Graduate Student Satisfaction Survey

Graduate Student Satisfaction Survey 2002-2009 Technical Report Graduate College Missouri State University

P a g e - 2 - Technical Report of Missouri State University Graduate Student Satisfaction Survey 2002-2009 Prepared by Drew Foster Tom Tomasi, Ph.D. Graduate College Missouri State University January 2010 We would like to acknowledge Tom Kane, Ph.D., Michelle Visio, Ph.D., Jeanne Phelps, Ph.D., Martha Kirker, Ph.D., and Carla Coorts for their help on this project.

P a g e - 3 - Table of Contents Executive Summary... 4 Participants... 5 Methods... 5 Results and Discussion... 7 Appendix A Questionnaire Items... 13 Appendix B Demographic Variables... 26 Appendix C Reasons for Choosing MSU... 32 Appendix D Part-time Item Analysis... 33 Appendix E Program Evaluations... 36

P a g e - 4 - EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Graduate College at Missouri State University (MSU) conducts the Graduate Student Satisfaction Survey (GSSS) biannually to evaluate the attitudes of its current graduate students. The GSSS, originally developed by the Graduate Student Council, provides an opportunity for students to convey their satisfaction with their graduate program, the services provided by the Graduate College, and which factors influenced their decision to attend Missouri State University for graduate school. Analyses of the information from this survey may assist faculty and administration of Missouri State University in improving the graduate experience for its students. This report is unique because it presents the results from data collected over an eight year time period. ABOUT THE SURVEY The GSSS questionnaire (Appendix A) is comprised of roughly fifty questions constituting four major areas of interest: demographic information, reasons for attending MSU, Graduate College services, and degree program evaluations. The organization of this report will reflect the four areas. The questionnaire was distributed in the spring semester of 2002, 2005, 2007, and 2009. The targeted population included all graduate students who were enrolled at the beginning of the semester the survey was conducted. FINDINGS Graduate students rated geographical location as the most important factor in choosing MSU for graduate school. Survey respondents were consistently dissatisfied with the health insurance plans offered to graduate students. Mean ratings of satisfaction with Graduate Student Council representation has increased since 2005 even though this organization has been relatively inactive for the past few years. Part-time students reported dissatisfaction with the availability of advising for them. Many part-time students indicated that they would be interested in participating in a school/work/family balance program if one were available. Students report satisfaction with faculty competency and instructor timeliness.

P a g e - 5 - PARTICIPANTS Participants were 2327 graduate students at Missouri State University. Individual sample sizes from years 2002, 2005, 2007, and 2009 were 539, 515, 845, and 428, respectively. The total sample included 775 men and 1,534 women (66%); 18 participants did not report gender. Majorities of participants (67%) were between the ages of twenty and thirty, were full-time students (67%), and among students responding in 2007 and 2009, 78% reported being Missouri residents (note: residency was not recorded prior to 2007). The demographic information of participants appears in Appendix B. METHODS This project was designed to evaluate a decade of responses to the Graduate Student Satisfaction Survey and to identify meaningful trends in the data. The questionnaire was approved by MSU s Human Subjects Institution Review Board each year that data were collected. Permission to send the mass emails was obtained from the proper authorities to comply with MSU s mass email policy. A list of email addresses for all graduate students enrolled at the beginning of the semester in which data were collected was obtained from the Graduate College. Emails were sent from the Graduate College Services account to these addresses. The email message included the survey s purpose statement, an invitation to participate voluntarily, a promise of anonymous reporting, and links to the online questionnaire. The data were collected via InQsit, an online testing service. SCALING Demographic questions used different scaling methods depending on the content of the question (e.g. nominal scale for sex: male/female). Scaling for the age and employment status items was not consistent from year to year, so data were grouped before the analysis. The Reasons for Attending MSU section items used a 5-point Likert scale based on importance of the reason (1= Not Important At All, 5= Very Important). The Graduate College Services and Program Evaluation sections used a 5-point Likert satisfaction scale ranging from (1=Very Dissatisfied) to (5=Very Satisfied). All Likert scaled items included a Not Applicable option, and these responses were not included in analyses. RESPONSE RATES For this report, response rates were calculated by dividing the number of completed surveys by the total graduate student headcount for each semester the questionnaire was administered (Missouri State University Enrollment Management, 2009). All submitted questionnaires were included in the response rate calculation and data analysis although some questionnaires were submitted incomplete. There were an abundance of partially completed questionnaires that were not submitted, and therefore, excluded from our analysis. The response rates for each year are 20.8% (2002), 18.0% (2005), 32.1% (2007), and 15.8% (2009). It is important to note that some error may exist in these calculations because we are unable to know

