Background
In the summer of 2009, Rochester Community and Technical College and Winona State University Rochester (which together are also known as
University Center Rochester or UCR) commissioned SNG Research Corporation to conduct another wave of their Knowledge and Awareness Study. This
is the tenth wave of the survey for UCR and the twelfth wave of questions specific to RCTC. The first wave of the UCR study was conducted in 1998,
with additional waves in 1999, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. In the 2000 and 2001 waves, only questions specific to RCTC were
included.
Specific objectives of the study include measurement of:
- unaided (top-of-mind) awareness of area higher educational institutions
- perceptions of how higher education needs are being met in the greater Rochester area
- perceptions of public colleges and universities compared to private schools
- awareness of the UCR partnership
- relationships with UCR institutions
- recent enrollment in courses
- importance of key attributes when enrolling in a college and impressions of RCTC on these attributes
- preferred method for receiving information on colleges and universities
- awareness of advertising/promotions for RCTC, as well as the specific messages ‘Get There’ and ‘Expect the Unexpected’
- use of social media and social networking sites
- demographic characteristics
The 2009 survey includes adults, age 18-49 (waves prior to 2002 included adults age 18-44), residing within UCR’s service area. A total of 202 telephone
interviews were conducted with randomly selected households within the service area, which represents approximately a
25-30 mile radius around the city of Rochester. To ensure the inclusion of unlisted and unpublished numbers, a random-digit-dial sampling method was
used. In addition, for the first time a cell phone sample was included in order to include area residents who do not have or do not use a landline. Quotas
were set to ensure that cell phone only households were appropriately represented in the sample. At a 90% confidence level, the maximum margin of
error for 202 respondents is +/- 5.8 percentage points.
Interviews were completed from July 15 to August 3, 2009. The incidence of qualified households (that is, with at least one adult age 18-49) was 39%.
SNG Research Corporation was responsible for all phases of data collection and data processing for this project.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 1
Executive Summary
Higher Education
• When asked to name the schools that come to mind when thinking of higher education institutions in the Rochester area, RCTC is the institution that comes to mind most
frequently. Overall, nearly eight-in-ten adults (78%) mentioned RCTC in one form or another, which is similar to the past three years. Winona State University was
mentioned by 43% of respondents, which is also consistent with recent years. Mentions of University of Minnesota remained similar to the past two years at 57%. The
portion of respondents mentioning Minnesota School of Business continues to climb by a few percentage points each year; this year 15% mentioned it compared to 7% in
2006.
• Nearly half of respondents (46%) feel that the higher education needs of the greater Rochester area are well-met overall. This is similar to the past two years (49% and
46%) and higher than in 2006 (36%) and 2005 (33%).
• More than one-third (35%) of adults have taken some sort of college or university course, either credit, non-credit, or online, in the past year, which is up from 25% last
year. All respondents were asked about their interest level in ever taking online courses. Overall, 21% are ‘extremely’ or ‘very’ interested. On the other hand, 41% say
they are ‘not at all’ interested.
• About half of respondents (49%) would prefer to receive information about a college electronically via the Internet or CDs, which is significantly lower than about 60% the
past two years. Meanwhile, 40% expressed a preference for hard copy catalogs and viewbooks, which is similar to the past couple of years.
• The most important attribute to respondents if they were going to enroll in a college or university is the ‘quality of the academic programs,’ with 76% rating this as ‘very
important.’ Other attributes that are considered ‘very important’ by about six-in-ten respondents are ‘courses are offered at a variety of times and days of the week’ and
‘overall value for the money.’ As in previous years, ‘size of the college and student body’ is least important.
• About four-in-ten respondents (39%) feel that the area’s higher education needs are being well-met by only the public colleges and universities in the area (compared to
46% who feel that the higher education needs are being well-met overall). The suggestions given most often for ways in which public colleges and universities could better
meet the higher education needs tended to focus on the need for a 4-year school and the need for more variety in programming/classes.
• Respondents were asked to rate public institutions compared to private institutions in several areas. Public institutions are most likely to be viewed as ‘better’ than private
institutions on ‘cost of education’ and ‘overall value for the money.’ Public institutions tended to be rated as ‘about the same’ as private institutions on most of the other
attributes. For ‘quality of academic programs,’ 21% said that public institutions are ‘worse’ than private institutions.
University Center Rochester
• Recent changes in the make-up of University Center Rochester, with UMR no longer a partner, has impacted awareness of UCR. About two-thirds of respondents (66%)
are aware of University Center Rochester, which is the lowest rating since 2002. In 2007, 78% were aware of UCR. When those who are aware of UCR were asked about
the institutions that make up the UCR partnership, the portion saying ‘don’t know’ was the highest it has ever been (19%) and the portion naming RCTC and WSU
decreased significantly, as did the portion who named UMR. In 2009, 41% named RCTC (compared to 59% last year) and 50% named WSU (compared to 67% last year).
Additionally, 63% named U of M (compared to 77% last year).
• To measure how many individuals have been ‘touched’ by the UCR institutions, respondents were asked if they or an immediate family member have ever attended any of
the institutions. Nearly six-in-ten respondents (58%) have a relationship with RCTC, while about one-third (32%) have a relationship with WSU. Most of those who have
a relationship with a UCR institution would recommend it to a friend or family member (giving a ‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale where 5 means ‘definitely would
recommend’). Specifically, 74% of those who have a relationship with RCTC would recommend it and 67% of the respondents who have a relationship with WSU
Rochester would recommend it.
• In addition, more than half of adults (55%) have visited the UCR campus in the past year. Among those who have been on campus, the largest portion were there for a
non-RCTC sporting event.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 2
Executive Summary
RCTC
• When asked how they feel RCTC serves the community as a whole (beyond just the students), 59% of respondents report high satisfaction (‘4’ or ‘5’ on the 5-point scale),
which is similar to the past two years and significantly more than in 2006 (50%) or 2005 (48%). Meanwhile, only 7% gave a low satisfaction rating of ‘1’ or ‘2.’
• Overall, 52% of respondents are ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ familiar with the programs and services offered by RCTC while 16% report being ‘not at all’ familiar.
• More than half (52%) of this year’s respondents said they have seen or heard advertising or promotions for RCTC in the past 60 days, which is significantly lower than 68%
in 2008 and similar to 55% in 2007. Word-of-mouth from family or friends was mentioned most often as a source of advertising or promotions for RCTC (55%), followed
by television (39%) and radio (35%). Movie theater, billboards and newspaper were each mentioned by about one-quarter of respondents. For the first time respondents
were also asked about social media and social networking sites. Seven percent recalled seeing something about RCTC on Facebook and 4% on My Space. Younger
respondents (age 18-34) were more likely than those age 35-49 to mention seeing something about RCTC on television, radio, billboards, Internet, Facebook and My Space.
• Nearly three-in-ten respondents (28%) were able to recite ‘Get There’ as the slogan for RCTC unaided, which is similar to 26% in 2008 and a significant increase over 18%
in 2007. After being asked directly, a total of 65% of all respondents recalled the ‘Get There’ message. Adults age 18-34 were more likely to recall ‘Get There’ (75%) than
those age 35-49 (57%).
• Only 2% of respondents mentioned ‘Expect the Unexpected’ unaided, but after aiding 49% recalled this RCTC message. Those age 18-34 were more likely than older
respondents to recall ‘Expect the Unexpected’ (57% vs. 42%).
• After being asked to rate the importance of various attributes when pursuing higher education, respondents rated their impressions of RCTC on these same factors. The
attribute that RCTC rated most highly on was ‘location,’ with 48% of respondents rating RCTC as ‘excellent’ or ‘very good.’ Other attributes that at least one-third of
respondents gave high ratings to RCTC on included ‘overall value for the money,’ ‘reputation of the academic programs,’ ‘access to computers and technology’ and ‘quality
of the academic programs.’ The attribute with the lowest portion of respondents giving high ratings was ‘innovative programs and courses’ (23%).
• Comparing importance ratings to perceived performance ratings is one way to look for areas for potential improvements. Three-quarters of respondents (76%) rated ‘quality
of the academic programs’ as ‘very important’ while 33% rated RCTC as ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ in this area. The next largest gap between importance ratings and
performance ratings was for ‘courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week.’ The smallest gaps are in the areas of ‘access to computers and
technology,’ ‘reputation of the academic programs’ and ‘innovative programs and courses.’ RCTC’s performance ratings were higher than importance for ‘location’ and
‘size of the college and student body.’
Winona State University Rochester
• Approximately two-thirds of respondents said that it is important for Winona State University to have a presence in Rochester (65%), mainly because they feel that students
need more 4-year options in Rochester or the students wouldn’t have to travel to Winona that way. Among the 13% of respondents who said it is not important for WSU to
have a presence in Rochester, the primary reasons were that Winona isn’t that far away or that there are plenty of other institutions here.
• Overall, 25% of respondents are ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ familiar with the programs and services offered by Winona State University Rochester, while 42% are ‘not at all’
familiar. This familiarity is significantly lower than familiarity with RCTC (52% ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ familiar).
Internet and Social Media
• More than nine-in-ten respondents have a home computer and most have either a cable modem or DSL. Additionally, 85% regularly have Internet access from another
location, such as school, work or cell phone. Altogether, 98% of adults age 18-49 regularly have Internet access.
• Respondents are quite active with social media and social networking sites. Six-in-ten respondents (60%) report visiting Facebook in the past 30 days and about half (49%)
have visited You Tube. About one-in-five (21%) report using blogs and slightly fewer (17%) have visited My Space. Linked In and Twitter are less popular, each being
used by 7% in the past month. Almost half of those who visit Facebook do so daily (45%) while about one-third of bloggers do so daily (32%).
