National Survey of Student Engagement 2004

1
National Survey of Student Engagement2004

• Student Responses to Academic Engagement Questions

2
NSSE comparisons

• This survey of first-year students and seniors
  was conducted in 2002 and 2004. It is not a
  longitudinal study.
• This presentation will compare SJU frequency
  distributions from 2002 to 2004.
• It will also compare the 2004 SJU frequency
  distributions to 2004 responses from the Jesuit
  consortium and Masters Level Institutions.

3
2004 NSSE Response Rate

• The average response rate for all institutions
  included in the study was 38.
• SJU response rate 39 (sample size 1959)
• -Freshmen response rate - 42
• -Senior response rate - 36
• Jesuit response rate 41
• Masters response rate 36
• The 2002 SJU overall response rate was 46 with a
  sample size of 450.

4
The Jesuit Consortium 20 Institutions

• Canisius College, College of Holy Cross,
  Creighton University, Fairfield University,
  Gonzaga University, John Carroll University, Le
  Moyne College, Loyola University of Chicago,
  Loyola University of New Orleans, Marquette
  University, Regis University, Rockhurst
  University, Saint Josephs University, Seattle
  University, Spring Hill College, University of
  Detroit Mercy, University of San Francisco,
  Xavier University

5
Masters Level Comparison Group 204 Institutions

• A sample of Masters Level Institutions
• Alfred UniversityCanisius CollegeDrake
  UniversityGwynedd-Mercy CollegeJames Madison
  UniversityLa Salle UniversityQuinnipiac
  UniversityRegis UniversityUniversity of
  Richmond

6
1a. Percentage of students that reported OFTEN /
VERY OFTEN asking questions and contributing to
discussions.
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
7
1b. Percentage of students that reported making
class presentations OFTEN / VERY OFTEN
8
1f. Percentage of students that reported
attending class without completing readings or
assignments OFTEN / VERY OFTEN
9
1k. Percentage of students that NEVER
participated in a community based projects as
part of a regular class
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
10
1q. Percentage of students reporting prompt
feedback from faculty on your academic
performance (written or oral).
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
11
1r. Percentage of students that reported working
harder than they thought they could to meet an
instructors standards OFTEN / VERY OFTEN
12
6a. Percentage of students reporting attendance
at an art exhibit, gallery, play, dance or
theater performance
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
13
7a. Percentage of students that report an
interest in an internship/co-op, field experience
or clinical assignment
14
7d. Percentage of students reporting an interest
in working on research with a faculty member
outside of class
15
7f. Percentage of student reporting an interest
in study abroad
16
9a. Percentage of students that spent 11 HOURS
PER WEEK preparing for class (studying, reading,
etc.)
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
17
11a. Percentage of students that reported QUITE A
BIT / VERY MUCH educational growth by acquiring
a broad general education
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
18
10a. Percentage of students that reported QUITE A
BIT / VERY MUCH time studying and on academic
work.
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
19
10b. Percentage of students that reported QUITE A
BIT / VERY MUCH support provided by the
institution to help them succeed academically.
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
20
12. Percentage of students reporting on the
overall quality of academic advising
21
13. Percentage of students rate the entire
educational experience as EXCELLENT
The mean is statistically significant plt.001
(2-tailed)
22
14. Percentage of students that would PROBABLY /
DEFINITELY choose the same institution if they
could start over.
23

• Data Break compiled by
• Kim Allen-Stuck, PhD
• October 2004