P a g e - 6 - if all the students had the opportunity to respond. Several students may not have received email invitations to participate because they did not access their accounts or their inbox was full. We should note that in 2009, MSU underwent a change in student email service provider that could have also affected response rates. GRADUATE STUDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE The questionnaire (Appendix A) currently consists of fifty items with five extra items for part-time students. The questionnaire is comprised of four major sections: demographic variables; reasons for choosing MSU for graduate school; Graduate College services; and degree program evaluation. An extra section was included at the end of the part-time student questionnaire form. This section included five questions addressing issues specific to part-time graduate students (Table 1). TABLE 1. GRADUATE STUDENT SATISFACTION SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS (2009). Graduate Student Satisfaction Survey Questionnaire Items Demographic Graduate Program Age Variables: Enrollment Status Residency Status Sex Employment Status Reasons for Program Rating Financial Assistance Availability Choosing Program Reputation Graduate Assistantship Availability Missouri State MSU Reputation MOGO Availability University for Interaction with Faculty Tuition Cost Grad School: Advertising Medium Geographical Location Graduate Admissions Assistance Campus Organizations College Timeliness Grad Student Council Representation Services: Orientation Inter-Library Loan GA Application Assistance Library Hours Graduate College Sponsored Events Career Services Website Information Health Insurance Online Forms Course Registration Workshops Computer Lab Hours Research Presentation Opportunities Online Courses Research Funding Parking Online Communication Shuttle Services Program Admissions Assistance Faculty Competency Evaluations: Advisor s Time Course Variety Research Chair Course Difficulty Comprehensive Exam Internship Opportunity Instructor s Timeliness Faculty Approachability Part-time Orientation Attendance Likelihood Weekend Course Likelihood Student Items: Orientation Time of Day Advising Availability Life Balance Program Participation Likelihood

P a g e - 7 - Since 2002, the items have changed slightly due to changes in university policies and offerings. The most significant change was the addition of six program evaluation items in 2005 and five Graduate College services items in 2007. DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Analysis of the demographic information shows some expected trends. The demographic information of those who responded to our survey reflects the demographics of MSU Springfield graduate students as indicated by census data. This is important because it supports the notion of representativeness. A representative sample allows us to interpret our sample as prototypical of the target population as a whole. Some of the findings include: More women responded (65%) than men. This is consistent with the gender composition (58.6% female) of graduate students on campus and the general tendency for females to respond to survey requests more than males. The 20-30 year old age group doubled all other age groups combined. A majority of respondents (65.6%) were full-time students. Fall census data indicates that 73% of total Springfield campus students are full-time. A large majority of respondents were Missouri residents (78.0%). Fall 2009 census data indicates that 77% of graduate students are Missouri residents. Most students (86.5%) were employed either off campus or as Graduate Assistants. Response rates by college reflect graduate student enrollment data for the spring semester of 2009 (Appendix B-5). All of the demographic figures can be found in Appendix B. REASONS FOR CHOOSING MSU Students rated all but one reason for choosing Missouri State University as important (Figure 1). Furthermore, little variance existed between the means of each reason (excluding MOGO Scholarship availability). However, response differences did emerge when the data were analyzed by demographic variables. A few subgroups reported some reasons as more important than other groups. Results include: Students rated geographical location as the most important factor in choosing MSU for graduate school. This was especially true for Missouri residents (m = 4.31) who reported

