2005 Hamline University Promise Study Summary Presentation

1
2005 Hamline University Promise StudySummary
Presentation
2
Introduction

• As you view results, keep in mind
• Promise Survey results are valuable, but only one
  tool for measuring students experiences.
• Other research tools (National Survey for Student
  Engagement in CLA, American Bar Association in
  Law School, etc.) should also be used in
  evaluating performance.
• Only areas that changed greater than the margin
  of error (3-5) were noted as differences between
  2004 and 2005.

3
Research Methods

• Populations surveyed included current
  degree-seeking students in each of Hamlines five
  schools. Overall, 1,388 students completed the
  survey.
• The survey was administered online from Feb.
  26-March 13, 2005.
• The survey questionnaire was very similar to the
  one used in 2004, to track changes over time. A
  few revisions were made to address new and
  current issues.

4
Research Method

• Sample Size Response Rate
  Accuracy Rate
• CLA Students 302 56 5
• GSE Students 309 59 5
• GLS Students 121 65 5
• GSM Students 225 69
  4
• HUSL Students 431 64 3
• Total 1,388 62 2

5
College of Liberal Arts Students
6
(No Transcript)
7
(No Transcript)
8
(No Transcript)
9
Key Changes from 2004 - CLA

• Technology available for enhancing academic
  learning increased (44 vs. 31 excellent/very
  good.)
• Hamlines commitment to meeting students needs
  increased (45 vs. 35 excellent/very good.)
• Providing support to address the needs of all
  students improved (36 vs. 26 good drop in
  fair/poor by 10.)

10
Graduate School of Education Students
11
(No Transcript)
12
(No Transcript)
13
(No Transcript)
14
Key Changes from 2004 - GSE

• The following aspects related to technology
  increased
• Technology available for enhancing academic
  learning (56 vs. 43 excellent/very good)
• Computer technology (19 vs. 11 excellent)
• The following aspects related to personal
  attention and support improved this year
• Providing support to address the needs of all
  students (70 vs. 60 excellent/very good)
• Amount of personal attention received from staff,
  other than professors (54 vs. 44 excellent/very
  good)
• Feel supported (33 vs. 26 all the time)

15
Graduate School of Liberal Studies Students
16
(No Transcript)
17
(No Transcript)
18
(No Transcript)
19
Key Changes from 2004 - GLS

• The following aspects related to personal
  attention and support improved this year
• Providing support to address the needs of all
  students (76 vs. 59 excellent/very good)
• Commitment to meeting students needs (79 vs.
  67 excellent/very good)
• Making each person in the Hamline community feel
  welcome (79 vs. 59 excellent/very good)
• In addition, GLS students ratings of their
  overall experience at Hamline increased (86 vs.
  74).

20
Graduate School of Management Students
21
(No Transcript)
22
(No Transcript)
23
(No Transcript)
24
Key Changes from 2004 - GSM

• Technology available for enhancing academic
  learning increased (62 vs. 44 excellent/very
  good.)
• Feel important (63 vs. 56 all the time/most of
  the time.)

25
School of Law Students
26
(No Transcript)
27
(No Transcript)
28
(No Transcript)
29
Key Changes from 2004 - Law

• Many ratings improved this year. Some highlights
  include
• Choosing Hamline if they could do it again (70
  vs. 63 definitely would/probably would)
• Encourage someone else who is similar to them to
  attend Hamline (70 vs. 59 definitely would/
  probably would)
• Quality of education offered at Hamline (58 vs.
  45excellent/very good)
• Respect shown to students by professors (57 vs.
  49excellent/very good)
• Overall experience at Hamline (54 vs. 44)
• Amount of personal attention they receive from
  professors (44 vs. 36)

30
Overall Conclusions

• For every school and for every element, Hamlines
  performance either stayed the same or improved in
  2005.
• School of Law showed the greatest amount of
  improvement, with significant improvement within
  most elements of the Promise, as well as loyalty
  to Hamline.
• All schools showed improvement in the performance
  of an Innovative Learning Environment, especially
  for the technology available.
• There is still room for improvement in the
  delivery of the Promise in most schools,
  including
• Academic advising and career development services
• Aspects related to an Engaged Learning
  Environment