Academic Assessment Workshop: A Review of the

Student Satisfaction Inventory

Implementation & ImplicationLiz Baldizan, Ed.D., Assistant Dean, Academic Success CenterPeter Kim, Ph.D. Senior Academic Advisor, Academic Success CenterRichard Clark, M.B.A., Director, Office of Student Conduct & Residential LifeAngelina Hill, Ph.D.Associate Director, Academic Assessment

Purpose of this Session

Overview Longitudinal implementation and implications of the 2002, 2005, and 2008 Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) at UNLV

The Student Satisfaction Inventory: A tool to improve the quality of student

life and learning. Measures student satisfaction and

priorities, showing how satisfied students are as well as what issues are important to them

Has existed for 36 years through Noel Levitz

Provides for a national comparison with more than 2,000 other colleges or universities

SSI Design

The 100 items on each survey have been analyzed to produce 11 scale scores

The scales provide the big picture overview of what matters to our students

The differentce between the student’s level of importance and satisfaction is the performance gap; the level of concern to students

Performance Gaps at UNLV after the 2002 & 2005 SSI:

2005 2002 1 1 Safety & Security

3 3 Academic Advising

7 6 Instructional Effectiveness

2 2 Registration Effectiveness

Three Primary Responses to Challenges (high importance & low satisfaction):

1. Change perceptions through information and communication

2. Implement easy & quick actions that resolve the issues

3. Plan for long-term strategic adjustments in the delivery of the service

UNLV and SSI Implementation

Spring Semester Administration of the SSI to a random selection of undergraduate students across disciplines:

Year Number of Valid Surveys No Response

2002 1926 472

2005 2124 274

2008 2223 119

Noel Levitz Recommendations following the 2002 & 2005 SSI:

Conduct an academic advising assessment resulting with an improvement plan and subsequent needed professional development for advisors

Complete a quality service assessment and create an improvement plan

Reexamine faculty roles and responsibilities for retention

Ensure that all student integration activities (pre-admission, admission, registration, advising, early alert, etc.) are frontloaded so that student success is maximized

SSI Administration Process at UNLV

– Administered every 3 years• 2002 – 2005 – 2008 - 2011

– How is the SSI administered?• Canon Center

– What have we learned about UNLV responses (e.g. classroom vs. online option)?

Performance Gaps at UNLV from 2002 to 2008 SSI:

2008 2005 2002 Scale

1 1 1 Safety & Security

2 3 3 Academic Advising

3 7 6 Instructional Effect.

4 2 2 Registration Effect.

Outcomes of SSI Results

• Advising – Hired Executive Director and additional advisors

• Campus Security – Hired additional police officers, installed additional campus lighting and installed cameras

Survey Big Picture• SSI

– Provides broad examination of student satisfaction.– Has national and comparison group benchmark data

available. – Has already been administered at UNLV (2002, 2005,

2008), establishing a baseline of data.

• NSSE– Examines student behavior and engagement in the

educational process. – Is used by U.S. News and World Report. – Has already been administered twice (2002, 2005,

2009) at UNLV

• Climate Survey– Used by the Division of Student Affairs

Scale 2002 2005 2008

  IMP SAT GAP IMP SAT GAP IMP SAT GAPSafety and Security 6.25 4.13 2.12 6.28 3.88 2.40 6.34 3.92 2.42Academic Advising 6.20 4.65 1.55 6.23 4.53 1.70 6.26 4.81 1.45

Instructional Effectiveness 6.21 4.88 1.33 6.18 4.81 1.37 6.20 4.95 1.25

Registration Effectiveness 6.10 4.54 1.56 6.10 4.38 1.72 6.12 4.59 1.53

Campus Support Services 5.96 5.04 0.92 5.95 5.00 0.95 5.94 5.08 0.86

Recruitment and Financial Aid 5.87 4.32 1.55 5.88 4.31 1.57 5.93 4.42 1.51

Concern for the Individual 5.90 4.39 1.51 5.87 4.30 1.57 5.89 4.49 1.40

Campus Climate 5.86 4.54 1.32 5.87 4.44 1.43 5.91 4.64 1.27Service Excellence 5.84 4.43 1.41 5.83 4.36 1.47 5.85 4.54 1.31

Student Centeredness 5.79 4.52 1.27 5.80 4.44 1.36 5.86 4.66 1.20

Campus Life 5.32 4.50 0.82 5.33 4.41 0.92 5.43 4.66 0.77

Responsiveness to Diverse Populations   4.80    4.69    4.82 

4.20

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

5.20

5.40

Faculty

The quality of instruction I receive in most of my classes is excellent

Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their field

Faculty are fair and un-biased in their treatment of individual students

Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course

2002 2005 2008

3.60

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

Academic Advising

My academic advisor is approachable

My academic advisor helps me set goals to work toward

The personnel in-volved in registration are helpful

2002 2005 2008

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Safety

The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate

Parking lots are well-lighted and secure

The campus is safe and secure for all students

2002 2005 2008

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

Registration/Tuition

I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts

The assessment and course placement pro-cedures are reasonable

Billing policies are rea-sonable

Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment

2002 2005 2008

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

Miscellaneous

Computer labs are ad-equate and accessible

I am able to experience in-tellectual growth here

Library resources and services are adequate

It is an enjoyable expe-rience to be a student on this campus

On the whole, the campus is well-maintained

2002 2005 2008

3.80

4.00

4.20

4.40

4.60

4.80

5.00

Student Satisfaction

So far, how has your college experience met your expectations?

Rate your overall satis-faction with your expe-rience here thus far

All in all, if you had to do it over, would you enroll here again?

2002 2005 2008

Discussion & Questions?

Thank you!

Liz, Angelina, Rich & Peter