P a g e - 8 - MSU s geographical location as significantly more important than non-resident students (m = 3.66), t(1, 1188) = 8.72, p<0.05. Students also reported that interaction with faculty (m = 3.99) and tuition cost (m = 3.96) were important. Financial assistance availability also correlated with enrollment status, r = 0.23; full-time students (m = 3.92) rated financial assistance availability as significantly more important than part-time students (m = 3.24), t(1, 1463)=8.84, p<0.05. The Missouri Outreach Graduate Opportunity (MOGO) scholarship availability item was given the lowest mean importance rating. This is likely because a large majority of our respondents were Missouri residents and few qualify for the MOGO scholarship. However, the MOGO scholarship availability was significantly more important to nonresidents (m= 3.22) than residents (m=2.01), t(1,725)=10.93, p<0.05. No significant longitudinal trends emerged in any of the eight Reasons for Choosing MSU items over the years data were collected (Appendix C). Figure 1 below shows the mean importance ratings for each of the items. FIGURE 1. IMPORTANCE OF VARIABLE IN CHOOSING MSU MEAN SCORES (2002-2009) Reasons for Choosing MSU 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 3.85 3.78 3.99 3.76 3.5 2.32 3.96 4.16 *2002 DATA WERE NOT AVAILABLE. **2002 AND 2005 DATA WERE NOT AVAILABLE.

P a g e - 9 - GRADUATE COLLEGE SERVICES In general, graduate students are satisfied with services provided by the Graduate College and Missouri State University (Table 2). Among the highest rated services were the Graduate College s online communication and timeliness. The lowest rated services were the health insurance plans offered to graduate students and campus parking. Specific results include: Most respondents (84.5%) were either satisfied or very satisfied with the ability of MSU s information network (email access, Blackboard, wireless internet connection, etc.) to meet their communication needs. Among the lowest rated Graduate College services items is satisfaction with the health insurance plans offered to graduate students. A third (33.8%) of respondents reported being either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. Satisfaction with parking ratings were below the midpoint (3.00) of our scale for both years in which the item was included in to the questionnaire. Forty percent reported being dissatisfied or very dissatisfied. From 2002 to 2005, satisfaction with interlibrary loans increased. During this time, a new service providing students with electronic journal articles became available. The department also underwent changes in personnel that may have affected students satisfaction. In November of 2005 (after data were collected), a new system was installed to process interlibrary loan requests. Since 2005 the satisfaction ratings have been consistent and amongst the top rated services. Over one third (38.4%) of respondents reported being dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with library hours. Satisfaction with course registration dropped between 2007 and 2009. Over this time period, a new system (Banner) was introduced which may explain the decrease in satisfaction. Mean satisfaction ratings for Graduate Student Council s ability to represent student needs to administration have increased since 2005. For this item, 61.3% of respondents reported being neither satisfied nor dissatisfied. This may be due to graduate student s lack of information about GSC decisions.

P a g e - 10 - TABLE 2. SATISFACTION WITH SERVICE MEANS GRADUATE COLLEGE SERVICE YEAR 2002 2005 2007 2009 ADMISSIONS ASSISTANCE 3.91 3.94 3.83 TIMELINESS 4.14 4.13 4.06 ORIENTATION 3.48 3.53 3.44 GA APPLICATION ASSISTANCE 3.46 3.35 WEBSITE INFORMATION 3.74 3.86 3.77 ONLINE FORM 3.81 3.87 3.80 WORKSHOPS 3.41 3.52 3.60 RESEARCH PRESENTATION 3.52 3.58 3.52 OPPORTUNITIES RESEARCH FUNDING 3.16 3.18 ONLINE COMMUNICATION 4.08 4.16 4.00 CAMPUS ORGANIZATIONS 3.43 3.37 3.46 GSC REPRESENTATION 3.19 3.24 3.30 INTER-LIBRARY LOAN 3.69 4.02 3.90 4.09 LIBRARY HOURS 3.25 3.18 3.12 CAREER SERVICES 3.19 3.29 3.20 HEALTH INSURANCE 2.86 2.80 2.87 2.77 COURSE REGISTRATION 4.00 3.32 COMPUTER LAB HOURS 3.93 3.80 ONLINE COURSE 3.57 3.62 PARKING 2.91 2.98 SHUTTLE SERVICE 3.78 3.90 PART-TIME STUDENT ANALYSIS Because administrators realize that part-time students may face a different set of obstacles, five questions were added to the questionnaire in 2005 that specifically address issues that these students face (Appendix D). Results show: Part-time students reported that they would likely attend Graduate Student Orientation. They also reported evenings as the times they are most likely to attend. Part-time students reported dissatisfaction with the availability of advising for them. A majority of part-time students (68%) reported being either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied.