• If looking for information about educational opportunities or institutions 29% of respondents say they would use Facebook and 6% or fewer would use any other social
networking site.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 3
UCR Knowledge and Awareness Study
Detailed Findings
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 4
UCR Knowledge and Awareness Study
Higher Education
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 5
Higher Education: Institutions Mentioned in 2009 vs. Previous Years
The first question asked of respondents is to name the institutions that come to mind when they think of higher education in the Rochester
area. Responses are recorded verbatim, using the respondents’ own words, which allows for tracking of how people refer to the institutions,
particularly RCTC which has gone through some name changes over the years.
The chart on the following page shows the portion of respondents who have named various institutions over time.
RCTC/Rochester Community and Technical College continues to be the most frequently mentioned institution, with 70% of respondents
saying either RCTC or Rochester Community and Technical College. This is slightly, although not significantly, lower than 77% last year
and is similar to 68% in 2007. The portion that still refers to RCTC as RCC or Rochester Community College has leveled off at 6%
(compared to 46% in the first wave of the study in 1998). Mentions of vo-tech also remained relatively low at 7%.
Winona State University was mentioned by 43% this year, which is similar to other waves.
UCR was mentioned by 5% of respondents, which is similar to recent years.
The portion mentioning University of Minnesota also remained similar to the past two years at 57%.
A newer entrant to the Rochester education market is Minnesota School of Business and awareness of this institution increases slightly each
year. It was mentioned by 15% (30 respondents) this year, compared to 11% (23 respondents) last year, 8% (16 respondents) in 2007, 7%
(13 respondents) in 2006 and only one person in 2005.
Crossroads College was mentioned by 4% of respondents, which is down from a high of 8% in 2006.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 6
Higher Education: Institutions Mentioned in 2009 vs. Previous Years
Unaided Awareness of Higher Education Institutions
70%
RCTC/Rochester Community and
Technical College
57%
51%
35%
57%
University of Minnesota
52%
39%
32%
39%
25%
65%
36%
60%
44%
14%
12%
13%
Mayo Medical School
St. Mary's University
Vo-tech/Technical College
9%
7%
7%
7%
8%
6%
5%
6%
6%
University Center Rochester
5%
4%
6%
7%
7%
0%
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
•Minnesota School of Business was mentioned by 15% (30 respondents)
compared to 11% (23 respondents) in 2008, 8% (16 respondents) in 2007 and
7% (13 respondents) in 2006. In 2005 it was mentioned by one respondent
(and had never been mentioned previously). The difference between 2009
and 2007/prior years is significant at a 95% confidence level.
•Crossroads College/Bible College was mentioned by 4% (8 respondents)
compared to 6% (12 respondents) in 2008, 7% (14 respondents) in 2007 and
8% (16 respondents) in 2006.
11%
13%
9%
9%
10%
2009 (N=202)
2008 (N=201)
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
2005 (N=201)
2004 (N=201)
2002 (N=200)
1998 (N=200)
Other points of interest:
13%
10%
11%
13%
15%
RCC/Rochester Community College
47%
22%
12%
11%
11%
11%
10%
11%
9%
9%
5%
46%
43%
45%
42%
44%
77%
60%
43%
Winona State University
68%
30%
•St. Scholastica was mentioned for the first time in 2006 by two respondents
(1%). Unaided awareness has remained similar; it was mentioned by three
respondents (2%) in 2007, two respondents (1%) in 2008 and three
respondents (2%) this year.
20%
46%
12%
20%
30%
40%
Page 7
50%
60%
70%
80%
Higher Education: University Center Rochester Institutions
When you think of higher education in this area,
which institutions come to mind?
Other Findings – Total Mentions (2009)
• More likely to mention RCTC:
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are slightly/not at all familiar with WSU
Rochester
(2009 N=202)
52%
RCTC
78%
19%
U of M
57%
• More likely to mention WSU:
» Have taken college courses in past year
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Have a relationship with WSU (vs. have a
relationship with RCTC or do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
First Unaided
Mention
10%
WSU
UCR
• More likely to mention U of M:
» Reside in Rochester (64% vs. 48% of nonRochester residents)
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
43%
Total Unaided
Mentions
1%
5%
18%
None of the above
7%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
• More likely to mention UCR:
» Age 35-49 (9% vs. 1% of age 18-34)
» Females (9% vs. 1% of males)
» Rochester residents (7% vs. 3% of nonRochester residents)
» Have a college degree/certificate
When an unduplicated count of mentions clearly referring to RCTC is made, nearly eight-in-ten adults (78%) mentioned RCTC (in one form or
another) when they think of higher education institutions in the greater Rochester area and more than half (52%) mentioned RCTC first. About
six-in-ten respondents mentioned U of M while more than four-in-ten (43%) mentioned WSU.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 8
Higher Education: UCR Institutions – Comparison Over Time
When you think of higher education institutions in this area, which institutions come to mind?
78%† ♦
82%†^ ♦
78%†
78%†
RCTC
69%
75%
72%
71%
57%* † ■ ^ ♦
60% ‡* † ■ ^ ♦
52%* † ■ ^ ♦
U of M
32% ♦
31% ♦
2009 (N=202)
39%
2008 (N=201)
39% ^
44%
WSU
36% ♦
2007 (N=200)
43%
46%†^
43%
45%†
2006 (N=200)
2005 (N=201)
42%
37%
44%
2004 (N=201)
5% ♦
4%† ■ ♦
6%♦
2003 (N=200)
7%
9%
10%
7% ♦
12%
UCR
2002 (N=200)
7%† ■ ^
6% † ■ ^
7%† ■ ^
9% ^
None of the above
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
13%
12%
15%♦
10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Comparing this unduplicated count over the past several years, mentions of RCTC had increased slightly each year between 2002 and 2004, then decreased
slightly in 2005. In 2006, however, mentions increased significantly to 78% and remained the same in 2007. In 2008, mentions of RCTC increased slightly to 82%
while in 2009 mentions of RCTC went back to 2006 and 2007 levels (78%). Mentions of the U of M had increased significantly from 2006 to 2007 (39% to 52%)
and again in 2008 (60%), but in 2009 dropped just slightly to 57%. Mentions of WSU have remained steady at 43% to 46% for the past four years.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 9
Higher Education: How Well Needs Are Met
Overall, how well do you feel the higher education needs of the greater Rochester area are being met?
Other Findings (2009)
Mean
2009 (N=202) 13% † ■
33% †
39%
2008 (N=201) 12% † ■
37% * †
35%
2007 (N=200)
9%
2006 (N=200)
8%
2005 (N=201)
8%
2004 (N=201) 6%
25%
■♦
40%
■^♦
42%
36%
♦
♦
38%
2003 (N=200)
9%
34%
35%
2002 (N=200)
8%
38%
30%
0%
20%
'5' - Extremely Well
40%
'4'
3.49*†■^
11%* †
3.51*†■^
• More likely to give a rating of ‘4’ or ‘5:’
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU
(vs. do not have a relationship with any
UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
16%
3.36 †
• More likely to give a rating of ‘1’ or ‘2:’
» Males (14% vs. 6% of females)
20%
3.20
34% †
37% * †
28%
10% ‡* †^♦
♦
60%
'3'
22%
♦
■
3.14 ■ ^ ♦
3.32
15%
17%
3.33
3.37
16%
80%
100%
'2' or '1' - Not at all Well
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
When rating how well respondents feel the higher education needs of the greater Rochester area are being met, 2009, 2008 and 2007 respondents were more likely
to give high ratings than respondents in 2006 or 2005. In 2009, the portion giving the highest rating of ‘5 - extremely well’ was the highest it has ever been (13%)
while the portion giving the lowest ratings of ‘1’ or ‘2’ was at its lowest (10%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 10
Higher Education: Taken Credit/Non-Credit Courses in Past Year
Portion who have taken any non-credit
courses or training in the past year
2009
(N=202)
2009
(N=202)
13%
2008
(N=201)
12%
18% *†
18% *†
11%
2007
(N=200)
2006
(N=200)
11%
2006
(N=200)
2003
(N=200)
2002
(N=200)
0%
10%
20%
30%
11%
Among those who have taken
online courses
Were the online courses forcredit or non-credit?
2009
2008
19%
2002
(N=200)
14%
2008
(N=201)
21%
2003
(N=200)
13%
17%
27%
2004
(N=201)
11%
2009
(N=202)
26%
2005
(N=201)
12%
2004
(N=201)
25% ~‡
2008
(N=201)
2007
(N=200)
2005
(N=201)
Portion who have taken any online
courses or training in the past year
Portion who have taken courses or
training for college credit in the past year
For-credit
Non-credit
Both
21%
0%
20%
10%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
30%
0%
10%
(n=34)
(n=23)
82%
12%
6%
87%
9%
4%
20%
30%
Note: Online was not asked prior to 2008.
In the past year, more than one-in-ten adults have taken non-credit courses at a college or university (13%), while one-quarter (25%) have taken courses for
which they received college credit and nearly one-in-five have taken online courses or training (17%). As can be seen on the following page, 35% of adults overall
have taken some sort of course or training at a college or university (either for credit, non-credit or online) in the past year, which is significantly higher than in
2008 (25%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 11
Higher Education: Taken Credit/Non-Credit Courses in Past Year
Other Findings (2009)
Portion who have taken any training or courses (credit, non-credit or online) in the past year
2009
(N=202)
2008
(N=201)
35% ~
25%
• More likely to have taken non-credit
courses:
» Are very/somewhat familiar with
RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with
WSU Rochester
Not asked in previous years
• More likely to have taken for credit
courses:
» Age 18-34 (37% vs. 15% of age
35-49)
Portion who have taken either credit or non-credit training or courses in the past year
2009
(N=202)
33% ~
2008
(N=201)
2007
(N=200)
23%
26%
2006
(N=200)
2005
(N=201)
31% ~
33% ~
2004
(N=201)
2003
(N=200)
2002
(N=200)
27%
26%
26%
• More likely to have taken online
courses:
» Age 18-34 (23% vs. 11% of age
35-49)
» Females (21% vs. 12% of males)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with
RCTC
• More likely to have taken any courses
in past year (non-credit, credit or
online):
» Age 18-34 (44% vs. 27% of age
35-49)
~ Significantly different from 2008.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 12
Higher Education: Interest in Online Classes
Some colleges and universities offer online courses or virtual classrooms that can be
accessed from home or work. How interested are you in ever taking online courses?
