DOCUMENT RESUME ED 467 336 HE 035 134 National Student Satisfaction Report, 2002. TITLE USA Group Noel-Levitz, Iowa City, IA. INSTITUTION 2002-00-00 PUB DATE NOTE 16p. For full text: http://www.noellevitz.com/pdfs/ AVAILABLE FROM 2002 SSI Report.pdf. Research (143) Reports PUB TYPE EDRS Price MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage. EDRS PRICE *College Students; *Educational Experience; Higher Education; DESCRIPTORS *Satisfaction; *Student Attitudes; Student Surveys ABSTRACT This report describes the results of the ninth annual National Student Satisfaction Study conducted to determine the level of importance that students place on areas of their student experience and how satisfied students are that institutions are meeting their expectations. This two-dimensional approach uses the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) to identify student concerns that are truly affecting student success. In 2002, the SSI was administered to 115,595 students from four-year public institutions; 242,804 from four-year private institutions; 226,886 from two- year community, junior, and technical colleges; and 38,761 from career and private schools. The SSI consists of more than 70 items that cover the full range of college experiences. Scores are obtained for each item for the importance students assign to the expectation and their level of satisfaction that the expectation is being met. A performance gap score is calculated by subtracting the satisfaction score from the importance score. Four tables summarize the importance, satisfaction, and performance gap findings for the 12 scales of the SSI by institution type. Strengths and challenges are then summarized in narrative form for each institution type. Five-year trend information is presented in table form for each type of institution studied. (SLD) Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report Noel-Levitz Inc. July 2002 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Office of Educational Research and Improvement PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS CENTER (ERIC) BEEN GRANTED BY This document has been reproduced as received from the person or organization originating it. Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction quality. Points of view or opinions stated in this TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES document do not necessarily represent INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) official OERI position or policy. 1 2 BEST COPY AVAILABLE He= 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report Study Conducted by Noel-Levitz Rationale for Satisfaction Measurement with how satisfied students are, this inventory provides a Student satisfaction studies vehicle for institutions are self-examinations that to set priorities that are closely enable institutions to aligned with those of their measure their students' satisfaction students. This year's report with a wide range of college experiences. By looks at the combination of taking the data to identify strengths "soundings" of student (high importance and high satisfaction, institutions are able to satisfaction) and challenges pinpoint their institutional (high importance and low strengths as well as areas in satisfaction) by institution type. need of improvement. Traditionally, colleges and The Source of Data universities have measured one dimension of student satisfaction only. However, for The 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report represents greatest impact and accuracy, satisfaction should be data from 864 colleges and universities representing viewed within the four- context of student expectations (levels year public, four-year private, of importance). For two-year community, junior example, the quality of food service and technical institutions, and two-year career and and the use of student private activity fees repeatedly surface as schools that utilized the Student areas of high dissatisfaction for Satisfaction Inventory students. But when asked with all or part of their student body between the fall to indicate the importance of of these areas to their overall 1999 and the spring of 2002. educational experience, students rate food service and The student populations by institutional type activity fees relatively low. Traditionally parking has also include 115,595 from four-year publics; 242,804 from been an area of high dissatisfaction as well, and the level four-year privates; 226,886 from two-year community, of importance indicated for parking varies by type of junior, and technical colleges; and 38,761 from institution. Students career and at primarily residential campuses rate private schools. parking with lower importance than students at institutions with a majority of commuter students. The Instrument The Study The Student Satisfaction Inventory, from which the data were collected for this report, consists This report reveals the of over 70 items that results of the ninth annual National cover the full range of college experiences. Each item is Student Satisfaction Study conducted by Noel-Levitz to expressed as a statement of expectation. Each statement determine the level of importance that students place on includes a rating scale of 1 to 7. Students are asked the areas of their student to rate experience and how satisfied the level of importance they assign to the expectation students are that institutions as are meeting their expectations. well as their level of satisfaction that the expectation This two-dimensional is approach uses the Student Satisfac- being met. tion InventoryTM to identify student concerns that are truly affecting student The inventory findings success. By revealing which are then presented with three aspects of campus students consider scores for each item: an importance most and least important, score, a satisfaction along