P a g e - 11 - Only 36% of part-time students reported that they would be likely to take a weekend course if it were offered. Many part-time students (44%) indicated that they would be interested in participating in a school/work/family balance program if one were available. PROGRAM EVALUATION The Graduate Program evaluation data can be analyzed and reported in several ways. Responses can be grouped by college, department, program, year, or demographic variable, but many of the programs for which data are reported have extremely small sample sizes. Those reviewing these data should be careful not to over-generalize findings reported here that are based on small sample sizes. In addition, certain questions on the GSSS have changed over time. For only a few questions asked consistently across multiple years were longitudinal analyses possible. First, item means were calculated for each of the ten program evaluation items. For all items in 2009, students were more satisfied than dissatisfied (Figure 2). Among the highest rated items were satisfaction with instructor s timeliness and faculty competency. Among the lowest rated items were satisfaction with course difficulty and comprehensive exams. It should be noted that at the time the survey was administered, many students had not taken their comprehensive exams. The data are presented below in Figure 2. FIGURE 2. PROGRAM EVALUATION ITEM MEANS FOR 2009. Program Evaluation Item Means 5 4 3.92 3.9 3.68 3.3 4 3.96 4 3.44 3.96 3.45 3 2 1

P a g e - 12 - The ten program evaluation items were then combined to form the student s general satisfaction scale with good internal consistency (α = 0.875). With this scale a single satisfaction score (mean) was calculated for each respondent. The scores were then analyzed by year, college, and program. No major changes occurred over time in general satisfaction with graduate program (Figure 3). See Appendix E for college and program results. FIGURE 3. GENERAL SATISFACTION WITH GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM. Satisfaction with Graduate Programs 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 3.89 3.87 3.82 2005 2007 2009 Only weak correlations were found when demographic variables were correlated with each scale. Demographic variables were also correlated to the general student satisfaction scale (see Appendix E for the complete analyses). The following trends in these correlational analyses were found: Women (mean = 3.90) were more satisfied with their program than men (m = 3.80), t(1,1698) = 2.71, (p<0.05). Although statistically significant because of a large sample size, this difference was not very large. Part-time students (m = 3.91) were significantly more satisfied with their graduate program than full-time students (m = 3.84), t(1, 1704) = 2.08 (p < 0.05). Here, a measure of practical significance may be more appropriate because large sample sizes increase the likelihood of finding statistical significance.

P a g e - 13 - APPENDIX A QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS 1. PLEASE CHOOSE YOUR DEGREE PROGRAM FROM THE DROP DOWN LISTS BELOW. CHOOSE ONLY ONE. ACCOUNTANCY ADMINISTRATIVE STUDIES APPLIED ANTHROPOLOGY AUDIOLOGY AUTISM SPECTRUM DISORDERS CERTIFICATE PROGRAM BIOLOGY BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION CELL AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY CHEMISTRY COMMUNICATION SCIENCES AND DISORDERS COMMUNICATION COMPUTER INFORMATION SYSTEMS CONFLICT AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION CERTIFICATE PROGRAM COUNSELING CRIMINOLOGY DEFENSE AND STRATEGIC STUDIES EARLY CHILDHOOD AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION MASTERS EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION SPECIALIST EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP ELEMENTARY EDUCATION ENGLISH GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION SCIENCES CERTIFICATE PROGRAM GEOSPATIAL SCIENCES IN GEOGRAPHY AND GEOLOGY HEALTH ADMINISTRATION HEALTH PROMOTION AND WELLNESS MANAGEMENT HISTORY INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA TECHNOLOGY INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY SPECIALIST CERTIFICATE PROGRAM INTERNAL AUDITING -- CERTIFICATE PROGRAM INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND ADMINISTRATION MATERIALS SCIENCE MATHEMATICS MUSIC NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCE NURSE ANESTHESIA NURSING ORIENTATION AND MOBILITY CERTIFICATE PROGRAM OZARK STUDIES CERTIFICATE PROGRAM PHYSICAL THERAPY PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT STUDIES

