(Includes a Detailed Analysis of Responses to Overall Satisfaction and Quality of Academic Advising Items) By Steve Chatman

Transcription

1 Report #202-1/01 Using Item Correlation With Global Satisfaction Within Academic Division to Reduce Questionnaire Length and to Raise the Value of Results An Analysis of Results from the 1996 UC Survey of Undergraduate Students (Includes a Detailed Analysis of Responses to Overall Satisfaction and Quality of Academic Advising Items) By Steve Chatman This paper describes an application of inter-item correlation analysis to undergraduates responses to a general survey of student opinion and experience to satisfy two objectives: (1) to identify where ratings of satisfaction correlate with overall satisfaction in order to better understand the student experience and (2) to reduce survey length by eliminating items that are apparently of little consequence in producing satisfied students. The analysis is based on results from a UC undergraduate survey in which UC Davis participated in the spring of The item reduction strategy is as follows. If responses to an item are highly correlated with responses to the global satisfaction item and if those correlations are significant for more than one academic division, then the item is operationally defined as important and is retained. In this instance, visual examination of a plot showing average strength of association across divisions by frequency significant instances is used to eliminate nearly one-half the initial pool. The analysis could have been performed at the institutional level and, if analyzed at the level of the institution would have been straightforward and would have naturally reflected the opinions of the student body. However, item correlation with global satisfaction varies by academic division and that variance would be lost in an institutional analysis. The special importance of divisional variance is that faculty members are best able to affect student satisfaction and a report that presents data closer to their level of experience and interest has a better chance of being successful. To summarize, the divisional analysis of inter-item correlation with a single measure of global satisfaction can be used to (1) construct reports that are more directly meaningful to faculty and to (2) eliminate less important items from future administrations. The first application, constructing more meaningful reports, is valid on its face, as each academic division should receive information tailored to fit when item responses clearly vary by division. The second application extends this reasoning more generally to eliminate from future item pools those items that are infrequently associated with global satisfaction and are weakly associated when they reach statistical significance. This paper emphasizes the second application, survey item reduction. Survey Davis is one of four UC campuses conducting a survey of enrolled students in as part of a System effort to create a common survey form or at least a survey with a common core of items. Questions on the survey are gleaned and tailored from a variety of sources (e.g., ACT College Outcomes Survey) with

2 supplemental sections on student time allocation and information technology. The survey was mailed to 2,500 randomly selected UC Davis undergraduate students along with a transmittal letter signed by Vice Chancellor Wall and an enclosed postage-paid envelope. To be included in the sample pool undergraduate students had to be enrolled during for 3 quarters and could be foreign or domestic students. The first mailing was on April 21 and 3rd class discounting was used. The first mailing was followed by a post card on April 29 then a second mailing of survey, postage-paid envelope and follow-up letter signed by Celeste Hunziker on May 13. Replies were taken until June 8. In sum, 1,412 responses were received for a response rate of 56%. The UCD survey form was produced in house. It was of standard letter size, yellow in color, and six pages in length. Responses were indicated on customized scan forms that could be optically scanned. Each survey carried an identifying number to protect respondent anonymity while minimizing the number of follow-up mailed items. Summary of Analysis Respondents are first sorted into one of ten academic divisions based on degree program: Agriculture/Interdivisional; Agricultural Sciences; Agriculture Environmental Sciences; Agriculture Human Sciences; Biological Sciences; Engineering; Letters & Science (L&S) Interdivisional; L&S Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies; L&S Mathematics and Physical Sciences; or L&S Social Sciences. Correlation of responses to each of 79 questionnaire items with global satisfaction is then determined within division. The measure of association used is Kendall s Tau; a nonparametric measure of association appropriate for ordered variables, and the significance level of each correlation is recorded as displayed (Table 1). At this step all correlations of less than 0.20 are eliminated. A Kendall s Tau correlation of 0.20 reflects a moderately strong association and there is little reason to include weak correlations whose significance is more a function of division size (hypothesis test power) than meaningful psychometric agreement. A brief review of table elements shows both agreement and disagreement across divisions in the strength with which responses correlate. It is also clear that responses to ecosystem items, items eliciting ratings of both importance of topic and progress made in the topical area, favor progress made when looking for significant correlation with global satisfaction. The relative unimportance of importance of ratings for the ecosystem items is an interesting first result. This set of moderately strong correlations becomes the database for subsequent analysis. Next, mean correlation across divisions and number of times the correlation is significant are determined for each item and a ranked listing is produced where items are first sorted first by frequency of significant occurrences then by strength of mean correlation. The sorted item list appears as Table 2 and in graphic form as Figure 1. Based on the scatter-plot, items that are significant in only one or two divisions and are, on average, correlated with global satisfaction more modestly, <0.25, are excluded. These are arbitrary restrictions that serve to eliminate nearly half the initial list of respondent ratings. The criteria reflect the position that items associated with global satisfaction more rarely and more weakly should be eliminated first. Of course in practice, other issues should be considered when selecting or rejecting individual items. The resulting list of 45 items are flagged in Table 2 and appear as Table 3 where attention is called to the university division principally responsible for affecting the outcome measured by each item. The preponderance of items subject to academic purview is immediately apparent and illustrates the importance of reporting at the level of academic division where faculty impact and interests lie. For example, availability of faculty outside of class is clearly both an important characteristic and an Academic Affairs issue but is not correlated with global satisfaction in all divisions. Some characteristics, like overall social and cultural experience can be more affected by Student Services efforts, and others are the purview of both Academic and Student Affairs or of other institutional entities.