score, and a performance gap score, which is calculated by subtracting the satisfaction score from the importance ompanion Studies. score. A large performance gap score on an item indicates that the institution is not meeting the expectation; a small See the final two sections of this report for gap score indicates that the institution is close to meeting 1) a national study the expectation; and that reveals institutional, a negative gap score indicates that the institution is exceeding the priorities from the perspective students' expectations. of fatuity, staff, and administrators The Student Satisfaction with results from 296 Inventory comes in institutions several versions: one for four-year institutions; one for community, junior, and technical 2) a national study colleges, and another for that reveals the priorities of two-year career and private schools. adult students with results Versions specific to from 78 institutions i Canadian four-year and two-year institutions are also .3EST COPY AVAILABLE www.noellevitz.com © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. 1 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report available. A sample of the SSI items representing a broad students' perceptions of the effectiveness and avail- array of issues relating to campus programs and services is ability of financial aid programs. presented at the end of this report. Registration Effectiveness assesses issues associated with registration and billing and the extent to which the registration process is smooth and effective. The Scales Responsiveness to Diverse Populations assesses the The items on the Student Satisfaction Inventory have been institution's commitment to specific groups of analyzed statistically and conceptually to create scales. The students enrolled at the institution (e.g., under- scales provide composite scores that allow for an overview represented populations, students with disabilities, of the data. The scales are as follows: commuters, part-time students, and older, returning learners). Please note that this scale captures only a satisfaction score. Academic Advising Effectiveness (four-year schools) Safety and Security measures the institution's and Academic Advising and Counseling Effective- responsiveness to students' personal safety and ness (two-year and career/private schools) assess the security on the campus. comprehensiveness of the academic advising pro- gram, evaluating advisors' knowledge, competence, Service Excellence measures the areas of campus approachability, and personal concern for students. where quality service and personal concern for students are rated most and least favorably. Academic Services (two-year and career/private schools) assesses services students utilize to achieve Student Centeredness measures the institution's their academic goals. These services include the attitude toward students and the extent to which they library, computer labs, tutoring, and study areas. feel welcome and valued. Campus Climate measures the extent to which the institution provides experiences that promote a sense Analysis of the Scales of campus pride and belonging. The best place to begin is by looking at the big picture and Campus Life (four-year schools) assesses the effec- understanding the areas on campus that matter most to tiveness of student life programs offered by the students. The following four tables summarize the impor- institution, covering issues ranging from athletics to tance, satisfaction, and performance gap findings for the 12 residence life. This scale also assesses campus scales by institution type. These are listed in order of policies and procedures to determine students' importance. perceptions of their rights and responsibilities. Campus Support Services assesses the quality of support programs and services. Concern for the Individual assesses the institution's commitment to treating each student as an individual. Included in this assessment are those groups who frequently deal with students on a personal level (e.g., faculty, advisors, counselors, residence hall staff, etc.). Instructional Effectiveness measures students' academic experience, the curriculum, and the campus's overriding commitment to academic excellence. Recruitment and Financial Aid Effectiveness (four- year schools) and Admissions and Financial Aid Effectiveness (two-year and career/private schools) measure the extent to which admissions counselors are competent and knowledgeable, along with 4 © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. 2 www.noellevitz.com 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report 2002 Scales: four-year private institutions Importance Performance Gap Satisfaction Scale Mean Mean Mean /.// Instructional Effectiveness 5.22 6.33 Academic Advising 6.26 5.20 1.06 Safety and Security 1.50 6.17 4.67 Registration Effectiveness 6.14 1.27 4.87 Concern for the Individual 6.13 1.08 5.05 Recruitment and Financial Aid 6.13 4.80 1.33 Student Centeredness 6.13 0.98 5.15 Campus Climate 6.12 1.05 5.07 Campus Support Services 5.99 5.07 0.92 Service Excellence 4.90 5.98 1.08 Campus Life 4.70 5.64 0.94 ` - Responsiveness to Diverse Populations 4.93 (7 = very important/very satisfied 1= not important /not satisfied at all) 2002 Scales: four-year public institutions Importance Performance Gap Satisfaction Scale Mean Mean Mean Academic Advising 6.30 5.11 1.19 Instructional Effectiveness 6.29 1.20 5.09 Safety and Security 6.27 4.33 1.94 Registration Effectiveness 6.16 4.82 1.34 Concern for the Individual 6.05 4.79 1.26 Campus Climate 6.04 4.90 1.14 Student Centeredness 4.92 6.02 1.10 Campus Support Services 0.95 6.01 5.06 Recruitment and Financial Aid 6.01 4.65 1.36 Service Excellence 5.97 4.72 1.25 Campus Life 0.87 5.57 4.70 Responsiveness to Diverse Populations 4.92 (7 = very important/very satisfied 1 = not important/not satisfied