University of Alaska – Anchorage
11/2010
Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI)
Strategic Planning Overview
1
STRENGTHS AND CHALLENGES
STRENGTHS
16. 2The instruction in my major field is excellent.
8. The content of the courses within my major is valuable.
68. Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their field.
33. My academic advisor is knowledgeable about requirements in my major.
39. I am able to experience intellectual growth here.
7. The campus is safe and secure for all students.
82. Campus item: I feel that I was correctly placed in the courses needed for my degree or certificate program.
65. Faculty are usually available after class and during office hours.
72. On the whole, the campus is well-maintained.
61. Adjunct faculty are competent as classroom instructors.
18. Library resources and services are adequate.
26. Computer labs are adequate and accessible.
78. Campus item: UAA's learning environment is accessible for people with varying needs and abilities.
CHALLENGES
16. 2The instruction in my major field is excellent.
58. The quality of instruction I receive in most of my classes is excellent.
34. I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts.
66. Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
55. Major requirements are clear and reasonable.
83. Campus item: I received timely and accurate information regarding admissions, financial aid, and registration
processes
47. Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course.
17. Adequate financial aid is available for most students.
14. My academic advisor is concerned about my success as an individual.
57. I seldom get the "run-around" when seeking information on this campus.
4. Admissions staff are knowledgeable.
12. Financial aid awards are announced to students in time to be helpful in college planning.
11. Billing policies are reasonable.
21. The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate.
59. This institution shows concern for students as individuals.
5. Financial aid counselors are helpful.
19. My academic advisor helps me set goals to work toward.
BENCHMARKS
Higher Satisfaction vs. National Four-Year Publics
7. The campus is safe and secure for all students.
25. Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students.
36. Security staff respond quickly in emergencies.
72. On the whole, the campus is well-maintained.
61. Adjunct faculty are competent as classroom instructors.
18. Library resources and services are adequate.
26. Computer labs are adequate and accessible.
28. Parking lots are well-lighted and secure.
Lower Satisfaction vs. National Four-Year Publics
34. I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts.
66. Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
55. Major requirements are clear and reasonable.
6. My academic advisor is approachable.
14. My academic advisor is concerned about my success as an individual.
4. Admissions staff are knowledgeable.
41. There is a commitment to academic excellence on this campus.
29. It is an enjoyable experience to be a student on this campus.
11. Billing policies are reasonable.
50. Class change (drop/add) policies are reasonable.
19. My academic advisor helps me set goals to work toward.
LONGITUDINAL CHANGE
Continued Strengths (SSI 2007, SSI 2010)
o Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their field.
o My academic advisor is knowledgeable about requirements in my major.
o Adjunct faculty are competent as classroom instructors.
o Faculty are usually available after class and during office hours.
o Library resources and services are adequate.
o I am able to experience intellectual growth here.
o On the whole, the campus is well-maintained.
o Computer labs are adequate and accessible.
Challenge (2007) to Strength (2010)
o The content of the courses within my major is valuable.
Continued Challenges (2007, 2010)
o I seldom get the "run-around" when seeking information on this campus.
o Admissions staff are knowledgeable.
o Financial aid awards are announced to students in time to be helpful in college planning.
o I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts.
o Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
o Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course.
o Adequate financial aid is available for most students.
o Billing policies are reasonable.
o The amount of student parking space on campus is adequate.
o This institution shows concern for students as individuals.
o The quality of instruction I receive in most of my classes is excellent.
o The instruction in my major field is excellent.
1
How Noel Levitz identifies strengths and challenges
Strengths are items with high importance and high satisfaction. These are specifically identified as items above the mid-point in
importance and in the upper quartile (25 percent) of your satisfaction scores. The strengths are listed in descending order of
importance.
Challenges are items with high importance and low satisfaction or large performance gap. These are specifically identified as items
above the mid-point in importance and in the lower quartile (25 percent) of your satisfaction scores or items above the mid-point in
importance and in the top quartile (25 percent) of your performance gap scores. The challenges are listed in descending order of
importance.
