes. The first year ( ) was particularly difficult for many students. We fully expected that student satisfaction as measured by the survey might suffer, and it did. Background

Overall Satisfaction 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Would Probably or Definitely Enroll Again 2001 Student Experiences Survey

Overall Quality of the University’s Academic Programs Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Quality of Faculty in Major Field of Study Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Instruction: Quality of Instruction Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Instruction: Availability of Instructors Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Instruction: Class Size Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Quality of Classrooms Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Availability of Places to Study on Campus Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Overall Physical Environment of the Campus Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Administration's Responsiveness to Concerns of Students Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Cost of Attending the University Undergraduates 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Overall Satisfaction Students of Color 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Overall Satisfaction Students of Color 2001 Student Experiences Survey sample too small sample too small 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

Overall Quality of the University’s Academic Programs Students of Color 2001 Student Experiences Survey 3 = fair 4 = good 5 = very good 6 = excellent

“Took a course that required accessing information through the internet.” 2001 Student Experiences Survey

“Accessed Course Materials Online.” 2001 Student Experiences Survey

“ ed an Instructor with a Question about a Class.” 2001 Student Experiences Survey

“Received an from an Instructor about class material.” 2001 Student Experiences Survey

Crookston Activity Hours attending class Hours in extracurricular activities Hours Studying Hours paid University job Hours paid Non-University job Total

Duluth Activity Hours attending class Hours in extracurricular activities Hours Studying Hours paid University job Hours paid Non-University job Total

Morris Activity Hours attending class Hours in extracurricular activities Hours Studying Hours paid University job Hours paid Non-University job Total

Twin Cities Activity Hours attending class Hours in extracurricular activities Hours Studying Hours paid University job Hours paid Non-University job Total

Calendar Preference? QuartersSemesters Undergraduate Crookston 57.6% 42.4% Morris 51.8% 48.2% Duluth 52.2% 47.8% Twin Cities 56.4% 43.6% Graduate 52.4% 47.6%

The overall goal of the University’s initiative to improve the undergraduate educational experience is to create a richer and deeper set of intensive learning experiences and academic connections that are strongly correlated with retention, graduation rates, and student satisfaction. A challenge for the Board of Regents and the administration is to continually review performance as it relates to Institutional Initiatives with the aid of the Institutional Measures and to adjust goals and benchmarks as appropriate. Conclusion

The University’s efforts to improve undergraduate education on all four campuses are on-going. So too is its monitoring of initiatives to improve undergraduate education and its measurement of student satisfaction with their undergraduate experience, student interest in the University, and student success.