3 What are the 10 most important factors to undergraduate student satisfaction? 10 th off-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious understanding 9 th library facilities 8 th quality of academic advising overall 7 th academic calendar for this campus 6 th availability of faculty outside of class 5 th faculty attitude toward students 4 th opportunities for involvement in campus activities 3 rd concern for student as an individual 2 nd overall social and cultural experience 1 st overall academic experience To summarize, the importance of University services, experiences, and programs, as measured by correlation with global satisfaction, can be used to form a shorter, more meaningful questionnaire. Limitations The analysis focused strictly on association There is no mention of whether or not students are satisfied overall or by division. There is no mention of level of satisfaction with the topic of any survey item. It does happen to be the case that UC Davis students do tend to be satisfied with their experience overall and with most aspects of that experience (see Appendix Table A), but the analysis reported here does not demand that responses to two items be similar in magnitude, only in rank order. In other words, if those who are most satisfied with their experience overall are also most satisfied with progress in learning to write effectively, the correlation would be high whether or not the most satisfied respondents are only neutral in their rating. Conversely, the absence of a significant correlation with global satisfaction does not mean that ratings are low on the second measure. The mean rating could be equally high with respondents ordered differently for some unknown reason. Either of these patterns would be exceptional cases as it is typically true that ratings are high on both items when the correlation is high (see Appendix A). Detailed Analysis of Responses to Overall Satisfaction and Quality of Academic Advising Items In recognition of the importance of academic satisfaction and in support of a discussion by the Undergraduate Advising Council, responses to two items, global satisfaction and satisfaction with academic advising will be discussed in detail. Overall Satisfaction Overall the mean rating of satisfaction by UC Davis undergraduates is 4.0 (Appendix B) on a scale from 1 being very dissatisfied to 5 being very satisfied. Expressed as percentages, 26% are very satisfied, 54% are satisfied, and 15% are neutral. Only one in 20 (4%) is dissatisfied and less than ½% are very dissatisfied. Collectively, these are high marks and are equivalent to those for overall academic experience reported for students at UC Berkeley, UC Santa Barbara, UC Santa Cruz, and UC San Diego (Table 9, The 1996 Undergraduate Experience Survey, UC Santa Cruz).