P a g e - 14 - PLANT SCIENCE POST MASTERS NURSE EDUCATOR CERTIFICATE PROGRAM POST MASTERS NURSE PRACTITIONER CERTIFICATE PROGRAM PROJECT MANAGEMENT PROJECT MANAGEMENT -- CERTIFICATE PROGRAM PUBLIC MANAGEMENT CERTIFICATE PROGRAM RELIGIOUS STUDIES FOR THE PROFESSIONS CERTIFICATE PROGRAM PSYCHOLOGY (INDUSTRIAL/ORGANIZATIONAL) PSYCHOLOGY (CLINICAL) PSYCHOLOGY (EXPERIMENTAL) PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION PUBLIC HEALTH READING RELIGIOUS STUDIES RELIGIOUS STUDIES -- CERTIFICATE PROGRAM SECONDARY EDUCATION SOCIAL WORK SPECIAL EDUCATION SPORTS MANAGEMENT -- CERTIFICATE PROGRAM STUDENT AFFAIRS TEACHING TESOL TECHNOLOGY MANAGEMENT -- CERTIFICATE PROGRAM THEATRE WRITING 2. ARE YOU A FULL-TIME OR PART-TIME STUDENT? A. FULL-TIME B. PART-TIME 3. SEX A. FEMALE B. MALE 4. AGE A. 20-25 B. 26-30 C. 31-35 D. 36-40 E. 41-45 F. 46-50 G. 51-55 H. 56-60

P a g e - 15 - I. 61 OR ABOVE 5. ARE YOU A NON-MISSOURI STUDENT? A. YES B. NO 6. PLEASE SELECT ONE OF THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS: A. I AM NOT EMPLOYED B. I AM EMPLOYED OFF-CAMPUS C. I AM EMPLOYED ON-CAMPUS AS A GRADUATE ASSISTANT D. I AM EMPLOYED ON-CAMPUS IN SOME TYPE OF POSITION OTHER THAN A GRADUATE ASSISTANT 7. AT THE TIME YOU APPLIED FOR ADMISSION TO YOUR MISSOURI STATE GRADUATE PROGRAM, HOW DID YOU RATE THE PROGRAM COMPARED TO PROGRAMS OFFERED AT OTHER UNIVERSITIES? A. FIRST CHOICE B. SECOND CHOICE C. THIRD CHOICE D. FOURTH CHOICE OR LOWER E. DID NOT LOOK AT ANY OTHER INSTITUTIONS 8. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE REPUTATION OF A PARTICULAR GRADUATE DEGREE PROGRAM IN YOUR DECISION TO ATTEND GRADUATE SCHOOL AT MISSOURI STATE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL 9. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE REPUTATION OF MISSOURI STATE AS AN ACADEMIC INSTITUTION IN YOUR DECISION TO ATTEND GRADUATE SCHOOL HERE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL

P a g e - 16-10. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE INTERACTION YOU HAD WITH MISSOURI STATE FACULTY PRIOR TO ENROLLMENT IN YOUR DECISION TO ATTEND GRADUATE SCHOOL HERE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL 11A. WHAT ADVERTISING OR PROMOTIONAL MEDIUM FIRST INTRODUCED YOU TO YOUR GRADUATE PROGRAM AT MISSOURI STATE? A. GRADSCHOOL.COM B. INTERNET SEARCH ENGINE C. LETTER FROM MISSOURI STATE UNIVERSITY D. NEWSPAPER E. RADIO F. WORD OF MOUTH G. OTHER 11B. IF OTHER, PLEASE SPECIFY: 12. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE AVAILABILITY OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE (OTHER THAN A GRADUATE ASSISTANTSHIP) FROM MISSOURI STATE IN YOUR DECISION TO ATTEND YOUR GRADUATE SCHOOL HERE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL 13. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE AVAILABILITY OF GRADUATE ASSISTANTSHIPS IN YOUR CHOICE TO ATTEND GRADUATE SCHOOL AT MISSOURI STATE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL

