executive summary of the 1999 - UTS W3 FrontPage Extensions ...

Office of Planning and Institutional Effectiveness
Hope, Knowledge, and Opportunity Research Report 2003
Student Satisfaction Survey
Fall 2003 Last Updated: 1/21/2005
Office of Planning & Institutional Effectiveness
The Student Satisfaction Survey is one survey in the series of Continuous
Quality Improvement Surveys instituted by Florida International
University's Office of Planning and Institutional Effectiveness. This is
the third survey report from the Student Satisfaction Survey to be
systematically distributed to a large number of students as part of the
Continuous Quality Improvement process. The information in these
Continuous Quality Improvement Survey Reports is distributed to members of
the University community and will be used by the appropriate departments to
enhance continuous quality improvement efforts. Every effort has been made to ensure that the data contained in this
document is accurate. For further information about this and other
Continuous Quality Improvement Survey Reports, visit our website at
www.fiu.edu/~opie/cqis/index.htm, or contact Yasmin LaRocca at
larocca@fiu.edu or the Vice Provost for Planning and Institutional
Effectiveness at 305-348-2731, (FAX) 305-348-1908. You may also visit the
Office of Planning and Institutional Effectiveness at University Park, PC
543. |TABLE OF CONTENTS | |
|Table of Contents |1 |
|Executive Summary of the Fall 2003 Student Satisfaction Survey |3 |
| | |
|I. Summary of the Fall 2003 Student Satisfaction Survey | |
|A. Introduction |5 |
|B. Methodology: | |
|Survey Design |5 |
|Sampling Design and Response Rates |6 |
|Table 1 Headcount Enrollment and Returned Surveys by |7 |
|College/School | |
|Table 2 Headcount Enrollment and Returned Surveys by Gender and |7 |
|Race/Ethnicity | |
|Table 3 Headcount Enrollment and Returned Surveys by Class Level |7 |
|Statistics |8 |
| | |
|II. Graphical Analyses of Survey Items With Levels of Highest | |
|Agreement and Disagreement | |
|A. Items With Highest Levels of Agreement |9 |
|B. Items With Highest Levels of Disagreement |11 |
| | |
|III. Survey Item Subscales | |
|A. Overall Analysis of Subscales |14 |
|Table 4 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey Subscales |14 |
|B. Item Analyses |14 |
|Table 5 Survey Items With Highest Levels of Agreement |14 |
|Table 6 Survey Items With Highest Levels of Disagreement |15 |
|C. Academic Issues |16 |
|Table 7 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey: Academic Issues |15 |
|D. Campus Environment |16 |
|Table 8 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey: Campus Environment |16 |
|E. Campus Life |16 |
|Table 9 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey: Campus Life |16 |
|F. Communication |17 |
|Table 10 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey: Communication |17 |
|G. Services |17 |
|Table 11 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey: Services |17 |
|H. Safety |18 |
|Table 12 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey: Safety |18 |
|I. Emergency Procedures |18 |
|Table 13 2002 Student Satisfaction Survey: Emergency Procedures |18 |
| | |
|IV. Experiences and Treatment of Protected Classes at FIU | |
|A. Experiences |19 |
|Table 14 Top Five Experiences By Student Groups |19 |
|B. Treatment of Protected Classes |19 |
|Table 15 "In the previous year I was offended by a faculty/staff |20 |
|member making a comment that I considered to be degrading to | |
|someone's:" | |
|Table 16 "In the previous year I was offended by a student making |20 |
|a comment that I considered to be degrading to someone's:" | |
|Table 17 "In the previous year at FIU, I witnessed discrimination |20 |
|by a faculty/staff member that I believed was based upon | |
|someone's:" | |
|Table 18 "In the previous year at FIU, I witnessed discrimination |21 |
|by a student that I believed was based upon someone's:" | |
| | |
|V. Significant Group Differences | |
|A. Differences Between Gender Groups |22 |
|Table 19 Demographic Information By Gender and Level |22 |
|Gender Demographics |23 |
|B. Differences Among Racial/Ethnic Groups |23 |
|Table 20 Demographic Information By Race/Ethnicity |24 |
|Race/Ethnicity Demographics |25 |
|C. Differences Among Age Groups |25 |
|Table 21 Demographic Information By Age |25 |
|Age Demographics |26 |
|D. Differences Among Class Levels |27 |
|Table 22 Demographic Information By Class Level |27 |
|Class Level Demographics |28 |
|E. Differences Among Colleges/Schools |28 |
|Table 23 Demographic Information By Colleges/Schools for |28 |
|Undergraduate Respondents | |
|Table 24 Demographic Information By Colleges/Schools for Graduate |29 |
|Respondents | |
|F. Differences Between Campuses |31 |
|Table 25 Demographic Information By Campus |30 |
| | |
|VI. Conclusions from the Fall 2003 Student Satisfaction Survey |32 |
|Appendix A: Student Satisfaction Survey |33 |
|Appendix B: Comments from Students |44 |
|Appendix C: Responses to Questions Regarding the Treatment of the|151 |
|Protected Classes | |
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE FALL 2003 STUDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY This report summarizes the main findings from the Fall 2003 Florida
International University Student Satisfaction Survey, a Continuous Quality
Improvement study conducted by the Office of Planning and Institutional
Effectiveness. This was the third student satisfaction survey to be
systematically distributed to a large number of students as part of the
Continuous Quality Improvement process. The survey design assured
respondents of anonymity in an attempt to facilitate candor. The Student Satisfaction Survey was placed online and data was collected
during the Fall 2003 semester. The survey was announced to the students
through several venues. A link to the Student Satisfaction Survey was
placed on the student government website, the Continuous Quality
Improvement Survey website, the Biscayne Bay Campus website, the FIU
student website, and intermittently on the FIU homepage. In addition, a
short message announcing the Student Satisfaction Survey ran on the
scrolling marquee board in the Graham Center (student union) and on the
message boards at the two main entrances to the University for several
weeks. The Deans, Associate Deans, Assistant Deans, Chairpersons, and
Program Directors were sent information regarding the survey collection
dates. Three thousand fifty-two students responded to the survey. It was
difficult to calculate the response rate to the survey, because it is
unclear how many students were actually aware of the data collection.
However, over nine percent of the degree-seeking student population
responded to the survey. Responses may not add up to 100% because some respondents chose not to
answer every question. Respondents reported the highest levels of agreement to the following
items.
. In general, my instructor's grading policies are clear to me: 85% of
respondents agreed with this item, 7% of respondents disagreed, 8% of
respondents were not sure
. I am satisfied that my instructors have sufficient background
knowledge for their assigned classe