11%
11%
9%†♦
12%
Extremely Interested
16%^
12%
10%♦
17%
15%
15%
10%‡^♦
13%
16%
13% ♦
13%
13%
18%
19%
Very Interested
26%
24%
39% ♦
2009 (N=202)
2008 (N=201)
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
2005 (N=201)
2004 (N=201)
2003 (N=200)
2002 (N=200)
2001 (N=100)
1999 (N=126)
Other Findings (2009)
• More likely to be ‘extremely’ interested:
» Rochester residents (14% vs. 6% of nonRochester residents)
» Have taken college courses in past year
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
• More likely to be ‘not at all’ interested:
» Males (47% vs. 34% of females)
» Have not taken any college courses in past
year
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution (vs. have a relationship with
RCTC)
» Are slightly/not at all familiar with RCTC
43%†♦
41%♦
35%
33%
35%
Somewhat Interested
41%♦
31%
36%
36%
41% ^
32%■
34%
37%
Not At All Interested
Note: Wording in previous years was ‘How interested
are you in taking online courses through UCR?’
40% ^
40%^
32%
35%
22%
25%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
Overall, nearly six-in-ten adults say they are at least ‘somewhat’ interested in taking online courses. The portion of adults who are ‘extremely interested’ in
taking online classes has been about one-in-ten for six of the past seven years.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 13
Higher Education: Preferred Way of Receiving Information
“Some colleges and universities are considering moving away from using hard copy literature such as
catalogs and viewbooks to provide prospective students with information about what they have to offer.
Instead, they would offer more targeted information electronically, via the Internet or on CDs.
If you were considering taking classes at a college or university, how would you prefer to receive
information about a particular school and what they offer?”
Preferred way of receiving information about a college
49% ~‡ ♦
60% * † ■ ^ ♦
59% * † ■ ^ ♦
Electronic
information via
Internet and CDs
42%
48%
45%
45%
41%
2009
(N=202)
2008
(N=201)
40% ■ ^ ♦
39% * ■ ^ ♦
35% * † ■ ^ ♦
48%
44% ♦
52%
51%
53%
Hard copy catalogs
and viewbooks
2007
(N=200)
2003
(N=200)
6%
10% ■ ^
8% ■
3% ♦
2002
(N=200)
5%
7%
0%
20%
• More likely to prefer hard copy catalogs
and viewbooks:
» Do not have a college
degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with WSU (vs. do
not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
2005
(N=201)
2004
(N=201)
11% ~‡ ■ ^
No preference
• More likely to prefer electronic information
via Internet and CDs:
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Do not have a relationship with any
UCR institution (vs. have a
relationship with WSU)
2006
(N=200)
‡* † ^ ♦
1%
Other Findings (2009)
40%
60%
80%
100%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
If they were considering taking a college course, nearly half of adults (49%) would prefer to receive information about what the college has to offer in an
electronic format. This is significantly lower than in 2008 and 2007, while the portion saying ‘no preference’ (11%) is significantly higher than in the past two
years. Four-in-ten would prefer hard copy information in the form of catalogs and viewbooks and this portion has stayed relatively stable since 2005.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 14
Higher Education: Importance of Attributes if Enrolling in a College
Importance of attributes if enrolling in a college
(2009 N=202)
Mean
76%
Quality of the academic programs
20%
60%
Courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week
58%
Overall value for the money
51%
Reputation of the academic programs
Variety of programs and degree options offered
52%
Credits transferring easily to other institutions
53%
Innovative programs and courses
4.72
33%
7%
4.52
37%
4% 1%
4.52
2%
4.36
3%
4.34
37%
55%
Cost of the course or program
3%1%
10%
30%
12%
33%
10%
28%
41%
11%
41%
5%
8%
4.31
4.22
4%
4.19
6%
4.17
14%
Location
46%
31%
17%
Availability of flexible enrollment options, such as online or e-learning
46%
32%
14%
8%
4.12
17%
7%
4.09
Access to computers and technology
42%
Size of the college and student body
14%
0%
34%
25%
20%
'5' Very important
37%
40%
'4'
60%
'3'
24%
80%
3.20
100%
'2' or '1' Not at all Important
Respondents rated the importance of several attributes if they were going to enroll in a college. Topping the list in terms of importance are ‘quality of the
academic programs’ (rated as ‘5-very important’ by 76%), ‘courses being offered at a variety of times and days of the week’ (rated ‘5’ by 60%) and ‘overall value
for the money’ (rated ‘5’ by 58%). More than half also gave ratings of ‘5’ to ‘cost of the course or program,’ ‘variety of programs and degree options offered,’
‘credits transferring easily to other institutions’ and ‘reputation of academic programs.’ The ‘size of the college and student body’ is clearly viewed as the least
important of the attributes rated; nearly one-quarter gave low importance ratings of ‘1’ or ‘2.’ Comparisons to recent years are shown on pages 17-20.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 15
Higher Education: Importance of Attributes if Enrolling in a College
Other Findings (2009)
More likely to rate importance as ‘5 – Very Important’:
• Quality of the academic programs
» Reside in Rochester (82% vs. 68% of non-Rochester residents)
• Courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week
» Females (71% vs. 47% of males)
» Non-Rochester residents (69% vs. 54% of Rochester residents)
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
• Overall value for the money
» Females (65% vs. 51% of males)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
• Reputation of the academic programs
» Females (59% vs. 41% of males)
» Rochester residents (59% vs. 38% of non-Rochester residents)
» Have a college degree/certificate
• Variety of programs and degree options offered
» Age 18-34 (60% vs. 45% of age 35-49)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
• Availability of flexible enrollment options, such as online or e-learning
» Females (58% vs. 31% of males)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a relationship with
any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
• Credits transferring easily to other institutions
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a relationship with
any UCR institution)
• Innovative programs and courses
» Reside in Rochester (46% vs. 33% of non-Rochester residents)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
• Access to computers and technology
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not have a relationship with any
UCR institution)
• Location
» Females (52% vs. 39% of males)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
• Size of the college and student body
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. have a relationship with WSU)
• Cost of the course or program
» Females (61% vs. 47% of males)
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 16
Higher Education: Importance of Attributes – Comparison Over Time
The next three pages show a comparison of the importance of these attributes over all of the waves of this survey. Some findings worth
noting include:
• ‘Quality of the academic programs’ continues to be seen as ‘very important’ by the largest portion of respondents.
• ‘Courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week’ decreased in importance for the second year in a row, from
72% rating it as ‘very important’ in 2007 to 65% in 2008 and 60% this year.
• ‘Variety of programs and degree options offered’ had decreased significantly in importance last year compared to the three
previous years (48% rating it as ‘very important’ in 2008 compared to 57% in 2007, 63% in 2006 and 64% in 2005). This year it
increased slightly to 52%.
• ‘Availability of flexible enrollment options, such as online or e-learning’ had its highest rating of 55% giving ratings of ‘very
important’ in 2007, then decreased slightly last year to 52% and in 2009 decreased further to 46%.
• ‘Size of the college and student body’ continues to be seen as ‘very important’ by the smallest portion of respondents (14%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 17
Higher Education: Importance of Attributes – Comparison Over Time
Importance of attributes if enrolling in a college
Mean
(Portion rating each attribute a '5-Very Important')
76% ♦
79% ■ ♦
82%■ ♦
78%■ ♦
76% ♦
Quality of the academic programs
4.72‡
4.76■♦
4.82†■♦
4.77■♦
4.70
4.63
4.65
4.69
70%
68%
72%
60% ‡* ♦
65%
Courses offered at a variety of
different times and days of the week
60% ♦
4.52♦
4.52♦
72%■
72%■
4.63
4.63
65%
4.56♦
4.55♦
72%
4.67
4.53
65%
58%
60%
4.52
4.50
64%
64%
62%
Overall value for the money
4.56■
4.56
4.51
4.45♦
4.58
4.42
56%
64%
58%
51% ♦
51% ♦
4.36
4.34‡
4.48*†■♦
4.28
4.27
4.34
4.27
4.31
57% * ♦
47%
49% ♦
49% ♦
Reputation of the academic program
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
41%
50%
0%
1998 (N=200)
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
10%
2002 (N=200)
20%
2004 (N=201)
30%
2005 (N=201)
40%
50%
2006 (N=200)
Page 18
60%
2007 (N=200)
70%
2008 (N=201)
80%
90%
2009 (N=202)
Higher Education: Importance of Attributes – Comparison Over Time
Importance of attributes if enrolling in a college
Mean
(Portion rating each attribute a '5-Very Important')
52% *†
48% ‡*†
4.31‡*†
4.23‡*†■♦
4.45
57%
63% ■♦
64%■♦
Variety of programs and degree options
offered
53%
42%
4.19
55%
51%
53%
56%
52%
51%
56%
50%
Cost of course or program
4.34
4.21
4.35
4.33
4.28
4.34
4.29
4.16
46% ‡
4.12‡
52%
55% ■
53%
51%
Availability of flexible enrollment options,
such as online or e-learning
4.24■
4.29■
4.21
4.17
4.04
4.21
4.07
46%
50%
41%
53%♦
56%
54%
56%
Credits transferring easily to other
institutions
53% ♦
4.22
4.25
4.25
4.13♦
4.30
4.16♦
4.35
4.22
60%
62%
62%
0%
1998 (N=200)
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
10%
2002 (N=200)
20%
2004 (N=201)
30%
40%
2005 (N=201)
Page 19
4.51■♦
4.39
4.38
50%
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
4.48
50%
2006 (N=200)
60%
2007 (N=200)
70%
2008 (N=201)
80%
90%
2009 (N=202)
Higher Education: Importance of Attributes - Comparison Over Time
Importance of attributes if enrolling in a college
Mean
(Portion rating each attribute a '5-Very Important')
41%■
38%
Innovative programs and courses
4.19
4.12*
42% ■
46% ■♦
41% ■
4.22■
4.28■♦
4.14
32%
4.08
4.12
4.03
38%
36%
42% *†
41% *†
46%
4.09
4.02*†♦
4.13
4.21
54%
Access to computers and technology
51%
4.23
4.18
4.23
48%
46%
47%
4.23
46% ■
44% ■
39%
Location
4.17■
4.15■
4.10■♦
4.14■
45% ■
42%
34%
4.03♦
43% ■
3.93♦
4.25
3.88
40%
14%
13%
17% ♦
15% ♦
11%
15% ♦
10%
15%
Size of college and student body
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
0%
1998 (N=200)
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
10%
2002 (N=200)
20%
3.20♦
3.08‡■
3.34♦
3.20♦
3.21♦
3.32♦
2.97
3.09
30%
2004 (N=201)
40%
2005 (N=201)
Page 20
50%
2006 (N=200)
60%
2007 (N=200)
70%
80%
2008 (N=201)
90%
2009 (N=202)
Higher Education: Public vs. Private Institutions
As you may know, public colleges and universities receive funding from the
state in addition to tuition and individual contributions, while private
colleges and universities do not receive any state funding.