4 There is also little variation in overall satisfaction by academic division. All 10 divisions received ratings from 3.8 to 4.2 and the majority of divisional averages are 4.0. The lowest mark, 3.8 is by undeclared Letters and Science students. There is no significant difference in satisfaction by sex overall or within divisions (<.01). Only satisfaction by race/ethnicity shows a significant difference and that is attributed to Asian students being less inclined to rate overall satisfaction very satisfied and more likely to use neutral to indicate level of satisfaction. Asian students are no more likely to report being dissatisfied than any other group (Appendix Table B). In sum, undergraduates are uniformly well satisfied with the University. Quality of Academic Advising Quality of academic advising is not as highly rated as overall experience. The mean response is 3.4 and the distribution of responses found 2% very dissatisfied and 10% dissatisfied. Students are less likely to be very satisfied (9%) or satisfied (41%). When examined by academic division, the amount of variation found is similar to that for global satisfaction. Mean rating by academic division varies from 3.2 in Engineering to 3.8 in Agricultural Sciences, but most are 3.3 to 3.5. As is true for overall satisfaction with UC Davis, there are no difference by sex overall. However, there is a significant difference by sex within division with female Engineering students being more satisfied than males. Ratings of satisfaction with academic advising are similar to satisfaction with UC Davis overall in that Asian students are less likely to be very satisfied. There is one case where satisfaction with advising varied by race/ethnicity within an academic division, Social Sciences. Asian Social Science students are less likely to be very satisfied but are no more likely to be dissatisfied. Comparative data might be helpful. As stated earlier, this survey is part of a cooperative effort by five UC campuses where each campus used some items that were in common but supplemented the questionnaire with institutionally specific items. In the area of advising, one item, quality of academic advising by faculty was asked by the five participating schools and the rating by UC Davis students is significantly higher than the mean ratings for Berkeley, Santa Barbara, Santa Cruz and San Diego (see Appendix Table C). There is some evidence that sampling strategies and survey methodology varied by campus, and that this result should be noted with extreme caution, but UC Davis s high marks are at the very least encouraging.

5 Table 1: Significance Level of Kendall Tau (Item Correlation with Global Satisfaction) Academic Division* AGCW AGSC ENVR HHAD BISC ENGI LSCW HARC M&PS SOSC Importance Reading with greater speed & comprehension (I) Developing writing skills (I) Developing quantitative reasoning skills (I) Developing up-to-date computer skills (I) Developing research skills (I) Developing effective speaking skills (I) Developing problem-solving skills (I) Becoming competent in field of study (I) Developing an appreciation for art, music & literature (I) Developing scientific knowledge and skills (I) Acquiring knowledge and skills for employment (I) Acquiring knowledge and skills for graduate school (I) Experience through internship (I) Developing more effective interpersonal skills (I) Acquiring a well-rounded general education (I) Generating original ideas and projects (I) Reasoning objectively about attitudes and values (I) Developing leadership skills (I) Exercising rights and responsibilities of citizenship (I) Increasing awareness of governmental issues (I) Developing uses of leisure time (I) Applying principles for improved health (I) Participating in community service activities (I) Progress Reading with greater speed & comprehension (P) Developing writing skills (P) Developing quantitative reasoning skills (P) Developing up-to-date computer skills (P) Developing research skills (P) Developing effective speaking skills (P) Developing problem-solving skills (P) Becoming competent in field of study (P) Developing an appreciation for art, music & literature (P) Developing scientific knowledge and skills (P) Acquiring knowledge and skills for employment (P) Acquiring knowledge and skills for graduate school (P) Experience through internship (P) Developing more effective interpersonal skills (P) Acquiring a well-rounded general education (P) Generating original ideas and projects (P) Reasoning objectively about attitudes and values (P) Developing leadership skills (P) Exercising rights and responsibilities of citizenship (P) Increasing awareness of governmental issues (P) Developing uses of leisure time (P) Applying principles for improved health (P) Participating in community service activities (P) Faculty instruction in major field

6 Table 1: Significance Level of Kendall Tau (Item Correlation with Global Satisfaction) Academic Division* AGCW AGSC ENVR HHAD BISC ENGI LSCW HARC M&PS SOSC TA/graduate student instruction in major field Availability of faculty outside of class Faculty attitude toward students Course content in major Testing/grading procedures Variety of courses offered Class size Availability of required courses Availability of courses in general Flexibility of degree requirements Opportunities for independent study and research Practical work experiences in your field of study Quality of academic advising by faculty Quality of academic advising by staff Quality of academic advising by academic peer advisors Quality of academic advising by dean's office Quality of academic advising overall Classroom facilities Laboratory facilities Computer facilities Computer services Library facilities Library services Campus catalog Academic calendar for this campus General registration procedures On-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious understan Off-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious understan Concern for student as an individual Opportunities for involvement in campus activities Overall academic experience Overall social and cultural experience * Academic Division: Agriculture/Interdivisional; Agricultural Sciences; Agriculture Environmental Sciences; Agriculture Human Sciences; Biological Sciences; Engineering; Letters & Science (L&S) Interdivisional; L&S Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies; L&S Mathematics and Physical Sciences; or L&S Social Sciences

