Summary of The Senior Survey, 2001

Spring Hill College

 

Prepared by

Michael S. Johnson

Associate Vice President for Academic Affairs

 

October 2001

 

This brief paper outlines the results of the Spring Hill College “HEDS” Senior Survey, administered by Paul Luttman at the end of the Spring 2001 semester.  A more detailed examination of our results by gender and ethnicity will be done at a later date.  This paper emphasizes our outcomes compared to two peer groups.  Both peer groups contain high-quality schools.  Peer group 1 represents national liberal arts colleges from 750 to 4,000 students.[1]  Each school has endowment and expenditures per student that matches or exceeds our own.  Peer group 2 includes the southern schools from peer group 1, plus two Jesuit colleges (the only other Jesuit participants in the survey), and Tulane.[2]

 

 

 

Ways we differ from our peers:

 

·         The proportion of graduates continuing studies in business and biology/pre-health is much higher at Spring Hill, while the proportion in education and fine arts is much lower.  These differences are also reflected in desired careers.

·         More of our students are taking jobs in advertising, public relations, media, and hospitality than at the peers.  A much higher proportion will be working in medicine or health care.  A much lower proportion will be working in educational fields.

·         More of our students view working for social change as an important career consideration.  On the other hand, our seniors also view as important careers that pay well, offer social status/recognition, provide stability, have limited working hours, and provide leadership potential.  This is an odd mix!

·         Our students were more likely to participate in a fraternity or sorority, and much more likely to participate for more than one year.

·         Of students who do participate in intercollegiate sports, our students are more likely to do so for several years.

·         Other schools tend to have more freshman participation in the student newspaper, but overall, our participation rates are slightly higher.

·         Our seniors who work are much more likely to work off-campus than at the peer schools.

·         A substantially smaller percentage of Spring Hill seniors held work-study jobs than in the peer groups.

·         A larger proportion of Spring Hill seniors had lived off-campus their freshman year.  However, this was not true for their senior years, where a larger fraction of Spring Hill students lived in campus housing.

Ways we do better than our peers:

 

·         Satisfaction:

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
% who would definitely attend same school again	40%	30%	36%
% who would probably or definitely attend same school again	69%	63%	68%

 

% of students who are very satisfied with item [if item has an asterisk (*), then the % is for generally or very satisfied]

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Their overall education	52%	38%	39%
First-year advising	35%	23%	14%
Major advising	56%	44%	25%
Faculty availability outside class	73%	60%	50%
Student interaction with faculty	71%	60%	43%
Availability of courses	34%	22%	19%
Course instruction in science and math	45%	31%	24%
Course instruction in social sciences	50%	43%	38%
Course instruction in business	63%	38%	41%
Classroom/laboratory facilities	38%	31%	33%
Financial aid office	42%	26%	24%
Financial aid package*	87%*	78%*	72%*
Student health services	31%	24%	22%
Student financial services*	89%*	81%*	82%*
Recreation/athletics facilities	47%	37%	30%
Registrar’s office	28%	23%	21%
Student voice in policies	13%	10%	8%
Student government	18%	11%	10%
Religious/spiritual life on campus	36%	22%	31%
Ethnic/racial diversity on campus*	63%*	47%*	47%*
Climate for minority students on campus*	63%*	54%*	49%*
Sense of community on campus	40%	22%	26%

It should be noted that the positive evaluation of diversity and minority student climate is largely as perceived by white students on campus.  We do not have breakdowns by race as of yet.  However, the percentage of minority students surveyed was higher in the Spring Hill sample (17%) than in the peer groups (13% and 15%).

 

·         Enhancement of Academic Abilities:  % stating item was “greatly enhanced” [if item has an asterisk (*), then the % is for moderately or greatly enhanced]