• More likely to give a rating of ‘4’ or ‘5:’
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs.
do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
Overall, how well do you feel the higher education needs
of the greater Rochester area are being met by only the
public colleges and universities in the area?*
9%
9%
'5' Extremely well
Top 2 Box
2009=39%
2008=37%
30%
28%
'4'
37%
'3'
'1' Not at all well
For comparative purposes – ratings for ‘Overall, how
well do you feel the higher educations needs of the
greater Rochester area are being met?’
45%
2009 (N=202)
2008 (N=201)
11%
9%
'2'
~
Bottom 2 Box
2009=14%
2008=12%
3%
3%
Don't know
0%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
.
Mean
2009=3.35
2008=3.33
9%
6%
20%
40%
Other Findings (2009)
60%
80%
100%
2009
2008
‘5’ Extremely well
13%
12%
‘4’
33%
37%
‘3’
39%
35%
‘2’
7%
9%
‘1’ Not at all well
3%
3%
Don’t know
5%
4%
2009=46%
2008=49%
2009=10%
2008=12%
Note: Not asked prior to 2008.
When asked to compare public colleges and universities to private institutions, about four-in-ten respondents feel that the area’s higher education needs are being
well-met by only the public colleges and universities (39% giving a rating of ‘4’ or ‘5’), compared to 46% who feel that the area’s higher education needs are being
well-met overall. Responses were similar to 2008. When asked for suggestions as to how public institutions could better meet needs, the suggestions made most
frequently had to do with the need for a more traditional 4-year college, as can be seen on the following page; however, respondents were less likely to mention this
than they were in 2008. In fact, 2009 respondents were much more likely to say they could not offer any suggestions than they were last year.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 21
Higher Education: Public vs. Private Institutions (continued)
What suggestions would you offer for ways in which local public colleges and universities
could better meet the higher education needs of the area?
2009 (N=202)
2008 (N=201)
4-Year School
Need a traditional 4-year college with more programs/degrees/liberal arts based
10% ~
17%
Actual 4-year residential campus environment - dorms/food service/sports/etc.
4% ~
9%
Comprehensive college with more programs rather than several colleges with a few specialties each
U of M should be 4-year college
1%
1%
2%
0%
More Variety of Programming/Classes
More programs/degrees (unspecified)
More classes
More diverse programs/beyond healthcare and IT
More advanced degree options/Masters/PhDs
Flexible class schedules/evenings/weekends/summers
More online classes
9%
4% ~
3% ~
3%
2% ~
2%
7%
0%
8%
4%
5%
3%
Partner with employers so employees can incorporate classes into workday
Hands-on learning/on-the-job training
1%
1%
1%
1%
Tuition/Financial Aid
Cheaper tuition
Increase availability of financial aid
8%
5%
5%
8%
Advertising/Recruitment
More advertising/publicity/let students know you're available
Better recruitment/let students know you're available
4%
1% ~
4%
2%
Miscellaneous Comments
Focus on older students
More focus on individual/one-on-one
Better teachers
Smaller class sizes
Bigger/more space/more buildings
4% ~
2% ~
2%
2% ~
2% ~
0%
0%
1%
0%
0%
Better public transportation/bus/shuttle
2% ~
0%
U of M should not be downtown/should be on campus with other schools
They are doing a good job
Other single mentions
None/Don't know/Refused
1%
1% ~
4%
41% ~
0%
3%
3%
22%
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 22
Note: Not asked prior to 2008.
~ Significantly different from 2008.
Higher Education: Public vs. Private Institutions (continued)
Overall, how do public colleges and universities compare to private institutions?
(2009 N=202, 2008 N=201)
Cost of education
2009
50%
2008
Overall value for the money
48%
2009
27%
2008
Variety of programs and
degree options offered
Availability of flexible
enrollment options, such as
online or e-learning
9%
2009
2008
23%
51%
2008
15%
55%
Access to computers and
technology
2009
4%
2008
4%
2009
4%
2008
4%
Note: Not asked prior to 2008.
~ Significantly different from 2008.
9%
11%
9%
9%
10%
Somewhat better (4)
9%
37%
3.37
9%
41%
3.51
17%
37%
3.49
38%
3.54
1%
13%
23%
3.15
9%
21%
3.14
12%
13%
3.08
15%
3.11
9%
13%
2.94
1% 8%
11%
2.96
61%
11%
20%
18%
Somewhat worse (2)
3.82
13%
9%
About the same (3)
61%
6% 1%
65%
60%
3.80
1%
5%
13%
40%
54%
1% 6%
7%
12%
61%
20%
8%
11%
56%
7%
M uch better (5)
4.27
42%
20%
0%
80%
41%
2009 3% ~
Quality of academic
programs
3% 2% 6%
43%
Innovative programs and
courses
6%
4.32
8%
42%
28%
15%
2008
79%
32%
22%
28%
9% ~
4% 1% 7%
34%
13%
2009
9%
29% ~
28%
Mean
29%
25% ~
29%
% ‘Better’
1%
1%
12%
1%
80%
M uch worse (1)
100%
Don't know/Refused
Public institutions are most likely to be viewed as ‘much better’ than private institutions on ‘cost of education’ and ‘overall value for the money.’ Relatively few
respondents rated public institutions as ‘worse’ than private institutions in any area, although about one-fifth of respondents (21%) say that public institutions are
worse than private institutions on the ‘quality of academic programs.’ For the most part, responses were similar to 2008, although 2009 respondents were
significantly less likely than in 2008 to say public institutions are ‘much better’ on ‘availability of flexible enrollment options’ and ‘innovative programs and courses.’
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 23
Higher Education: Public vs. Private Institutions (continued)
Other Findings (2009)
More likely to rate public institutions as ____________ than private institutions:
Somewhat/much better
Somewhat/much worse
• Cost of education
» No significant differences
• Cost of education
» Non-Rochester residents (9% vs. 3% of Rochester residents)
» Have taken college courses in past year
• Overall value for the money
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
• Overall value for the money
» Males (13% vs. 6% of females)
• Variety of programs and degree options offered
» No significant differences
• Variety of programs and degree options offered
» No significant differences
• Availability of flexible enrollment options, such as online or e-learning
» Males (47% vs. 28% of females)
• Availability of flexible enrollment options, such as online or e-learning
» No significant differences
• Innovative programs and courses
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
• Access to computers and technology
» Rochester residents (17% vs. 7% of non-Rochester residents)
• Quality of academic programs
» Very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
• Innovative programs and courses
» No significant differences
• Access to computers and technology
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR institution (vs. have a
relationship with RCTC or WSU)
• Quality of academic programs
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Have taken college courses in past year
Page 24
UCR Knowledge and Awareness Study
University Center Rochester
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 25
University Center Rochester: Awareness
Have you heard of University Center Rochester, also known as UCR?
Other Findings (2009)
66% ‡*†■
73%
Yes
68%
71%
78% ^
75%
78% ^
78%
^
33% ~‡*†■
25%
23%
24%
22%
21%
No
• More likely to be aware of UCR:
» Females (73% vs. 58% of males)
» Reside in Rochester (71% vs. 59% of nonRochester residents)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs.
do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
2009 (N=202)
2008 (N=201)
32% ‡*†■
30% ■
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
1%
2%
2005 (N=201)
2004 (N=201)
1%
Don't know
2003 (N=200)
2002 (N=200)
1%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
80%
Several questions focused specifically on University Center Rochester, which currently includes RCTC and WSU (in the past, University of Minnesota Rochester
was also a UCR partner). 2009 respondents were significantly more likely to say they have not heard of University Center Rochester, also known as UCR,
compared to the past five waves of the study (33% vs. 25% or fewer).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 26
University Center Rochester: Awareness of Partners
(Among those that who are aware of UCR)
Other Findings (2009)
Unaided awareness of partner institutions
63% ~‡*†■♦
• More likely to identify U of M as UCR partner:
» Females (70% vs. 54% of males)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
• More likely to identify WSU as UCR partner:
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do
not have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
• More likely to identify RCTC as UCR partner:
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do
not have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
77% ‡*†■♦
88%
86%
89%
86%
92%
U of M
50% ~‡*†■♦
67% ‡*†■♦
84%
85%
88%
84%
86%
WSU
41% ~‡*†■♦
59%
61%
RCTC
67% †
56%
58%
63%
8% ‡*■
12%
15%
14%
13%
16%
12%
St. Marys University
2009 (n=134)
11% ~‡*†■♦
5% ‡*♦
Mayo Clinic
2008 (n=147)
6%
4%
2%
3%
5%
Don't know
0%
Note: In 2009 and 2008, this question was asked
of those who were aware of UCR. In previous
years, it was asked of those who were aware that
multiple institutions partnered together at UCR.