7 Table 2: Kendall Tau of Items Correlating with Global Satisfaction Within Division Academic Division* Top AGCW AGSC ENVR HHAD BISC ENGI LSCW HARC M&PS SOSC Count Mean 45 1 Overall academic experience X 2 Overall social and cultural experience X 3 Concern for student as an individual X 4 Opportunities for involvement in campus activities X 5 Faculty attitude toward students X 6 Availability of faculty outside of class X 7 Academic calendar for this campus X 8 Quality of academic advising overall X 9 Library facilities X 10 Off-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious understanding X 11 Variety of courses offered X 12 On-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious understanding X 13 Faculty instruction in major field X 14 Course content in major X 15 Classroom facilities X 16 Campus catalog X 17 Laboratory facilities X 18 Quality of academic advising by faculty X 19 Testing/grading procedures X 20 Acquiring knowledge and skills for graduate school (P) X 21 Availability of required courses X 22 Class size X 23 Opportunities for independent study and research X 24 Quality of academic advising by staff X 25 Availability of courses in general X 26 Flexibility of degree requirements X 27 Quality of academic advising by dean's office X 28 Acquiring a well-rounded general education (P) X 29 Acquiring knowledge and skills for employment (P) X 30 Library services X 31 Practical work experiences in your field of study X 32 Developing scientific knowledge and skills (P) X 33 General registration procedures X 34 Developing leadership skills (P) X 35 Developing uses of leisure time (P) X 36 Becoming competent in field of study (P) X 37 Developing problem-solving skills (P) X 38 Developing research skills (P) X 39 Applying principles for improved health (P) X 40 TA/graduate student instruction in major field X 41 Developing more effective interpersonal skills (P) Developing an appreciation for art, music & literature (P) Computer facilities Quality of academic advising by academic peer advisors Developing quantitative reasoning skills (P) Generating original ideas and projects (P) X 47 Developing writing skills (P) X 48 Developing up-to-date computer skills (P) X 49 Developing effective speaking skills (P) X 50 Exercising rights and responsibilities of citizenship (P) X 51 Developing research skills (I)

8 Table 2: Kendall Tau of Items Correlating with Global Satisfaction Within Division Academic Division* Top AGCW AGSC ENVR HHAD BISC ENGI LSCW HARC M&PS SOSC Count Mean Participating in community service activities (P) Experience through internship (P) Reasoning objectively about attitudes and values (P) Computer services Experience through internship (I) Becoming competent in field of study (I) Increasing awareness of governmental issues (P) 59 Reading with greater speed & comprehension (I) 60 Developing writing skills (I) 61 Developing quantitative reasoning skills (I) 62 Developing up-to-date computer skills (I) 63 Developing effective speaking skills (I) 64 Developing problem-solving skills (I) 65 Developing an appreciation for art, music & literature (I) 66 Developing scientific knowledge and skills (I) 67 Acquiring knowledge and skills for employment (I) 68 Acquiring knowledge and skills for graduate school (I) 69 Developing more effective interpersonal skills (I) 70 Acquiring a well-rounded general education (I) 71 Generating original ideas and projects (I) 72 Reasoning objectively about attitudes and values (I) 73 Developing leadership skills (I) 74 Exercising rights and responsibilities of citizenship (I) 75 Increasing awareness of governmental issues (I) 76 Developing uses of leisure time (I) 77 Applying principles for improved health (I) 78 Participating in community service activities (I) 79 Reading with greater speed & comprehension (P) Mean Standard Deviation Only significant correlations of 0.20 or higher are included. A 0.20 Kendall Tau correlation is moderately strong. * Academic Division: Agriculture/Interdivisional; Agricultural Sciences; Agriculture Environmental Sciences; Agriculture Human Sciences; Biological Sciences; Engineering; Letters & Science (L&S) Interdivisional; L&S Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies; L&S Mathematics and Physical Sciences; or L&S Social Sciences

9 Figure 1: Relationship of Item Correlation with Global Satisfaction to Number of Times Item was Significant Across Disciplines 10 9 Number of Times Significant Items Retained Items Eliminated Average Correlation Across Divisions