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Write effectively*	90%*	88%*	85%*
Acquire new skills and knowledge	57%	50%	50%
Think analytically and logically	58%	53%	51%
Formulate creative ideas and solutions	45%	36%	35%
Evaluate and choose alternatives	38%	28%	32%
Use quantitative tools*	70%*	59%*	59%*
Use technology	39%	31%	33%
Gain in-depth knowledge of a subject	69%	61%	58%
Understand process of science	28%	26%	21%
Evaluate role of science and technology in society*	72%*	53%*	50%*
Engage in pursuit of knowledge and truth*	88%*	76%*	75%*
Relate to people of different races, nations, or religions*	77%*	61%*	63%*
Develop awareness of social problems	40%	31%	33%
Place problems in historical perspective*	70%*	66%*	68%*
Understand moral and ethical issues*	87%*	73%*	76%*
Function effectively as a team member	47%	38%	39%
Communicate well orally	54%	40%	40%
Understand myself*	94%*	89%*	90%*
Establish course of action	58%	44%	45%
Develop self-esteem	42%	37%	38%
Work under pressure	65%	63%	61%

In each of the above cases, the Spring Hill mean score was higher than that of peer groups, except the “understand process of science,” which was the same as one peer group.  There was not a single “enhancement of abilities” question where the Spring Hill mean was lower than that of either peer group.  I have not run any significance tests on the data, however.

 

·         Activities during college (% participating in the activity):

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Leadership training	34%	22%	17%
Sexual harassment program	11%	5%	4%

 

·         Spring Hill students were more likely to participate in religious groups, and to participate for more than one year.

·         Our seniors were much more likely to have participated in volunteer service, and to have done so for several years.

·         Frequency of activities:  % doing activity “very often” [if item has an asterisk (*), then the % is for often or very often]

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Class presentations	43%	35%	37%
Organized demonstrations*	18%*	13%*	15%*
Religious services*	35%*	15%*	31%*
Discussions with students of different beliefs	34%	28%	25%

 

·         Time spent on activities:

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Attending class or labs – 16 or more hours per week	48%	39%	32%
Working with peers on classwork – 11 or more hours per week	13%	7%	8%

 

 

 

 

Ways we closely resemble our peers:

 

·         We have similar student participation in student government.

·         Our students participate in intramural athletics in proportions similar to the peer schools.  Our overall participation is slightly higher.

·         Our students spent about the same amount of time as students at peer institutions:  studying/preparing for class, using the computer, partying, socializing with friends, and reading for pleasure.

·         Our students have similar satisfaction levels for:  computer facilities and resources; computer services and support; career services; and counseling services.

·         Student center/union facilities offer a mixed signal – the national liberal arts peers do much better than us, but we do much better than the southeast/Jesuit peer group.  The same finding applies to student center/union programs.

·         Satisfaction with student housing is almost identical to our peers.  This may reflect the influence of the Fairway Apartments, since the survey is of seniors only.

·         Campus social life receives mixed satisfaction, with Spring Hill seniors showing more satisfaction than the national liberal arts peers, but less satisfaction than the southeast/Jesuit peers.

 

Ways these peers do better than us:

 

·         Students at peer schools search for and find jobs before graduation more often than do our students.

·         Spring Hill has a lower proportion of students continuing to graduate school (our 23% v. their 32 to 34%)

·         Activities during college (% participating in the activity):

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Semester or year abroad	6%	29%	26%
Off-campus internship	40%	45%	45%
Honor society	17%	31%	34%
Summer paid internship	12%	26%	35%
Independent study	23%	31%	25%
Gender studies program	7%	11%	7%

 

·         Our students were less likely to participate in the performing arts.

·         Our seniors were less likely to participate in social action groups.

·         Our seniors were less likely to participate in cultural groups.

·         Our students were less likely to be involved in faculty research.

·         Frequency of activities:  % doing activity “very often” or “often”

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Guest in faculty member’s home	8%	13%	8%
Cultural events	40%	51%	47%

 

·         Time spent on activities:

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Participating in clubs or organized groups - 11 or more hours per week	6%	10%	10%
Applying to jobs or school – 3 or more hours per week	24%	30%	38%
Work for pay - 16 or more hours per week	26%	22%	19%

 

·         Dissatisfaction:  % who are very or generally dissatisfied with the item

	Spring Hill	Peer 1 (national liberal arts)	Peer 2 (southern plus Jesuit)
Internships or study off-campus or abroad	25%	11%	17%
Course instruction in humanities and arts	15%	7%	8%
Library facilities and resources	32%	20%	12%
Library services	20%	12%	9%
Food services	44%	36%	30%
Recreation/athletics programs	17%	11%	11%
Cultural and fine arts programming	30%	16%	19%
Campus safety	34%	19%	11%