at all) 5 © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. www.noellevitz.com 3 BEST COPY AVAILABLE 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report 2002 Scales: community, junior, and technical colleges Importance Satisfaction Performance Gap Scale Mean Mean Mean Instructional Effectiveness 6.14 5.27 0.87 Registration Effectiveness 6.10 5.27 0.83 Academic Advising/Counseling 6.08 5.05 1.03 Concern for the Individual 6.04 5.09 0.95 Academic Services 5.98 5.22 0.76 Safety and Security 5.95 4.81 1.14 Admissions and Financial Aid 5.93 4.95 0.98 Campus Climate 5.90 5.14 0.76 Student Centeredness 5.90 5.21 0.69 Service Excellence 5.88 5.09 0.79 Campus Support Services 5.37 4.81 0.56 Responsiveness to Diverse Populations 5.33 (7 = very important/very satisfied 1 = not important/not satisfied at all) 2002 Scales: career and private schools Importance Satisfaction Performance Gap Scale Mean Mean Mean Instructional Effectiveness 6.26 5.24 1.02 Concern for the Individual 6.20 5.08 1.12 Admissions and Financial Aid 6.18 5.02 1.16 Academic Advising/Counseling 6.16 5.05 1.11 Registration Effectiveness 6.15 5.20 0.95 Campus Climate 6.14 5.12 1.02 Student Centeredness 6.14 5.23 0.91 Academic Services 6.09 4.92 1.17 Service Excellence 6.05 5.03 1.02 Safety and Security 5.97 4.60 1.37 Campus Support Services 5.59 4.66 0.93 Responsiveness to Diverse Populations 5.19 (7 = very important/very satisfied 1 = not important/not satisfied at all) 4 © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. 6 www.noellevitz.com 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report Analysis Strengths and Challenges It is important that the analysis of the data includes all The individual items on the inventory can be analyzed to three areas of measurement importance, satisfaction, determine strengths (high importance and high satisfac- and performance gap. Focusing on only one area, such tion) which are the items that the institution can incorpo- as performance gap, is likely to result in overlooking rate into their marketing activities, their recruiting materi- areas of the campus experience that students value most. als, internal and external public relations opportunities, and A combination of scores provides the most dynamic to provide positive feedback to the faculty, staff, adminis- information for institutions to consider when developing tration, and students on campus. Strengths are defined as an action agenda. being above the median in importance and in the top Using the matrix below permits the institution to quartile of satisfaction. conceptualize its student satisfaction data by retention The items can also be analyzed to determine the key priorities (challenges) and marketing opportunities challenges (high importance and low satisfaction). These (strengths). In addition, it allows the institution to pinpoint are the key areas that the campus needs to address to areas where resources can be redirected from areas of low improve retention on campus. These are the items where importance to areas of high importance. students expect a lot, but where the institution is currently High importance/low satisfaction Matrix for Prioritizing Action pinpoints areas that should claim the institution's immediate attention, i.e. Very retention agenda/priorities Important High importance/high satisfaction showcases the institution's areas of strength that should be highlighted in promotional materials Very Very Dissatisfied Satisfied X Low importance/low satisfaction presents an opportunity for the institution * to examine those areas that have low X status with students Very * Low importance/high satisfaction Unimportant suggests areas from which it might be beneficial to redirect institutional re- sources to areas of higher importance 7 www.noellevitz.com © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. 5 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report failing to meet student expectations. The areas of dissatis- There is a good variety of courses provided on this faction are prioritized by their importance score so the campus. institution knows it is working in the areas that matter the Adequate financial aid is available for most students. most to students. Challenges are defined as being above Computer labs are adequate and accessible. the median in importance and in the bottom quartile of Faculty provide timely feedback about student satisfaction and/or the top quartile of performance gaps. progress in a course. Following, the strengths and challenges are presented Financial aid awards are announced to students in by each institution type. They are listed in order of time to be helpful in college planning. importance. Security staff respond quickly in emergencies. Financial aid counselors are helpful. Four-Year Private Colleges and Universities: I seldom get the "run-around" when seeking informa- Strengths (high importance/high satisfaction): tion on this campus. The content of the courses within my major is Billing policies are reasonable. valuable. Parking lots are well-lighted and secure. The instruction in my major field is excellent. Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their Four-Year Public Colleges and Universities: field. Strengths (high importance/high satisfaction): The quality of instruction I receive in most of my classes is excellent. The content of the courses within my major is valuable. My academic advisor is knowledgeable about require- ments in my major. The instruction in my major field is excellent. The campus is safe and secure for all students. My academic advisor is knowledgeable about require- ments in my major. I am able to experience intellectual growth here. Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their Major requirements are clear and reasonable. field. My academic advisor is approachable. The quality of instruction I receive in most of my There is a commitment to academic excellence on this classes is excellent. campus. The campus is safe and secure for all students. It is an enjoyable experience to be a student on this My academic advisor is approachable. campus. The campus staff are caring and helpful. There is a good variety of courses provided on this campus. Faculty are usually available after class and during office hours. Major requirements are clear and reasonable. Faculty are usually available after class and during Students are made to feel welcome on this campus. office hours. This institution has a good reputation within the community. I am able to experience intellectual growth here. On the whole, the campus is well-maintained. Computer labs are adequate and accessible. There is a commitment to academic excellence on this campus. Challenges (high importance/low satisfaction): It is an enjoyable experience to be a student on this I am able to register for classes I need with few campus. conflicts. Library resources and services are adequate. Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment. On the whole, the campus is well-maintained. Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of Students are made to feel welcome on this campus. individual students. BEST COPY AVAILABLE © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. 6 www.noellevitz.com 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report Class change (drop/add) policies are reasonable. Students are made to feel welcome on this campus. This institution has a good reputation within the It is an enjoyable experience to be a student on this community. campus. Challenges (high importance/low satisfaction): Challenges (high importance/low satisfaction): I am able to register for classes I need with few Classes are scheduled at times that are convenient for conflicts. me. Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment. I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts. Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students. The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate. The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate. This school does whatever it can to help me reach my educational goals. Adequate financial aid is available for most students. Students are notified early in the term if they are Faculty provide timely feedback about student doing poorly in a class. progress in a course. Adequate financial aid is available for most students. Security staff respond quickly in emergencies. Parking lots are well-lighted and secure. This institution shows concern for students as indi- viduals. The college shows concern for students as individu- Parking lots are well-lighted and secure. als. I seldom get the "run-around" when seeking informa- My academic advisor is knowledgeable about the tion on this campus. transfer requirements of other schools. Faculty are understanding of students' unique life Financial aid awards are announced to students in circumstances. time to be helpful in college planning. My academic advisor is concerned about my success as an individual. Community, Junior, and Technical Colleges: I seldom get the "run-around" when seeking informa- Strengths (high importance/high satisfaction): tion on this campus. The quality of instruction I receive in most of my classes is excellent. Career and Private Schools: Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their Strengths (high importance/high satisfaction): fields. There is a good variety of courses provided on this The quality of instruction I receive in most of my campus. classes is excellent. I am able to experience intellectual growth here. Classes are scheduled at times that are convenient for me. The campus is safe and secure for all students. The quality of instruction in the academic programs is Program requirements are clear and reasonable. excellent. Faculty are usually available after class and during Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their office hours. fields. Computer labs are adequate and accessible. I am able to experience intellectual growth here. Library resources and services are adequate. The school is safe and secure for all students. Policies and procedures regarding registration and Program requirements are clear and reasonable. course selection are clear and well-publicized. Students are made to feel welcome at this school. On the whole, the campus is well-maintained. 9 www.noellevitz.com © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. 7 2002 National Student Satisfaction Report Trend Analysis My academic advisor is knowledgeable about my program requirements. The composite scales were analyzed to determine trends in There is a good variety of courses provided at this importance, satisfaction, and performance gap across the school. most recent five years of data. The comparisons on the following pages are presented separately by institutional Nearly all classes deal with practical experiences and type: four-year private; four-year public; and two-year applications. community, junior, and technical institutions. The data My academic advisor is approachable. have been isolated by academic year, rather than presented Faculty are usually available after class and during cumulatively. office hours. The school staff are caring and helpful. I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts. Challenges (high importance/low satisfaction): The equipment in the lab facilities is kept up to date. This school does whatever it can to help me reach my educational goals. The school shows concern for students as individuals. Computer labs are adequate and accessible. The career services office provides students with the help they need to get a job. Faculty are understanding of students' unique life circumstances. www.noellevitz.com © Noel-Levitz, Inc. All rights reserved. 8