2.  ADP Database  Students Registered  Absentee Ballots  Variety of Programs

3.  Past studies  Mixed Results

4.  A stratified sample  200 surveys went out randomly within the stratified control group, as well as another 200 surveys to random ADP registered students  Absentee Ballot Students

5.  Approximately 1/4 th of the surveys were returned.  88 percent of students were registered at the time of the survey.  Motor voter program  Registered at UCM

6.  Actually Voting?  Number of UCM students who voted  The survey also showed areas of needed improvement.

7.  Absentee Ballots  Percent that turned it in  Number of students who actually had absentee ballot notarized

8.  Did students feel more inclined to vote?  What percentage of students felt they learned something?  Finally, ninety-six percent of students who attended the ADP programs felt the information was presented fairly.

9.  62% percent of students received their news about the 2008 election on television  28% percent on the internet  0% from twitter  10% from other sources including friends, radio, and newspaper

10.  Relationships  Students who were assisted by ADP in receiving an absentee ballot were more likely to complete the absentee ballot process

11.  Self-Reporting  Time delay  Failure of the survey to be manipulated so that it included a third category of students who simply requested absentee ballots.