10 Table 3: Reduced Item Set with Campus Responsibility Identified -- Items Most Clearly Associated with Global Satisfaction UC Davis Responsibility Academic S.A. Clearly Administrative Questionnaire Items Purview Purview Both Support Other 1 Overall academic experience x 2 Overall social and cultural experience x 3 Concern for student as an individual x 4 Opportunities for involvement in campus activities x 5 Faculty attitude toward students x 6 Availability of faculty outside of class x 7 Academic calendar for this campus x 8 Quality of academic advising overall x 9 Library facilities x 10 Off-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious understanding x 11 Variety of courses offered x 12 On-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious understanding x 13 Faculty instruction in major field x 14 Course content in major x 15 Classroom facilities x 16 Campus catalog x 17 Laboratory facilities x 18 Quality of academic advising by faculty x 19 Testing/grading procedures x 20 Acquiring knowledge and skills for graduate school (P) x 21 Availability of required courses x 22 Class size x 23 Opportunities for independent study and research x 24 Quality of academic advising by staff x 25 Availability of courses in general x 26 Flexibility of degree requirements x 27 Quality of academic advising by dean's office x 28 Acquiring a well-rounded general education (P) x 29 Acquiring knowledge and skills for employment (P) x 30 Library services x 31 Practical work experiences in your field of study x 32 Developing scientific knowledge and skills (P) x 33 General registration procedures x 34 Developing leadership skills (P) x 35 Developing uses of leisure time (P) x 36 Becoming competent in field of study (P) x 37 Developing problem-solving skills (P) x 38 Developing research skills (P) x 39 Applying principles for improved health (P) x 40 TA/graduate student instruction in major field x 41 Generating original ideas and projects (P) x 42 Developing writing skills (P) x 43 Developing up-to-date computer skills (P) x 44 Developing effective speaking skills (P) x 45 Exercising rights and responsibilities of citizenship (P) x (P) identifies items reflecting self-reported progress made toward achieving goal.

11 Appendix Table A: UC Davis Undergraduate Experiences Survey -- Goals, Progress, and Satisfaction Frequencies Percentages Very Very None Little Moderate Great Great n = None Little Moderate Great Great Mean Importance of Goal Reading with greater speed & comprehension (I) % 6% 21% 33% 37% 4.0 Developing writing skills (I) % 2% 11% 31% 55% 4.4 Developing quantitative reasoning skills (I) % 3% 15% 32% 50% 4.3 Developing up-to-date computer skills (I) % 4% 18% 29% 48% 4.2 Developing research skills (I) % 5% 22% 33% 38% 4.0 Developing effective speaking skills (I) % 4% 15% 31% 48% 4.2 Developing problem-solving skills (I) % 2% 14% 32% 52% 4.3 Becoming competent in field of study (I) % 1% 6% 20% 73% 4.6 Developing an appreciation for art, music & literature (I) % 13% 28% 26% 27% 3.6 Developing scientific knowledge and skills (I) % 7% 18% 28% 44% 4.0 Acquiring knowledge and skills for employment (I) % 1% 6% 15% 77% 4.7 Acquiring knowledge and skills for graduate school (I) % 5% 11% 23% 58% 4.3 Experience through internship (I) % 3% 11% 30% 52% 4.3 Developing more effective interpersonal skills (I) % 3% 17% 33% 45% 4.2 Acquiring a well-rounded general education (I) % 7% 21% 32% 37% 3.9 Generating original ideas and projects (I) % 4% 22% 36% 38% 4.1 Reasoning objectively about attitudes and values (I) % 3% 20% 36% 39% 4.1 Developing leadership skills (I) % 5% 17% 34% 42% 4.1 Exercising rights and responsibilities of citizenship (I) % 9% 25% 31% 32% 3.8 Increasing awareness of governmental issues (I) % 10% 27% 31% 28% 3.7 Developing uses of leisure time (I) % 6% 21% 32% 39% 4.0 Applying principles for improved health (I) % 4% 17% 33% 43% 4.1 Participating in community service activities (I) % 14% 31% 26% 22% 3.4 Progress Reading with greater speed & comprehension (P) % 22% 47% 19% 4% 2.9 Developing writing skills (P) % 14% 42% 32% 9% 3.3 Developing quantitative reasoning skills (P) % 13% 40% 35% 10% 3.4 Developing up-to-date computer skills (P) % 23% 32% 24% 11% 3.1 Developing research skills (P) % 20% 34% 25% 13% 3.1 Developing effective speaking skills (P) % 25% 36% 19% 7% 2.8 Developing problem-solving skills (P) % 13% 41% 31% 12% 3.4 Becoming competent in field of study (P) % 12% 35% 34% 15% 3.4 Developing an appreciation for art, music & literature (P) % 26% 31% 20% 9% 2.8 Developing scientific knowledge and skills (P) % 15% 33% 29% 15% 3.3 Acquiring knowledge and skills for employment (P) % 22% 39% 24% 8% 3.0 Acquiring knowledge and skills for graduate school (P) % 19% 37% 25% 9% 3.0 Experience through internship (P) % 13% 18% 15% 13% 2.4 Developing more effective interpersonal skills (P) % 18% 36% 28% 11% 3.2 Acquiring a well-rounded general education (P) % 15% 38% 28% 14% 3.3 Very Very None Little Moderate Great Great None Little Moderate Great Great Mean Generating original ideas and projects (P) % 25% 42% 20% 6% 3.0 Reasoning objectively about attitudes and values (P) % 11% 39% 32% 12% 3.3 Developing leadership skills (P) % 23% 34% 20% 10% 2.9 Exercising rights and responsibilities of citizenship (P) % 18% 38% 22% 12% 3.1 Increasing awareness of governmental issues (P) % 30% 31% 16% 8% 2.7