P a g e - 17-14. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE AVAILABILITY OF MISSOURI OUTREACH GRADUATE OPPORTUNITY (MOGO) SCHOLARSHIP TO ATTEND GRADUATE SCHOOL AT MISSOURI STATE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL 15. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE COST OF TUITION IN YOUR DECISION TO ATTEND GRADUATE SCHOOL AT MISSOURI STATE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL 16. HOW IMPORTANT WAS THE GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION OF THE UNIVERSITY IN YOUR DECISION TO ATTEND GRADUATE SCHOOL AT MISSOURI STATE? A. VERY IMPORTANT B. IMPORTANT C. NEITHER IMPORTANT NOR NOT IMPORTANT D. NOT VERY IMPORTANT E. NOT IMPORTANT AT ALL 17. HOW SATISFIED WERE YOU WITH THE GRADUATE COLLEGE'S ASSISTANCE IN THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS WHEN YOU ENTERED GRADUATE SCHOOL AT MISSOURI STATE? 18. IF YOU REQUESTED INFORMATION FROM THE GRADUATE COLLEGE (E.G. ONLINE, EMAIL, INFORMATION CARD, PHONE CALL), HOW SATISFIED WERE YOU IN RECEIVING ALL NEEDED INFORMATION IN A TIMELY FASHION?

P a g e - 18-19. HOW SATISFIED WERE YOU WITH THE ORIENTATION PROVIDED BY THE GRADUATE COLLEGE? G. UNAWARE OF ANY ORIENTATION EVENTS 20. HOW SATISFIED WERE YOU WITH THE GRADUATE COLLEGE'S ASSISTANCE IN THE GRADUATE ASSISTANT APPLICATION PROCESS? 21. WHAT TYPE OF SOCIAL OR PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY, SPONSORED BY THE GRADUATE STUDENT COUNCIL, WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN ATTENDING? 22. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE INFORMATION FOUND ON THE GRADUATE COLLEGE WEBSITE? 23. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE FORMS OR OTHER DOCUMENTS FOUND ON THE GRADUATE COLLEGE WEBSITE?

P a g e - 19-24. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE WORKSHOPS OFFERED FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS (E.G. "THESIS WRITING 101")? G. UNAWARE OF ANY WORKSHOPS OFFERED FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS 25. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT YOUR RESEARCH ON CAMPUS (E.G. GRADUATE INTERDISCIPLINARY FORUM)? G. UNAWARE OF THE GRADUATE INTERDISCIPLINARY FORUM 26. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH RESEARCH FUNDING AND GRANTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO GRADUATE STUDENTS? F. I DID NOT KNOW FUNDING WAS AVAILABLE 27. HOW SATISFIED WERE YOU WITH YOUR DEPARTMENT'S ASSISTANCE IN THE ADMISSIONS PROCESS WHEN YOU ENTERED GRADUATE SCHOOL AT MISSOURI STATE?

P a g e - 20-28. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE MISSOURI STATE INFORMATION NETWORK (EMAIL ACCESS, BLACKBOARD, WIRELESS CONNECTION, AND OTHER INTERNET ACCESS) IN MEETING YOUR COMMUNICATION NEEDS AS A GRADUATE STUDENT? 29. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH YOUR OPPORTUNITIES FOR INVOLVEMENT IN CAMPUS ORGANIZATIONS AS A GRADUATE STUDENT AT MISSOURI STATE? 30. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE GRADUATE STUDENT COUNCIL'S ABILITY TO REPRESENT YOUR NEEDS TO THE ADMINISTRATION? 31. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE ABILITY OF THE LIBRARY'S INTER-LIBRARY LOAN SYSTEM TO MEET YOUR NEEDS AS A GRADUATE STUDENT? 32. HOW LIKELY ARE YOU TO USE THE LIBRARY IF HOURS WERE EXTENDED ON FRIDAY AND SATURDAY UNTIL MIDNIGHT?