2007 (n=120)
1%
2% ‡
4%‡*
1%
2006 (n=120)
2005 (n=135)
19%‡*†■♦
12% ‡*†■♦
2004 (n=123)
2002 (n=109)
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
It is evident that there is some confusion among area residents’ as to who the UCR partners currently are. University of Minnesota Rochester is no longer a UCR
partner and the portion naming UMR as a partner decreased significantly compared to previous years; however, the portion naming Winona State University and
Rochester Community and Technical College as partners also decreased significantly. Interestingly, more than one-in-ten named Mayo Clinic as a UCR partner,
which is more than twice as many as in any previous year.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 27
University Center Rochester: Relationships with Institutions
Other Findings (2009)
Self/family member ever taken
any classes through each institution?
More likely to have a relationship (either personally or
through a family member) with each institution:
(2009 N=202)
• RCTC
» Females (65% vs. 51% of males)
» Non- Rochester residents (65% vs. 54% of
Rochester residents)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
58%
RCTC
40%
41%
Self &/or family
member attended
32%
WSU
• WSU
» Females (39% vs. 24% of males)
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
Self attended
19%
18%
Family member
attended
(Among those whose self/family attended WSU)
Which locations of WSU? (2009 n=64)
Winona
64%
Rochester
53%
34%
None of the above
52%
52%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Overall, two-thirds of adults (66%) have a relationship (meaning they or an immediate family member has taken classes) with at least one of the UCR institutions.
This is similar to previous years. Nearly six-in-ten adults (58%) have personally or have a family member who has taken classes at RCTC, while about one-third
have a relationship with WSU (32%). Of those attending WSU, 64% were at the Winona location while 53% were in Rochester. Based back to total, 17% of all
adults have a relationship with WSU Rochester.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 28
University Center Rochester: Relationships with Institutions
(Among those who have attended or had a family member attend each institution)
Based on your/your family members' experience, how likely would you be to
recommend _______ to a friend or family member?
Other Findings (2009)
Mean
2009 (n=118)
37%
37%
16% ‡*
2008 (n=111)
38%
36%
9%
3.99
18%
7%1%
4.03
27%
4%
3.94
26%
6%
3.98
26% ~
6%
3.85~
• More likely to give a rating of ‘4’ or ‘5’:
RCTC
» Females (82% vs. 64% of males)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with
RCTC
RCTC
2007 (n=117)
38% *
31%
2006 (n=125)
39%
28%
29% ~
2009 (n=34)
2008 (n=25)^
WSU Rochester
38%
52% *
2007 (n=28)^
32%
2006 (n=35)
39%
26%
0%
'5' - Definitely would
49%
20%
'4'
40%
'3'
4%‡ 8% 4%
4.33
21%
4% 4%
4.04
14%
9% 2%
3.94
32%
60%
80%
'2' or '1' - Definitely would not
100%
Don't know
WSU
» Have not taken college courses in
past year
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
^ Caution: small base size.
Most of those who have a relationship with an UCR institution would be likely to recommend that institution to a friend or family member. Specifically, 74% of
those with a relationship with RCTC gave a rating of ‘4’ or ‘5’ on the 5-point scale where 5 meant they ‘definitely would recommend.’ The base size of those who
have a relationship with Winona State University Rochester is fairly small, but the majority of those who do have a relationship with WSU are likely to
recommend it to a friend or family member (67%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 29
University Center Rochester: Campus Visits
Other Findings (2009)
Portion who have been on UCR campus in SE Rochester
(including main campus, Heintz Center,
Regional Sports Center or sports fields) in the past year
• More likely to have visited UCR campus:
» Rochester residents (61% vs. 41% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
55% ♦
2009 (N=202)
54% ♦
2008 (N=201)
52% ♦
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
56% ♦
2005 (N=201)
56% ^ ♦
57% ^ ♦
2004 (N=201)
2003 (N=200)
48%
2002 (N=200)
43%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
The portion of area residents who have been on the UCR campus in the past year remained steady at 55%. As can be seen on the following page, the biggest
reason for visiting the campus is watching or participating in sports.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 30
University Center Rochester: Campus Visits
(Among those who have visited UCR campus in past 12 months)
For what reasons have you been to the UCR campus?
2009
(n=110)
2008
(n=109)
2007
(n=104)
2006
(n=111)
2005
(n=112)
2004
(n=115)
2003
(n=95)
2002
(n=85)
Participate/watch other sports/youth sports/baseball/soccer/football/lacrosse
32% †♦
36% †^♦
38% †^♦
38% †^♦
21% ■
34% ♦
24%
15%
Taking classes at one of the institutions
20%
23% ■
21% ■
16%
24% ■
12% ♦
18%
24%
Watch RCTC sports teams
13% †■♦
7%
13% †■♦
6%
5%
4%
7%
5%
Attended a community event or fundraiser
11% ■
16% ♦
12% ■
14% ♦
13% ■
22% ♦
16% ♦
7%
Attending training/workshop/seminar
8%
15% ‡
7%
8%
13%
13%
12%
13%
Graduation ceremony
6% ~†
2%
3%
12%
13%
10%
8%
5%
Get information on classes/pick up transcripts/get books
6% ~
-
5%
6%
8%
7%
12%
7%
Visited regional sports center
5% ■
10%†
5%
4% ■
10%
7%
8%
Relative/friend works there
5% ~‡*†■ 1%
-
-
-
1%
1%
Children’s event/math meet/College for Kids/music contest/science fair
4% ■^
6% ■^
5% ■^
9% ■^
-
-
Board meeting/meeting
4% †■^♦
1%
1%
4%
-
-
-
-
Conducted business/delivered food out there
4% ~*†■^
-
1%
-
-
-
-
4%
Visited library
3% *♦
1%
1%
-
2%
3%
3%
-
Just to see the campus/tour
3% †
2%
4% †
6% †^
1%
5% ■
Note: Multiple responses were allowed.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 31
2% ■
10% ■^
-
7% ■^
4% †
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
UCR Knowledge and Awareness Study
RCTC
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 32
RCTC: Satisfaction With How Community is Served
Overall, how satisfied are you with how well RCTC serves
the community as a whole?
Other Findings (2009)
Mean
2009 (N=202)
19% †■♦
2008 (N=201)
16% †
2007 (N=200)
17% †
2006 (N=200)
15%
2005 (N=201)
27%*†
40%
26%*†
42%
36% ^
35% ^
38%
6% 9%
26%*†
42%
10%
7%^ 7%
3.74†
3.73†
8% ^ 7%
3.71†
8%^ 6%
3.60^
11%■^ 6%
35%
• More likely to give a rating of ‘4’ or ‘5’:
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs.
do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
• More likely to give a rating of ‘2’ or ‘1’:
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
3.48■^♦
2009 Satisfaction ratings among key demographic subgroups:
2004 (N=201)
2003 (N=200)
2002 (N=200)
12%
42%
13%
45%
12%
0%
33%
29%
42%
20%
'5' - Extremely Satisfied
'3'
60%
3.74
7% 9%
80%
'2' or '1' - Not at all Satisfied
18-34
35-49
Males
Females
5
15%
22%
22%
17%
18%
20%
4
42%
38%
31%
47%^
41%
37%
3
32%
22%
29%
25%
26%
27%
2
5%
7%
8%
6%
5%
9%
1
0%
2%
0%
2%
2%
0%
DK
6%
8%
11%
5%
7%
7%
Mean 3.70
3.78
3.75
3.74
3.75
3.73
3.65
3% 10%
30%
40%
'4'
6% 7%
3.65
100%
Don't know
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
Rochester Non-Roch.
^ Significantly different than males.
Several survey questions were specifically about RCTC. Satisfaction ratings have remained consistent over the past few years, with about six-in-ten respondents
giving high satisfaction ratings of ‘4’ or ‘5’ on a 5-point scale. Only 7% of 2009 respondents gave low ratings of ‘1’ or ‘2’ to how well RCTC serves the community.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 33
RCTC: Familiarity
Other Findings (2009)
How familiar are you with the programs and services offered by
Rochester Community and Technical College?
• More likely to be ‘very/somewhat’ familiar with
RCTC:
» Females (63% vs. 39% of males)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs.
do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
13%
11%
13% †
9%
8%
11%
8%
Very Familiar
18%
16%
39%
39%
33% ♦
33% ♦
Somewhat Familiar
40%
40%
43%
34%
27%
32% †
37%
38%
34%
Only Slightly
Familiar
40% ♦
33%
32%
32%
35%
2009 (N=202)
2008 (N=201)
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
2005 (N=201)
2004 (N=201)
2002 (N=200)
2000 (N=100)
1998 (N=200)
16% *
12% *
16% *
24%
Not At All Familiar
10%
20%
2009 Familiarity among key demographic subgroups:
18-34
35-49
Males
Females
Rochester Non-Roch.
Very
16%
10%
9%
17%^
14%
11%
Smwt
38%
40%
30%
47%^
40%
38%
Slight
34%
30%
43%
22%^
30%
35%
Not
12%
20%~
18%
15%
17%
16%
~ Significantly different from 18-34.