12 Appendix Table A: UC Davis Undergraduate Experiences Survey -- Goals, Progress, and Satisfaction Frequencies Percentages Developing uses of leisure time (P) % 22% 31% 22% 13% 3.0 Applying principles for improved health (P) % 20% 38% 23% 11% 3.1 Participating in community service activities (P) % 29% 26% 12% 7% 2.5 Frequencies Percentages Very Very Very Very DissatisfiedDissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied DissatisfiedDissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Mean Faculty instruction in major field % 6% 19% 52% 22% 3.9 TA/graduate student instruction in major field % 10% 30% 45% 13% 3.6 Availability of faculty outside of class % 7% 22% 48% 21% 3.8 Faculty attitude toward students % 6% 24% 48% 20% 3.8 Course content in major % 6% 19% 49% 24% 3.9 Testing/grading procedures % 8% 32% 47% 10% 3.5 Variety of courses offered % 10% 18% 43% 28% 3.8 Class size % 23% 31% 33% 7% 3.1 Availability of required courses % 22% 29% 32% 10% 3.2 Availability of courses in general % 18% 33% 35% 9% 3.2 Flexibility of degree requirements % 12% 40% 35% 9% 3.3 Opportunities for independent study and research % 14% 36% 32% 16% 3.4 Practical work experiences in your field of study % 19% 32% 29% 14% 3.3 Quality of academic advising by faculty % 11% 33% 36% 16% 3.5 Quality of academic advising by staff % 11% 32% 39% 15% 3.5 Quality of academic advising by academic peer advisors % 11% 35% 35% 16% 3.5 Quality of academic advising by dean's office % 15% 38% 26% 13% 3.2 Quality of academic advising overall % 10% 38% 41% 9% 3.4 Classroom facilities % 9% 34% 47% 8% 3.5 Laboratory facilities % 10% 28% 48% 12% 3.6 Computer facilities % 11% 20% 45% 21% 3.7 Computer services % 8% 23% 47% 20% 3.7 Library facilities % 3% 11% 50% 37% 4.2 Library services % 4% 16% 48% 31% 4.0 Campus catalog % 3% 15% 54% 27% 4.1 Academic calendar for this campus % 7% 24% 47% 20% 3.7 General registration procedures % 10% 25% 45% 16% 3.6 Very Very Very Very DissatisfiedDissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied DissatisfiedDissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Mean On-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious underst % 9% 29% 42% 17% 3.6 Off-campus atmosphere of ethnic, political and religious underst % 11% 37% 36% 12% 3.4 Concern for student as an individual % 18% 41% 28% 6% 3.1 Opportunities for involvement in campus activities % 7% 28% 41% 23% 3.8 Overall academic experience % 5% 22% 53% 19% 3.8 Overall social and cultural experience % 8% 29% 43% 19% 3.7 UC Davis in general % 4% 15% 54% 26% 4.0