P a g e - 21 - A. VERY LIKELY B. LIKELY C. NEITHER LIKELY NOR UNLIKELY D. UNLIKELY E. VERY UNLIKELY 33. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE CAREER SERVICES RESOURCES AVAILABLE TO GRADUATE STUDENTS AT MISSOURI STATE (E.G. CAREER FAIRS, WORKSHOPS, JOBTRACK ONLINE JOB RESOURCES)? 34. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE HEALTH INSURANCE PLAN AVAILABLE TO MISSOURI STATE'S GRADUATE STUDENTS? 35. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE CURRENT COURSE REGISTRATION PROCESS? 36. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE OPEN COMPUTER LAB HOURS?

P a g e - 22-37. HAVE YOU TAKEN ANY ONLINE CLASSES? A. YES B. NO 38. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE ONLINE GRADUATE COURSES THAT ARE OFFERED AT MISSOURI STATE? 39. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE CURRENT PARKING AVAILABLE ON CAMPUS? 40. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE ON-CAMPUS SHUTTLE SERVICES? 41. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH YOUR FACULTY ADVISOR'S WILLINGNESS TO SPEND THE TIME NECESSARY TO ADVISE YOU ON ACADEMIC AND PROFESSIONAL MATTERS? 42. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH YOUR RESEARCH CHAIR'S ASSISTANCE IN WRITING YOUR THESIS/SEMINAR PAPER?

P a g e - 23-43. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH YOUR PROGRAM'S COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION PROCESS? 44. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH YOUR INSTRUCTOR'S TIMELINESS IN RETURNING CALLS AND/ OR EMAIL? 45. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE FACULTY IN YOUR PROGRAM WITH REGARD TO THEIR APPROACHABILITY AND OVERALL CONCERN FOR YOUR WELFARE? 46. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE SCHOLARLY AND PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCY OF THE GRADUATE FACULTY IN YOUR DEPARTMENT?

P a g e - 24-47. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE VARIETY OF CLASSES OFFERED IN YOUR GRADUATE PROGRAM? 48. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE DEGREE OF INTELLECTUAL CHALLENGE PROVIDED BY THE COURSES IN YOUR PROGRAM? 49. HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTERNSHIPS, FIELD WORK EXPERIENCE, OR PRACTICAL EMPLOYMENT EXPERIENCES PROVIDED BY YOUR GRADUATE PROGRAM? 50. AS A PART-TIME STUDENT, HOW LIKELY ARE YOU TO ATTEND A GRADUATE SCHOOL ORIENTATION? A. VERY LIKELY B. LIKELY C. NEITHER LIKELY NOR UNLIKELY D. UNLIKELY E. VERY UNLIKELY 51. AS A PART-TIME STUDENT, WHEN WOULD YOU BE INTERESTED IN ATTENDING A GRADUATE SCHOOL ORIENTATION?

P a g e - 25 - A. DAY B. EVENING C. WEEKEND D. I AM NOT INTERESTED IN ATTENDING A GRADUATE SCHOOL ORIENTATION 52. AS A PART-TIME STUDENT, HOW SATISFIED ARE YOU WITH THE AVAILABILITY OF ADVISING FOR YOU? 53. AS A PART-TIME STUDENT, HOW LIKELY ARE YOU TO TAKE A WEEKEND COURSE IF THIS OPTION WERE OFFERED? A. VERY LIKELY B. LIKELY C. NEITHER LIKELY NOR UNLIKELY D. UNLIKELY E. VERY UNLIKELY 54. AS PART-TIME STUDENT, HOW LIKELY ARE YOU TO PARTICIPATE IN PROGRAMS GEARED TOWARDS HELPING YOU FIND THE BALANCE BETWEEN YOUR PROFESSIONAL, PERSONAL, AND STUDENT LIFE? A. VERY LIKELY B. LIKELY C. NEITHER LIKELY NOR UNLIKELY D. UNLIKELY E. VERY UNLIKELY 55. OTHER COMMENTS

