University Surveys and Assessments

Department Chair and Dean Retreat

Faculty and Staff Surveys

• COACHE (Harvard)—Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education

• Great Colleges to Work For (Chronicle)• Commission on Black Faculty and Staff Survey• Staff Survey

COACHE

• Where Clemson is ahead of other universities– Clarity of the tenure process—expectations,

process, criteria– Clarity of the expectations for performance as a

teacher– Satisfaction with professional interaction with

peers– Satisfaction with how well faculty “fit” in the

department

COACHE

• Where Clemson is below– Professional interaction with senior faculty– Clarity of their own prospects for earning tenure– Satisfaction with the number of courses taught– Lack of Child Care– Lack of spousal hiring policies– Quality of graduate students

Great Colleges2010

• Third year to participate– Selected as a “great” college in 2008 in shared

governance• Detailed report with break downs will not be

received until September• Broad overview provided with the publication

of the Honor Colleges and Universities

Great Colleges

• Categories Ranked Good (we had no very good or excellent areas)– Job Satisfaction/support– Professional Development– Facilities– Pride

Great Colleges

• Categories in the Yellow (area of concern; note we had no red categories, the worse)– Senior leadership– Faculty, Administration, and Staff Relations– Communication– Collaboration– Fairness

Student Surveys

• ETS Proficiency Profile (formerly MAPP)• Alumni Surveys (one year/three year)• Non-returning Student Survey• Student Satisfaction Survey• National Survey of Student Engagement• Core Alcohol and Drug Survey

Department SpecificSurveys

• CCIT• Electrical and Computer Engineering• General Counsel• PEER-WISE• Disability Services• HEHD Advising• Housing• Focus Groups (ex: Food Science graduates)

Assessment Goals

• Share data with you annually• College and department use the data in

making decisions• Collect value added data

ETS Proficiency--Freshmen Scores

Possible Range Mean Score

95% Confidence Limits* for

MeanStandard Deviation

25th Percentile

50th Percentile

75th Percentile

Total Score 400 to 500 450.69 449 to 452 16.96 439 449 464

Skills Sub scores:Critical Thinking 100 to 130 112.81 112 to 114 5.73 108 111 116

Reading 100 to 130 119.74 119 to 121 6.1 116 121 124

Writing 100 to 130 115.96 115 to 117 4.55 113 117 120Mathematics 100 to 130 115.42 115 to 116 5.32 111 115 119

Context-Based Sub scores:

Humanities 100 to 130 116.19 115 to 117 6.28 111 117 122Social Sciences 100 to 130 114.37 113 to 115 5.34 111 114 119Natural Sciences 100 to 130 116.82 116 to 118 5.01 113 117 121

FreshmenSkill Dimension Proficiency Classification

Proficient Marginal Not Proficient

Reading, Level 1 76% 16% 8%

Reading, Level 2 46% 23% 31%

Critical Thinking 7% 19% 74%

Writing, Level 1 78% 16% 6%

Writing, Level 2 30% 40% 31%

Writing, Level 3 12% 37% 51%

Mathematics, Level 1 76% 16% 8%

Mathematics, Level 2 41% 33% 26%

Mathematics, Level 3 9% 25% 65%

Seniors Possible

Range Mean Score95%

Confidence Limits* for

Mean

Standard Deviation

25th Percentile

50th Percentile

75th Percentile

Total Score 400 to 500 459.23 458 to 461 19.05 443 457 474

Skills Sub scores:

Critical Thinking 100 to 130 115.09 114 to 116 6.54 110 115 120

Reading 100 to 130 121.37 120 to 122 5.82 118 121 126

Writing 100 to 130 116.68 116 to 118 4.38 114 117 120

Mathematics 100 to 130 118.67 118 to 120 5.94 115 119 123

Context-Based Sub scores:

Humanities 100 to 130 117.48 116 to 118 6.45 112 117 124

Social Sciences 100 to 130 116.82 116 to 118 5.84 113 116 120

Natural Sciences 100 to 130 118.02 117 to 119 5.12 114 118 121

SeniorsSkill Dimension Proficiency Classification

Proficient Marginal Not Proficient

Reading, Level 1 84% 11% 5%

Reading, Level 2 59% 19% 23%

Critical Thinking 17% 25% 58%

Writing, Level 1 81% 18% 1%

Writing, Level 2 37% 37% 26%

Writing, Level 3 17% 38% 45%

Mathematics, Level 1 87% 9% 4%

Mathematics, Level 2 64% 24% 12%

Mathematics, Level 3 29% 32% 40%

Alumni SurveysOpportunity for undergraduate research/CI

Response Mean

Response Median

Response Mode(s)

Standard Deviation

Valid Responses

CU 3.75 4.00 4 1.06 317

CAFLS 3.80 4.00 4 1.10 41

Dept 1 3.80 4.00 4 1.10 5

Dept 2 3.50 3.00 3 1.23 6

Dept 3 3.90 4.00 4 1.20 10

Dept 4 4.00 4.00 3, 5 1.41 2

Dept 5 3.67 4.00 3, 4, 5 1.53 3

Dept 6 5.00 5.00 5 0.00 3

Dept 7 3.00 3.00 3 0.00 2

NSSE

• 91% of seniors at Clemson report that “if they could start over again” they would choose Clemson; compared to 88% at our peer and Top 20 institutions and 83% at Carnegie peer institutions.

• Freshmen at Clemson agree with seniors. 93% of our freshmen would choose Clemson if they could start over again, compared to 92% at peer and 90% at Top 20 institutions, and 85% at Carnegie institutions.

NSSE

• “Entire educational experience”– 95% of freshmen responded excellent/good;

compared to 91% at peer and Top 20 and 87% at Carnegie institutions.

– 94% of Clemson seniors responded excellent/good. The response at peer and Top 20 institutions is 90% and at Carnegie institutions 85%.

NSSEFreshmen trends

'04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '0915

25

35

45

55

65

75

85

54.2 52.4 53.0 53.9 54.1 55.6

Level of Academic Challenge (LAC)

NSSE Findings

• CLASS PREPARATION– Students are statistically less prepared for class;

they come to class without completing readings or assignments

– Freshmen score lower in attending art exhibits, gallery, play, dance, or other theatre productions

– Dissatisfaction is significant with graduate teaching assistants.

NSSE--Improvement

• DIVERSITY– Students report lower inclusion of diverse

perspectives in class discussions and writing assignments (trend is moving in right direction)

– Students report that the environment does encourage contact among students from diverse backgrounds, but students do not report the interactions taking place

NSSE and SSI Findings• ADVISING

– Mixed results are presented regarding the effectiveness of advising. NSSE results show that 70-80% of students rate the advising as good to excellent, but on the Student Satisfaction Survey only the gap between the importance of advising and satisfaction with advising was significant (1.14; third highest gap). Of particular concern is advising related to curriculum planning.

– Only 14% of freshmen and 25% of seniors believe the faculty is available, helpful or sympathetic.

– Students are dissatisfied with the protection of freedom of expression, commitment to racial harmony, disciplinary procedures, and the student handbook.

– Registration effectiveness is an area for concern. The gap between importance and satisfaction was (1.23), the second highest.

NSSE and SSI Findings

• CAMPUS CLIMATE– Only 10% of freshmen and 16% of seniors believe

the staff is helpful, considerate, or flexible.– Campus safety has the largest gap (1.76) between

importance and satisfaction. The areas included parking (gap of 3.62), lighting of parking lots (gap 1.22), and security response time (gap 1.20).

NSSE

• Adding additional analysis by broad disciplines