Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey Results
Fall 2002
SUbjects
In November of 2002, the Noel-Levitz Student Satisfaction Survey (SSI) was administered to ten intact undergraduate classes at STU whose total enrollment was 243. An attempt was made to stratify the sample according to the level (100, 200, etc.) of the course, the discipline of the course and whether the course was given in the morning or in the evening. A total of 209 scoreable questionnaires were returned, representing 17.3% of the STU undergraduate population. The resulting sample’s demographic characteristics compared to the undergraduate population of STU in Fall 2002 are presented below in Table 1.
Table 1. Demographic comparison of SSI sample and undergraduate population
Category / SSI Sample % / Undergraduate Pop. %Gender
Female / 61 / 61Male / 39 / 39
Ethnicity/Race
African-American / 26 / 18White / 9 / 11
Hispanic / 49 / 50
Class Level
Freshman / 17 / 50Sophomore / 29 / 19
Junior / 27 / 21
Senior / 26 / 11
Review of Table 1 indicates that the present sample was generally representative of the undergraduate population in regards to gender and ethnicity. There was an oversampling of students from higher class levels than the population, however, given the nature of this survey this probably served to increase the validity of the results as students with greater experience with STU would be able to make more reliable judgments concerning the items on the survey.
Results
SSI Scales
The individual items of the SSI can be aggregated according to Noel-Levitz into 12 scales. Table 2. list these scales with the results sorted by level of satisfaction for each. In addition a comparison to the results of the Spring,1998 administration of the SSI is also provided. The first salient difference to be observed is the great improvements made by the University in regard to student satisfaction. In 1998, the average satisfaction score for 10 out of the 12 scales was significantly lower (i.e. non-chance) than means for a national
sample of 4 year private institutions. In 2002, only the mean satisfaction score for Safety and Security was below the national average. Overall, mean satisfaction scores improved from 1998 to 2002 on each scale except for Recruitment and Financial Aid and Safety and Security. It should noted that the Safety and Security Scale is composed of only 4 items and item # 7 ‘The campus is safe and secure for all students’ was not rated significantly below the national sample. Another item in this scale # 28 ‘The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate’ while rated as being significantly below the national norm does not seem to be appropriate for inclusion for a scale dealing with safety and security needs.
INDIVIDUAL ITEMS
Analysis of the individual items of the SSI reveals that in terms of student satisfaction 12 items were rated as being significantly below the national norms and 7 were above the national norms. Table 3 presents these items in order of the importance ratings given to them by the students. Of the 12 items with significantly lower mean satisfaction scores than the national sample, 9 had satisfaction means that were greater than the corresponding means recorded from the 1998 STU sample, indicating that the University is making progress internally but not able yet to demonstrate success as compared to the national norms. Of the three items that had lower satisfaction means, all were items that corresponded to the Safety and Security Scale of the SSI.
Analysis of the items whose satisfaction means were greater than the corresponding national means, reveals that STU undergraduates are quite satisfied generally with the University Library both in terms of its resources and staff. Additionally, there is a positive satisfaction with the University’s responsiveness to diverse populations and the degree of racial harmony in the institution.
.
Table 3. Individual SSI items with satisfaction scores significantly different than the national normsIndividual Items whose mean satisfaction value was significantly lower than the National Sample for 2002 in order of importance
change in
Spring 1998 / Fall 2002 / satisfaction
importance / satisfaction / importance / satisfaction / 1998 to 2002
7. The campus is safe and secure for all students / 6.53 / 5.34 / 6.53 / 4.67 / -0.67
72. On the whole, the campus is well-maintained / 6.32 / 4.52 / 6.37 / 5.22 / 0.70
69. There is a good variety of courses provided on this campus / 6.54 / 4.22 / 6.34 / 4.60 / 0.38
12. Financial aid awards are announced to students in time to be helpful… / 6.21 / 3.95 / 6.33 / 4.39 / 0.44
41. There is a commitment to academic excellence on this campus / 6.38 / 4.94 / 6.31 / 5.14 / 0.20
51. This institution has a good reputation within the community / 6.29 / 4.95 / 6.27 / 5.13 / 0.18
21. The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate / 6.09 / 3.69 / 6.19 / 3.17 / -0.52
11. Billing policies are reasonable / 6.17 / 3.87 / 6.15 / 4.09 / 0.22
28. Parking lots are well-lighted and secure / 6.35 / 4.28 / 6.13 / 4.11 / -0.17
23. Living conditions in the residence halls are comfortable / 5.42 / 3.08 / 5.81 / 3.87 / 0.79
24. The intercollegiate athletic programs contribute to a strong sense of school spirit / 5.19 / 3.92 / 5.66 / 3.99 / 0.07
42. There are a sufficient number of weekend activities for students / 5.23 / 3.69 / 5.62 / 3.97 / 0.28
Individual Items whose mean satisfaction value was significantly greater than the National Sample
67. Freedom of expression is protected on campus / 6.29 / 4.94 / 6.30 / 5.21 / 0.27
20. The business office is open during hours which are convenient for most students / 6.24 / 4.81 / 6.29 / 5.43 / 0.62
62. There is a strong commitment to racial harmony on this campus / 6.28 / 5.30 / 6.24 / 5.41 / 0.11
18. Library resources and services are adequate / 6.28 / 4.83 / 6.19 / 5.33 / 0.50
13. Library staff are helpful and approachable / 6.12 / 5.75 / 6.18 / 5.71 / -0.04
85. Institution's commitment to evening students / 4.95 / 5.13 / 0.18
87. Institution's commitment to under-represented populations / 4.92 / 5.13 / 0.21
kjhkjh