^ Significantly different from males.
12% *
15% *
18% *
17% *
22%
0%
• More likely to be ‘slightly/not at all’ familiar with
RCTC:
» Males (61% vs. 37% of females)
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution (vs. have a relationship with RCTC
or WSU)
» Are slightly/not at all familiar with WSU
Rochester
30%
40%
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
50%
Overall, more than half of adults in the area (52%) feel at least ‘somewhat’ familiar with the programs and services offered by RCTC, while 16% report being
‘not at all’ familiar with RCTC’s programs. Females are more likely to be ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ familiar with RCTC’s programs than are males.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 34
RCTC: Advertising Recall
Portion who have seen or heard advertising or promotions
for RCTC in the past 60 days
2009 (N=202)
52%
Other Findings (2009)
• More likely to have seen/heard advertising:
» Rochester residents (57% vs. 44% of nonRochester residents)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do
not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
~*♦
68% ‡†■^
2008 (N=201)
55% †
2007 (N=200)
63% †
2006 (N=200)
Portion that recall advertising/promotions in past 60 days among
2009 key demographic subgroups:
45% ■^♦
2005 (N=201)
2004 (N=201)
18-34
35-49
Males
Females
57%
47%
55%
50%
Rochester Non-Roch.
57%*
44%
56%
* Significantly different from non-Rochester residents.
2003 (N=200)
57%
2002 (N=200)
62%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
^ Significantly different from 2003.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
Awareness of advertising and promotions for RCTC in the past 60 days varies from year to year depending on how the timing of the study corresponds with
promotional campaigns. In 2009, 52% of respondents reporting seeing or hearing advertising or promotions for RCTC in the past 60 days. Those residing in
Rochester were more likely to be aware of recent promotions than those residing outside of Rochester.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 35
RCTC: Advertising Recall
Where have you seen or heard advertising or promotions
for RCTC in the past 60 days?
Total Awareness
Previous Years
(2009 N=202)
Word of mouth from friends/family
3%
25%
5%
Newspaper
26%
10%
In the mail 2%
1%
Facebook
My Space
45%
48%
42%
49%
45%
43%
44%
37%
44%
27% *
23%
21%
17%
27%
29%
28%
31%
32%
35%
28%
16%
21%
13%‡
12%
13%
10%
12%
12%
39% ~
35% ~
23% ~‡
13%
14% ‡
13%
7%
7%
4%
55% ~*
5%
10%
22%
1%
Internet/Web site
2006
34%
Radio
Billboards
2007
52%
Television
At the movie theater
2008
Unaided Mentions
4%
Blogs or RSS feeds
1% 1%
You Tube
1% 1%
Note: Social media
was not included in
previous years.
Aided Mentions
Twitter 1% 1%
None of the above
15%
0%
9%*
15% ~
20%
40%
60%
14%
15%
80%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
Respondents who were aware of any advertising or promotions for RCTC in the past 60 days were asked unaided where they saw or heard it. All respondents
were then aided on specific types of advertising or promotions. Word of mouth was cited most often after aiding (55%), followed by television (39%) and radio
(35%). RCTC in social media was included for the first time in 2009. Although no one mentioned social media unaided, 7% did say they were aware of RCTC on
Facebook and 4% on My Space when asked about them specifically. As can be seen on the following page, younger respondents were more likely to be aware of
RCTC on Facebook and My Space.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 36
RCTC: Advertising Recall
Where have you seen or heard advertising or promotions for RCTC in the past 60 days? (unaided + aided)
- Among 2009 key demographic subgroups -
18-34
35-49
Males
Females
Word-of-mouth
57%
52%
55%
54%
57%
51%
Television
46%~
33%
45%
34%
44%*
32%
Radio
45%~
28%
39%
33%
36%
36%
At movie theater
29%
26%
27%
28%
27%
27%
Billboards
36%~
19%
28%
26%
31%
21%
Newspaper
19%
26%
25%
21%
26%
19%
In the mail
11%
17%
14%
14%
12%
17%
Internet/web site
18%~
8%
17%^
9%
10%
17%
Facebook
16%~
0%
9%
6%
7%
9%
My Space
7%~
0%
5%
2%
3%
5%
Blogs or RSS feeds
2%
0%
2%
0%
1%
1%
You Tube
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
1%
Twitter
1%
0%
1%
0%
1%
0%
None of the above
9%~
20%
14%
16%
11%*
21%
~ Significantly different than age 35-49.
^ Significantly different from females.
* Significantly different than non-Rochester residents.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 37
Rochester
Non-Roch.
RCTC: Advertising Recall
Other Findings (2009)
More likely to have seen/heard advertising:
• By word-of-mouth
» Have taken college courses in past year
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
• On television
» Age 18-34 (46% vs. 33% of age 35-49)
» Rochester residents (44% vs. 32% of non-Rochester residents)
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
• On radio
» Age 18-34 (45% vs. 28% of age 35-49)
» Have a relationship with WSU (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester)
• At a movie theatre
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester)
• On billboards
» Age 18-34 (36% vs. 19% of age 35-49)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester)
• In newspaper
» No significant differences
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
• In the mail
» Have not taken college courses in past year
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are slightly/not at all familiar with WSU Rochester
• On the Internet/web site
» Age 18-34 (18% vs. 8% of age 35-49)
» Males (17% vs. 9% of females)
» Have taken college courses in past year
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
• On Facebook
» Age 18-34 (16% vs. 0% of age 35-49)
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
• On My Space
» Age 18-34 (7% vs. 0% of age 35-49)
Page 38
RCTC: Awareness of ‘Get There’
Unaided/Aided Awareness of 'Get There' Message
Other Findings (2009)
2009 (N=202)
28% ‡
2008 (N=201)
26% ‡
2007 (N=200)
18%
65%*
37%
34%
40%
• More likely to be aware of ‘Get There’:
» Age 18-34 (75% vs. 57% of age 35-49)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs.
do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
60%
58%
Unaided
Mentions
Aided
Mentions
2006 (N=200)
25%
32%
Unaided/aided awareness of ‘Get There’
among 2008 key demographic subgroups:
18-34
35-49
Males
Females
Rochester Non-Roch.
Unaided
36%~
20%
29%
27%
31%
22%
Aided
39%
37%
32%
41%
33%
45%
Total
75%~
57%
61%
68%
64%
67%
57%
~ Significantly different than age 35-49.
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
‡ Significantly different from 2007.
* Significantly different from 2006.
Respondents were also asked what specific slogans or messages they recall from RCTC advertising or promotions. ‘Get There’ was, by far, the slogan mentioned
most often; 28% of this year’s respondents mentioned ‘Get There’ unaided and, when those who didn’t mention it unaided were asked directly if they had seen or
heard it, another 37% had. Thus, nearly two-thirds of respondents overall (65%) were familiar with the ‘Get There’ slogan for RCTC. Those age 18-34 were
more likely than those age 35-49 to be aware of ‘Get There’ (75% vs. 57%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 39
RCTC: Awareness of ‘Expect the Unexpected’
Unaided/Aided Awareness of 'Expect the Unexpected' Message
Other Findings (2009)
• More likely to be aware of ‘Expect the Unexpected’:
» Age 18-34 (57% vs. 42% of age 35-49)
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
2009 (N=202) 2%
47%
Unaided/aided awareness of ‘Expect the Unexpected’
among 2009 key demographic subgroups:
49%
18-34
Unaided
Unaided
Mentions
Aided
Mentions
0%
20%
40%
60%
3%~
35-49
Males
Females
0%
2%
1%
Rochester Non-Roch.
3%*
0%
Aided
54%
42%
46%
49%
46%
49%
Total
57%~
42%
48%
50%
49%
49%
~ Significantly different than age 35-49.
* Significantly different than non-Rochester residents.
