“Customers today are strongly value- oriented. They seek results and service process quality that far exceeds the price and acquisition costs they incur for a service.” Source: Heskett, J.L., Sasser Jr., W.E. & Schlesinger, L.A. (1997). The Service Profit Chain. New York: Simon & Shuster Inc. 2

Presentation Outline  Introductions  Why is student satisfaction important?  Instrument design: What does your institution want to learn?  Best practices in current student data collection  Data analysis and reporting: Highlights of selected research results  From research to action  Questions 3

About Maguire Associates  A 25 year-old, research-based consultancy helping over 350 educational institutions and consortia  Founded in 1983 by Jack Maguire, former Dean of Enrollment Management at Boston College  Staffed by a senior consulting team comprising higher education and marketing practitioners with governing board experience  Supported by a team of market researchers and social scientists 4

 Student Satisfaction & Retention  Market Research  Strategic Financial Aid Modeling  Student Recruitment Optimization  Enrollment Management Consulting  Strategic Planning  Advancement & Alumni Engagement  Branding & Image Development  Pricing Optimization & Value Enhancement  Integrated Marketing 5 Service Areas

Primary Goals of Student Satisfaction & Retention Research  Identify strengths and weaknesses of an institution as perceived by students  Examine how these variables contribute to students’ overall satisfaction and likelihood of completing their education at the institution  Highlight differences and similarities across important subgroups  Make decisions about where to invest institutional resources to enhance satisfaction with the overall experience and increase student degree completion rates 6

Why is Student Satisfaction Important? 7

Freshman Retention Rates (4-Year U.S. Universities & Colleges) Source: Data from 2008 U.S. News and World Report College Edition 8 Statistics Mean75% Median75% Minimum33% Maximum99% N1,348

Graduation Rates (4-Year U.S. Universities & Colleges) Source: Data from 2008 U.S. News and World Report College Edition 9 Statistics Mean53% Median52% Minimum7% Maximum98% N1,390

The Multiple Funnel Model of Enrollment Management 10

Important Outcomes to Define Success of Presidency Improved retention and graduation rates 11 Source: 2005 Chronicle of Higher Education Survey of Four-year College and University Presidents

Top Institutional Concerns Student retention 12 Source: 2005 Chronicle of Higher Education Survey of Four-year College and University Presidents

Satisfaction-Retention Matrix A  B: Among persisters, what are the demographic and attitudinal differences between satisfied and less than satisfied students? B  D: Among less than satisfied students, which students stay versus dropout, and why? A  D: What are the differences between satisfied current students and dissatisfied dropouts? 13

Instrument Design: What Does Your Institution Want to Learn? 14

Key Outcome Variables  How satisfied are you overall with your experience at X University?  How likely is it that you will complete your degree at X University? or To what extent have you considered leaving X University?  If you were able to go back to when you chose a university, knowing what you know now, would you choose to attend X University again, choose to attend another university, or not go to university at all? 15

Key Predictor Variables  Demographic/socioeconomic characteristics  Attitudes/opinions about X University on specific areas: –Academics –Resources –Affordability/value –Faculty –Supporting/Advising services –Preparation for the future –Social life –Extracurricular activities –Educational goals 16

Stated vs. Derived Importance  Stated Importance  Derived importance – Is calculated by correlating evaluation of particular attributes with overall satisfaction – Uncovers items that are most important to the satisfaction of students (These attributes will not always be the same features students identify as being important. However, they will be the ones which, if improved, will most likely increase satisfaction.) 17

Sample University 18 Correlation: Quality Rating with Overall Satisfaction

Derived Importance  Pros –Shorter instrument –Can ask many more “other” questions (i.e., demographic, goals, etc.) –“Stated” importance may be misleading and very often many variables are rated as important  Cons –Satisfaction ratings with small standard deviations will not be correlated with dependent measures 19

Best Practices in Current Student Data Collection 20

On-line Survey  Larger samples can be collected more cost-efficiently  Sample sizes are more manageable to process and more conducive to sophisticated analyses  Surveys have a shorter turnaround time  Instruments can be customized and use complex skip patterns  Visual stimuli or dynamic content can be more easily incorporated  24-hour access is available to respondents; respondents can work at their own pace and/or return later  Surveys are not subject to interviewer bias  Respondents tend to provide more in-depth verbatim responses  More environmentally friendly 21

Response Rates  31 survey records analyzed; 24 colleges and universities  22 undergraduate surveys –Range: 11% to 45% –Average = 25%  9 graduate student surveys –Range: 7% to 34% –Average = 21%  Variables examined – Setting (urban, suburban, rural) – Religious affiliation (has an affiliation, does not have an affiliation) – Timing of the data collection – Incentives – Students’ overall satisfaction levels and self assessed likelihood of graduating 22

Response Rates by Top Prize Amount Correlation =

Data Analysis and Reporting: Highlights of Selected Research Results 24

Overall Satisfaction – 35 Surveys Undergraduate Students: mean is 5.16, range of 4.61 to 5.65 Graduate Students: mean is 5.45, range of 4.83 to 6.16 Scale: 1 = Not at All Satisfied and 7 = Very Satisfied 25

Likelihood of Graduating – 21 Surveys 26 Undergraduate Students: mean is 6.40, range of 5.86 to 6.64 Graduate Students: mean is 6.51, range of 6.25 to 6.76 Scale: 1 = Not at All Likely and 7 = Definitely

Overall Satisfaction by Likelihood of Graduating 27 Likelihood of Graduating 1 Definitely Will not Graduate Definitely Will Graduate Overall Satisfaction 1=Extremely Dissatisfied = Extremely Satisfied  27 of the 190 responding students (14%) are dissatisfied, but say they are likely to graduate  1 student is satisfied yet unlikely to graduate

Current Students Mean = 6.55 Former Students Mean = 4.34 Overall Satisfaction of Current and Former Students 28

Percent of Students Enrolled at First- choice Institution – 16 Schools Different Colleges and Universities --

Segmentation Analysis  Overall satisfaction  Likelihood of graduating  Class year or semester  Gender  Major program of study  Academic ability (grade point average)  Residential status 30

Segmentation Analysis Likelihood of Graduating by Class Year 31

Segmentation Analysis Satisfaction by Class Year 32

Segmentation Analysis Demographic Profile of Current and Former Students 33

Segmentation Analysis Independent T-Test Analysis of Quality Ratings of a University on Characteristics by Overall Satisfaction 34

Regression Analysis 35

Satisfaction-Retention Matrix A  B, B  D, A  D  The following variables are in model for all three transitions: –quality of students –quality of major  The following variables are in model for two out of three transitions: –parents’ preference (A  B, B  D) –value of education (A  B, A  D) Regression Analysis

From Research to Action 37

From Research to Action  Organize recommended actions suggested by the research in a thematic fashion – Academic community – Future outcomes – Campus atmosphere and student life – Value and affordability – Location  Share results with current students, faculty and staff 38

Questions Tara E. Scholder Vice President for Research Operations , Ext. 241 Linda Cox Maguire Executive Vice President , Ext