2
Items appearing as both a strength and a challenge
Occasionally, one or twrengths list and your challenges list. This occurs when an item has very high importance, relatively high
satisfaction a
s well as a fairly large performance gap. The satisfaction score may qualify it as a strength, while the performance gap qualifies it as a
challenge. In these circumstances, it is suggested that institutions disregard it as a strength, and stay focused on it as a challenge
since students care so much about it and still see room for improvement.
University of Alaska - Anchorage
11/2010
Institutional Priorities Survey (IPS)
Strategic Planning Overview
STRENGTHS AND CHALLENGES
STRENGTHS
25. Security staff respond quickly in emergencies.
6. The campus is safe and secure for all students.
27. Students are able to experience intellectual growth here.
46. Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their field.
37. Major requirements are clear and reasonable.
45. Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
53. Campus item: UAA staff and faculty care about students' personal growth and academic success.
14. Library resources and services are adequate.
42. There is a strong commitment to racial harmony on this campus.
CHALLENGES
22. Academic advisors are knowledgeable about requirements for majors within their area.
18. Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students.
5. Academic advisors are approachable.
39. The quality of instruction students receive in most of their classes is excellent.
4. Financial aid counselors are helpful.
3. Admissions staff are knowledgeable.
58. Campus item: High school sufficiently prepares students for UAA's academic demands.
10. Financial aid awards are announced to students in time to be helpful in college planning.
60. Campus item: Students receive timely and accurate information on admissions, financial aid, and registration
processes
41. Adjunct faculty are competent as classroom instructors.
38. Students seldom get the "run-around" when seeking information on this campus.
BENCHMARKS
Higher Satisfaction vs. National Four-Year Publics IPS
25. Security staff respond quickly in emergencies.
6. The campus is safe and secure for all students.
1. The campus staff are caring and helpful.
14. Library resources and services are adequate.
Lower Satisfaction vs. National Four-Year Publics IPS
41. Adjunct faculty are competent as classroom instructors.
LONGITUDINAL CHANGE
Continued Strengths (IPS 2007, IPS 2010)
o Library resources and services are adequate.
o Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their field.
o Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
o The campus is safe and secure for all students.
o Students are able to experience intellectual growth here.
o Security staff respond quickly in emergencies.
Continued Challenges (2007, 2010)
o Admissions staff are knowledgeable.
o Academic advisors are approachable.
o Financial aid counselors are helpful.
o Financial aid awards are announced to students in time to be helpful in college planning.
o Students seldom get the "run-around" when seeking information on this campus.
Strength (2007) to Challenge (2010)
o Faculty are fair and unbiased in their treatment of individual students.
Key:
2010 University Strengths (for both students and staff/faculty)
2010 University Challenges (for both students and staff/faculty)
1
How Noel Levitz identifies strengths and challenges
Strengths are items with high importance and high satisfaction. These are specifically identified as items above the mid-point in
importance and in the upper quartile (25 percent) of your satisfaction scores. The strengths are listed in descending order of
importance.
Challenges are items with high importance and low satisfaction or large performance gap. These are specifically identified as items
above the mid-point in importance and in the lower quartile (25 percent) of your satisfaction scores or items above the mid-point in
importance and in the top quartile (25 percent) of your performance gap scores. The challenges are listed in descending order of
importance.
2
Items appearing as both a strength and a challenge
Occasionally, one or two items may appear on both your strengths list and your challenges list. This occurs when an item has very
high importance, relatively high satisfaction as well as a fairly large performance gap. The satisfaction score may qualify it as
strength, while the performance gap qualifies it as a challenge. In these circumstances, it is suggested that institutions disregard it as
strength, and stay focused on it as a challenge since students care so much about it and still see room for improvement.
Definition of performance gap
A performance gap is simply the importance score minus the satisfaction score. The larger the performance gap, the greater the
discrepancy between what students expect and their level of satisfaction with the current situation. The smaller the performance
gap, the better the institution is doing at meeting student expectations.
For the IPS, the performance gap is calculated by subtracting the agreement score from the importance score.