80%
Awareness of the slogan ‘Expect the Unexpected’ was also measured in 2009. Although only 2% of respondents mentioned ‘Expect the Unexpected’ unaided,
when asked about it directly another 47% said they were aware of that slogan, for total awareness of 49%. Those age 18-34 were more likely than those age 35-49
to be aware of ‘Expect the Unexpected’ (57% vs. 42%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 40
RCTC: Impressions of RCTC on Key Attributes
Impressions of RCTC on key attributes
(2009 N=202)
Location
48%
Overall value for the money
34%
Access to computers and technology
34%
Quality of the academic programs
33%
Availability of flexible enrollment options, such as on-line or e-learning
31%
Size of the college and student body
30%
Cost of education
30%
Variety of programs and degree options offered
28%
Credits transferring easily to other institutions
28%
Innovative programs and courses
41%
36%
Reputation of the academic programs
Courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week
Mean
34%
10%
37%
6%
34%
26%
'Good'
3.28
3.26
3.27
19%
3.37
38%
12%
36%
'Excellent' or 'Very Good'
3.44
21%
13%
11%
40%
3.39
19%
17%
38%
20%
22%
12%
40%
23%
3.55
29%
39%
32%
3.35
30%
9%
60%
'Fair' or 'Poor'
3.26
24%
14%
27%
80%
3.60
3.46
15%
11%
31%
3%
20%
14%
30%
23%
0%
8%
3.22
100%
Don't know
RCTC is most likely to be rated as ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ on ‘location’ (nearly half of respondents gave high ratings on this attribute). ‘Overall value for the
money,’ ‘reputation of the academic programs,’ ‘access to computers and technology’ and ‘quality of the academic programs’ received high ratings by at least onethird of respondents. Several attributes showed large portions of respondents who were unable to offer a rating. The attribute that respondents were most likely
to rate as ‘fair’ or ‘poor’ was ‘cost of education,’ with 17% giving low ratings.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 41
RCTC: Impressions of RCTC on Key Attributes
Other Findings (2009) - More likely to rate RCTC as ‘excellent/very good’ or ‘fair/poor’ on each statement:
•
Location
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Rochester residents (55% vs. 38% of non-Rochester residents)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Rochester residents (11% vs. 4% of non-Rochester residents)
•
Access to computers and technology
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Have a college degree/certificate
•
•
Availability of flexible enrollment options
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Rochester residents (36% vs. 25% of non-Rochester residents)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Have taken college courses in past year
Overall value for the money
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» No significant differences
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
•
Courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Have taken college courses in past year
» Have a relationship with WSU (vs. do not have a relationship
with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
•
Quality of the academic programs
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
•
Variety of programs and degree options offered
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» No significant differences
•
Size of the college and student body
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» No significant differences
Page 42
•
Cost of education
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Rochester residents (35% vs. 22% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Have a relationship with WSU (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Have taken college courses in past year
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
•
Credits transferring easily to other institutions
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Rochester residents (37% vs. 15% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» No significant differences
•
Reputation of the academic programs
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. do not have a
relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR institution
(vs. have a relationship with RCTC)
•
Innovative programs and courses
More likely to rate RCTC as excellent/very good
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
More likely to rate RCTC as fair/poor
» Rochester residents (18% vs. 7% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Have a college degree/certificate
RCTC: Impressions of RCTC On Key Attributes – Comparison Over Time
Ratings of RCTC on Key Attributes
Mean
(Portion rating RCTC as 'excellent' or 'very good')
48%♦
47% ♦
46% ♦
Location
52%
53%
50%
58%
55%
34% *
34% *
31% *
Access to computers and
technology
22%
31% *
38% *♦
30% *
42%
31%
34% *
36% *†♦
Availability of flexible enrollment
options, such as online or elearning
26%
27%
30%
28%
27%
36% *
37% *
35% *
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
0%
40% *
37% *
38% *
41%
10%
20%
30%
40%
3.55
3.59*
3.45
3.39■
3.41■
3.62
3.51
3.58
2009 (N=202)
3.44†
3.58†■
3.45†
3.46†
3.22♦
3.39
3.43
3.45
2004 (N=201)
2008 (N=201)
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
2005 (N=201)
2002 (N=200)
1998 (N=200)
3.46
3.42
3.39♦
3.35♦
3.46
3.48
3.56
3.55
27%
Overall value for the money
3.60♦
3.62♦
3.54†♦
3.57♦
3.72
3.63♦
3.81
3.75
50%
60%
The charts on this page and the following two pages show a comparison of the impressions of RCTC on these attributes over various waves of this survey. For
several attributes, the portion of respondents rating RCTC as ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ was lower in 2006 than in years before that. In 2007, these attributes
rebounded in the portion of respondents rating them as ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ and ratings remained similar in 2008 and 2009. The portion rating ‘credits
transferring easily to other institutions’ as ‘excellent’ or ‘very good’ increased significantly in 2009 compared to 2008 (28% vs. 20%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 43
RCTC: Impressions of RCTC On Key Attributes- Comparison Over Time (cont.)
Ratings of RCTC on Key Attributes
(Portion rating RCTC as 'excellent' or 'very good')
Mean
26% ♦
3.26♦
3.43
3.37
3.33
3.30♦
3.36
3.49
3.52
30%
29% ♦
25% ♦
Courses offered at a variety of
different times and days of the week
29% ♦
31%
38%
41%
33%
3.39
3.50†■
3.36
3.38
3.27♦
3.33
3.47
3.54
38%
32%
33%
31%
35%
34%
37%
Quality of the academic programs
28% ■♦
29% ♦
Variety of programs and degree
options offered
32%
37%
38%
33%
30%
32% *
30%
29%
33% *
31%
36%
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
0%
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
10%
20%
30%
Page 44
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
2005 (N=201)
2004 (N=201)
2002 (N=200)
1998 (N=200)
3.28
3.35
3.29
3.28
3.23■♦
3.38
3.42
3.41
24%
Size of the college and student body
2008 (N=201)
3.27
3.25
3.32
3.27
3.21♦
3.35
3.40
3.33
34% *
25% ■♦
2009 (N=202)
40%
50%
60%
RCTC: Impressions of RCTC On Key Attributes- Comparison Over Time (cont.)
Ratings of RCTC on Key Attributes
(Portion rating RCTC as 'excellent' or 'very good')
Mean
30%
28%
31%
3.26
3.25♦
3.26
3.20♦
3.33
3.27
3.44
3.59
24%†♦
Cost of education
32%
30%
34%
43%
28%~
3.37
3.21
3.26
3.38
3.25
3.28
3.37
3.41
20%
26%
Credits transferring easily to other
institutions
23%
26%
25%
25%
28%
34%
34%
32%
33%
35%
34%
36%
23%
23%
24%
24%
23%
19%
~ Significantly different from 2008.
* Significantly different from 2006.
† Significantly different from 2005.
■ Significantly different from 2004.
♦ Significantly different from 2002.
0%
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
10%
20%
2007 (N=200)
2006 (N=200)
2005 (N=201)
2004 (N=201)
2002 (N=200)
1998 (N=200)
3.22
3.28†
3.20
3.20
3.11♦
3.19
3.33
3.17
19%
20%
Innovative programs and courses
2008 (N=201)
3.35
3.35
3.24♦
3.29
3.24♦
3.29
3.42
3.41
39%
Reputation of the academic programs
2009 (N=202)
30%
Page 45
40%
50%
60%
RCTC: Comparing Importance and Performance on Key Attributes
Importance of attributes if enrolling in college or university (rated as 'very important')
Impressions of RCTC on attributes (rated as 'excellent' or 'very good')
(2009 N=202)
76%
Quality of the academic programs
33%
60%
Courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week
26%
58%
Overall value for the money
36%
55%
Cost of education
30%
53%
Credits transferring easily to other institutions
28%
Variety of programs and degree options offered
28%
Rated as 'Very
Important'
52%
51%
Reputation of the academic programs
Rated RCTC as
'Excellent' or 'Very
Good'
34%
46%
Availability of flexible enrollment options, such as online or e-learning
31%
46%
48%
Location
42%
Access to computers and technology
34%
41%
Innovative programs and courses
23%
14%
Size of the college and student body
30%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Most of these attributes are considered to be quite important to adults if they were planning to enroll in a college or university. One way to determine areas to
focus on for improvement is to look at where there are the largest ‘gaps’ between importance and perceived performance of the institution. For RCTC, the
largest gaps are in the areas of ‘quality of the academic programs’ and ‘courses offered at a variety of different times and days of the week.’ The smallest gaps
are in ‘access to computers and technology,’ ‘reputation of the academic programs’ and ‘innovative programs and courses.’ RCTC’s performance ratings are
higher than importance for ‘location’ and ‘size of the college and student body.’
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 46
UCR Knowledge and Awareness Study
Winona State University Rochester
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 47
Winona State University Rochester: Importance
Other Findings (2009)
In your opinion, how important is it for Winona State University
to have a presence in Rochester?
33%
36%
'5' Extremely important
32%
30%
'4'
• More likely to rate as important (‘5’ or ‘4’):
» Females (71% vs. 57% of males)
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Have a relationship with RCTC or WSU (vs.
do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU
Rochester
Top 2 Box
2009=65%
2008=66%
19%
17%
'3'
2009 (N=202)
7%
7%
'2'
'1' Not at all important
6%
4%
Don't know
4%
5%
2008 (N=201)
Bottom 2 Box
2009=13%
2008=11%
Mean
2009=3.81
2008=3.91
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Note: Not asked prior to 2008.
Nearly two-thirds of respondents feel that it is important for Winona State University to have a presence in Rochester (65%), which is similar to last year. As can
be seen on the following page, the main reasons that respondents feel it is important for WSU to be in Rochester are that respondents feel that students need more
four year program options and to minimize the commute to Winona. Those who feel it is not very important for WSU to have a presence in Rochester tend to say
that Winona isn’t that far away or that there are enough other institutions here.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 48
Winona State University Rochester: Importance (continued)
For what reasons do you feel it is __________ for Winona State University to have a Rochester presence?*
Important (rated ‘4’ or ‘5’)
(n=130)
Only somewhat important (rated '3')
(n=39)
Not important (rated '1' or '2')
(n=26)~
To minimize the commute/don't have to travel
to Winona
32%
Provides a wider selection of educational
institutions to choose from
15%
Winona isn't that far away/people can drive
there to go to WSU
23%
Students need more program options/4-year
degree programs
29%
Students need more program options/4-year
degree programs
10%
It's not necessary/there are plenty of other
institutions
23%
Provides a wider selection of educational
institutions to choose from
19%
To minimize the commute/don't have to
travel to Winona
10%
Rochester should have its own 4-year
college
8%
Provides a wider selection of classes
11%
Winona isn't that far away/people can drive
there to go to WSU
WSU should focus on Winona campus
8%
8%
WSU should focus on Winona campus
8%
Confusing to have a college named
‘Winona’ in Rochester
8%
It's not necessary/there are plenty of other
institutions
5%
Prefer presence of a larger institution/
U of M
4%
Rochester should have its own 4-year college
5%
A lot of people are taking classes online
5%
Competition from other institutions/degrees
may overlap
4%
Credits transfer easily there
3%
A lot of people are taking classes online
4%
To keep students local
3%
Not that familiar with WSU
4%
Prefer presence of a larger institution/U of M
3%
Don't know
12%
Not that familiar with WSU
8%
Don't know
26%
WSU has a good nursing program
7%
Cheaper/helps students with finances
5%
WSU is a high quality institution
4%
Credits transfer easily there
4%
Close proximity to Mayo/IBM
3%
Verbatim responses are included in the Appendix.
Responses mentioned by at least 3% of respondents are shown.