13 Appendix Table B: Satisfaction with UC Davis Overall and with Academic Advising Overall Frequencies Percentages Very Very Very Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied n = Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Mean Quality of academic advising overall % 10% 38% 41% 9% 3.4 Agriculture/Interdivisional % 15% 35% 40% 9% 3.4 Agricultural Sciences % 7% 22% 53% 17% 3.8 Agriculture Environmental Sciences % 14% 43% 39% 4% 3.3 Agriculture Human Sciences % 7% 38% 47% 8% 3.5 Biological Sciences % 7% 41% 39% 12% 3.5 Engineering % 13% 42% 31% 8% 3.2 Letters & Science (L&S) Interdivisional % 4% 38% 54% 4% 3.6 L&S Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies % 16% 36% 36% 10% 3.4 L&S Mathematics and Physical Sciences % 6% 43% 48% 0% 3.4 L&S Social Sciences % 10% 36% 40% 10% 3.4 Differences by sex? No Differences by sex within division? Yes, Engineering. Female % 0% 30% 52% 15% 3.8 Male % 17% 46% 25% 6% 3.1 Differences by race/ethnicity? Yes. Unknown % 20% 24% 41% 10% 3.3 Asian % 9% 44% 39% 6% 3.4 Underrepresented Minority % 7% 38% 41% 11% 3.5 White % 10% 36% 41% 11% 3.5 Differences by race/ethnicity with division? Yes, Social Sciences. Unknown too few Asian % 9% 37% 47% 4% 3.4 Underrepresented Minority % 5% 40% 35% 12% 3.4 White % 11% 35% 39% 13% 3.5 UC Davis in general % 4% 15% 54% 26% 4.0 Agriculture/Interdivisional % 3% 22% 50% 25% 4.0 Agricultural Sciences % 3% 14% 48% 32% 4.0 Agriculture Environmental Sciences % 3% 8% 59% 30% 4.2 Agriculture Human Sciences % 1% 10% 58% 30% 4.2 Biological Sciences % 3% 14% 60% 22% 4.0 Engineering % 6% 16% 52% 25% 3.9 Letters & Science (L&S) Interdivisional % 3% 31% 44% 22% 3.8 L&S Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies % 3% 18% 52% 27% 4.0 L&S Mathematics and Physical Sciences % 3% 18% 49% 28% 4.0 L&S Social Sciences % 5% 13% 54% 28% 4.0 Differences by sex? No Differences by sex within division? No. Differences by race/ethnicity? Yes

14 Appendix Table B: Satisfaction with UC Davis Overall and with Academic Advising Overall Frequencies Percentages Very Very Very Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied n = Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Mean Unknown % 3% 13% 56% 29% 4.1 Asian % 4% 21% 59% 16% 3.9 Underrepresented Minority % 5% 16% 51% 27% 4.0 White % 4% 10% 52% 34% 4.1 Differences by race/ethnicity with division? No.

15 Appendix Table C: External Comparison of Satisfaction with Faculty Advising Frequencies Percentages Very Very Very Very Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied n = Dissatisfied Dissatisfied Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Mean Quality of academic advising by faculty % 11% 33% 36% 16% 3.5 UCB 3.2 UCSC 3.2 UCSD 2.8 UCSB 3.2 Agriculture/Interdivisional % 13% 37% 38% 10% 3.4 Agricultural Sciences % 5% 19% 45% 26% 3.8 Agriculture Environmental Sciences % 14% 39% 29% 18% 3.5 Agriculture Human Sciences % 10% 34% 37% 15% 3.5 Biological Sciences % 8% 33% 39% 16% 3.6 Engineering % 19% 31% 34% 12% 3.3 Letters & Science (L&S) Interdivisional % 9% 39% 39% 13% 3.6 L&S Humanities, Arts, and Cultural Studies % 15% 29% 28% 19% 3.3 Simple Average of UCSC Arts and Humanities 3.4 L&S Mathematics and Physical Sciences % 12% 38% 38% 8% 3.3 UCSC Natural Sciences 2.9 L&S Social Sciences % 10% 33% 33% 19% 3.5 UCSC Social Sciences 3.2