~ Caution: small base size.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 49
Winona State University Rochester: Familiarity
How familiar are you with the programs and services offered
by Winona State University Rochester?
Other Findings (2009)
• More likely to be ‘very’ familiar with WSU
Rochester:
» Have a relationship with WSU (vs. do not
have a relationship with any UCR institution)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
6%
Very familiar (4)
6%
At least ‘somewhat’ familiar
2009=25%
2008=27%
19%
Somewhat familiar (3)
21%
2009 (N=202)
32%
Only slightly familiar
(2)
2008 (N=201)
32%
42%
Not at all familiar (1)
Mean
2009=1.90
2008= 1.93
40%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
• More likely to be ‘not at all’ familiar with WSU
Rochester:
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution (vs. have a relationship with
RCTC or WSU)
» Have a relationship with RCTC (vs. have a
relationship with WSU)
» Are slightly/not at all familiar with RCTC
For comparative purposes,
familiarity with RCTC:
2009
2008
Very
13%
11%
Somewhat
39%
39%
Slightly
32%
37%
Not at all
16%
12%
100%
Note: Not asked prior to 2008.
One-quarter of respondents are at least ‘somewhat’ familiar with the programs and services offered by WSU Rochester and about four-in-ten are ‘not at all
familiar,’ which is similar to last year. Familiarity among area residents is significantly lower for WSU Rochester than for RCTC.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 50
UCR Knowledge and Awareness Study
Internet & Social Media
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 51
Internet & Social Media: Home Computer & Internet Access
Do you regularly have access to the
Internet from another location, such as
work, school or cell phone?
(Among those with a home computer)
Does your household have a home computer?
Have Internet access from home computer?
(2009 N=202)
(2008 n=188)
(2009 N=202)
Yes
85%
Yes
94%
No
7%
Yes
93%
No
15%
No
6%
(Among those that have Internet access from home computer)
Which of the following do you use to access the Internet from home?
2009 2008
2007
n=177 n=183 n=179
51%
45%
46%
37%
39%
34%
Cable modem
DSL
Regular modem &
telephone line
7%
Wireless
Satellite
Broadband
2006
2005
2004
n=169
n=176
n=158
2003
2002
51%
21%
45%
19%
41%
13%
35%
7%
30%
7%
36%
44%
58%
62%
n=169 n=164
11%
17%
25%
3%
1%
1%
1%
--
--
--
--
2%
--
3%
--
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
--
1%
--
---
---
More than nine-in-ten adults age 18-49 have a home computer (93%). As in previous years, the vast majority of those with a home computer have Internet access
from home (94%). Basing back to total, 88% of all adults in this age group have Internet access from home. The Internet is most likely to be accessed via cable
modem (51%) or DSL (37%). Only 7% of respondents report having dial-up via telephone line. Additionally, 85% of respondents also have Internet from
another location, such as work, school or cell phone. Thus, 197 of 202 respondents (98%) have Internet access from home or regularly access the Internet from
another location.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 52
Internet & Social Media: Home Computer & Internet Access
Other Findings (2009)
• More likely to have a home computer:
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Have taken college courses in past year
• More likely to have a cable modem:
» Rochester residents (60% vs. 36% of nonRochester residents)
» Have a college degree/certificate
• More likely to have DSL:
» Non-Rochester residents (49% vs. 31% of
Rochester residents)
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR
institution (vs. have a relationship with RCTC)
• More likely to have regular modem:
» Have a college degree/certificate
• More likely to have Internet access from home:
» Rochester residents (97% vs. 89% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Do not have a college degree/certificate
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
• More likely to regularly have Internet access from
another location, such as work, school or cell phone:
» Rochester residents (89% vs. 79% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Are very/somewhat familiar with WSU Rochester
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 53
Internet & Social Media: Use of Social Media
(Among those with Internet access)
Portion who have visited/used each in the past 30 days …
(2009 n=197)
Facebook
60%
You Tube
(Among those who have visited/used each in past 30 days)
Approximately how frequently do you visit or use …
49%
Blogs
Facebook
(n=118)
21%
Daily
My Space
17%
Linked In
7%
Twitter
7%
45%
You Tube Blogs
(n=96) (n=41)
My Space
(n=34)
Linked In
(n=13)*
Twitter
(n=13)*
10%
32%
6%
0%
31%
3-6 days/wk
18%
16%
7%
21%
0%
15%
1-2 x/wk
14%
35%
37%
44%
15%
23%
Every 2-3 wks
14%
20%
10%
9%
39%
23%
Once/mo.
8%
16%
5%
15%
23%
0%
< Once/mo.
3%
3%
10%
6%
23%
8%
* Caution: small base size.
Other
6%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Note: Not asked prior to 2009.
Six-in-ten respondents who have Internet access report that they have visited Facebook in the past 30 days, while almost half have visited You Tube (49%) and
about one-in-five have used blogs (21%) or visited My Space (17%). Use of Linked In and Twitter is lower (7% each). Among those who have visited or used
each social media in the past month, the frequency of use is highest for Facebook with 45% reporting daily use. About one-third of those who use blogs or Twitter
report daily use.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 54
Internet & Social Media: Use of Social Media
Other Findings (2009)
More likely to have visited/used in past 30 days:
• Facebook
» Age 18-34 (74% vs. 48% of age 35-49)
» Have taken college courses in past year
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
Use of social media in past 30 days by demographic subgroups:
18-34
35-49
Males
Females
Rochester
Non-Roch.
Facebook
74%~
48%
54%
65%
61%
58%
You Tube
54%
44%
58%^
41%
59%*
33%
Blogs
26%~
16%
27%^
16%
27%*
12%
My Space
24%~
11%
19%
16%
20%
13%
Linked In
4%
9%
9%
5%
8%
5%
Twitter
9%
5%
9%
5%
8%
4%
~ Significantly different from 35-49.
^ Significantly different from females.
* Significantly different from non-Rochester residents.
•
You Tube
» Males (58% vs. 41% of females)
» Rochester residents (59% vs. 33% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR institution
(vs. have a relationship with RCTC or WSU)
•
Blogs
» Age 18-34 (26% vs. 16% of age 35-49)
» Males (27% vs. 16% of females)
» Rochester residents (27% vs. 12% of non-Rochester
residents)
» Do not have a relationship with any UCR institution
(vs. have a relationship with RCTC or WSU)
•
My Space
» Age 18-34 (24% vs. 11% of age 35-49)
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
•
Linked In
» Have a college degree/certificate
» Are very/somewhat familiar with RCTC
•
Twitter
» No significant differences
Younger respondents (age 18-34) are much more likely than older respondents (age 35-49) to have used Facebook in the past 30 days (74% vs. 48%). Younger
respondents are also more likely to have used blogs or My Space. Males are more likely than females to have visited You Tube or used blogs, as are Rochester
residents compared to those residing outside of Rochester.
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 55
Internet & Social Media: Information on Educational Opportunities
(Among those with Internet access)
Other Findings (2009)
If you were looking for information about educational
opportunities or institutions, which social networking sites
would you be most likely to use, if any?
More likely to use for info about educational
opportunities or institutions:
(2009 n=197)
Facebook
• Facebook
» Age 18-34 (41% vs. 20% of age 35-49)
» Have taken college courses in past year
29%
You Tube
6%
My Space
6%
• Twitter
» Rochester residents (4% vs. 0% of nonRochester residents)
Portion who would use each for information about educational
opportunities or institutions by demographic subgroups:
Linked In
3%
18-34
Twitter
3%
Blogs
2%
Other
35-49
Males
Females
Rochester Non-Roch.
Facebook
41%~
20%
30%
29%
29%
30%
You Tube
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
5%
My Space
6%
6%
6%
6%
6%
5%
Linked In
2%
4%
1%
5%
3%
3%
Twitter
3%
2%
2%
3%
4%*
Blogs
3%
1%
1%
3%
2%
7%
Don't know
6%
None
20%
40%
3%
~ Significantly different from 35-49.
* Significantly different from non-Rochester residents.
49%
0%
0%
60%
Note: Not asked prior to 2009.
80%
Social media does not appear to be a major resource for information about educational opportunities and institutions, although nearly three-in-ten did say they
would use Facebook if they were looking for this type of information. Responses were similar across demographic sub-groups for the most part, although those
age 18-34 were twice as likely as those age 35-49 to say they would use Facebook if they were looking for information on educational opportunities or institutions
(41% vs. 20%).
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 56
UCR Knowledge and Awareness Study
Classification
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Page 57
Classification: Respondent Profile 2009 (N=202)
Current Education Level
Some high school
High school graduate
Educational Goal for Next 5 Years
2%
14%
High school diploma
1%
College courses/not complete degree
1%
1-3 years of Technical – no degree
4%
Classes to maintain licensure/certification
8%
Technical School degree/diploma
7%
Technical school certificate/license
2%
1-3 years of college – no degree
7%
2 year degree/Associates
6%
2 year college degree
12%
4 year degree/Bachelors
11%
4 year college degree
33%
Masters degree
15%
Post-graduate degree
20%
Ph.D./M.D.
Area of Residence
Rochester (55901-55906)
60%
Outside Rochester
40%
Age
3%
Nothing planned in next 5 years
51%
Don’t know/can’t say at this time
3%
Gender
Female
54%
Male
46%
18-24
16%
25-29
10%
Cell Phone Use
30-34
21%
Have landline & cell – use both equally
36%
35-39
16%
Have landline & cell – most calls on cell
29%
40-44
17%
Have landline & cell – most calls landline
16%
45-49
20%
Have cell phones only
10%
- 16% of those age 18-34
Employment Status
- 6% of those age 35-49
Employed Full-time
73%
Employed Part-time
15%
- 4% of those age 18-34
Not Employed
11%
- 12% of those age 35-49
2009 UCR Knowledge & Awareness Study
Have landline only
Page 58
8%