P a g e - 26 - APPENDIX B SAMPLE DEMOGRAPHICS APPENDIX B-1 SAMPLE SIZES AND RESPONSE RATES FIGURE 4. RESPONSES BY YEAR Responses By Year 845 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 539 515 2002 2005 2007 2009 428 TABLE 3. SAMPLE SIZES AND RESPONSE RATES YEAR 2002 2005 2007 2009 NUMBER OF RESPONSES RESPONSE RATES 539 515 845 428 20.8% 18.0% 32.1% 15.8%

P a g e - 27 - APPENDIX B-2 GENDER AND AGE DEMOGRAPHICS FIGURE 5. RESPONSES BY GENDER (2002-2009) Responses By Gender 2000 1534 1500 1000 775 500 0 Male Female FIGURE 6. RESPONSES BY AGE (2002-2009) 1166 1200 1000 800 Responses By Age 600 400 200 0 301 233 20-30 31-40 41-54 55+ 40

P a g e - 28 - APPENDIX B-3 ENROLLMENT AND RESIDENCY STATUS FIGURE 7. ENROLLMENT STATUS (2002-2009) Enrollment Status 1562 1600 1400 1200 1000 800 600 400 200 0 Full-Time Part-Time 765 FIGURE 8. ENROLLMENT STATUS BY YEAR Enrollment Status Percentages 70 68.8 69.7 64.7 66.6 60 50 40 31.2 30.3 35.3 33.4 2002 2005 30 2007 20 2009 10 0 Full Time Part Time

P a g e - 29 - FIGURE 9. RESIDENCY STATUS* Residency Status* 987 1000 800 600 280 400 200 0 In-State Out-of-State *INFORMATION WAS ONLY AVAILABLE FOR YEARS 2007 AND 2009

P a g e - 30 - APPENDIX B-4 EMPLOYMENT STATUS FIGURE 10. EMPLOYMENT STATUS TOTALS (2002-2009) Employment Status 976 986 1000 900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 338 199 Not Employed Employed Off-Campus On-Campus, Not GA Graduate Assistant

P a g e - 31 - APPENDIX B-5 RESPONSES BY COLLEGE AND PROGRAM FIGURE 11. RESPONSE TOTALS BY COLLEGE (2002-2009) Responses by College 600 500 400 513 486 493 300 200 100 199 208 195 105 0 COBA COE CHHS CNAS COAL CHPA GC TABLE 4. RESPONSES BY COLLEGE AND YEAR COLLEGES 2002 2005 2007 2009 TOTAL TOTAL % COLLEGE OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION COLLEGE OF EDUCATION COLLEGE OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES COLLEGE OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES COLLEGE OF ARTS AND LETTERS COLLEGE OF HUMANITIES AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS GRADUATE COLLEGE ENROLL % 119 115 186 93 513 23.3% 24.3% 80 107 203 96 486 22.1% 29.3% 119 102 181 91 493 22.4% 20.7% 57 48 55 39 199 9.0% 5.9% 53 33 72 50 208 9.5% 7.4% 40 45 73 37 195 8.9% 9.8% 19 42 42 2 105 4.8% 2.6%

P a g e - 32 - APPENDIX C REASONS FOR CHOOSING MSU FIGURE 12. IMPORTANCE OF VARIABLE IN CHOOSING MSU MEAN SCORES (2002-2009) 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 Reasons for Choosing MSU 2.5 2 1.5 1 2002 2005 2007 2009 *2002 DATA WAS NOT AVAILABLE. **2002 AND 2005 DATA WAS NOT AVAILABLE.

P a g e - 33 - APPENDIX D PART-TIME STUDENT ITEM ANALYSIS FIGURE 13. PART-TIME STUDENT LIKELIHOOD OF ATTENDING GRADUATE STUDENT ORIENTATION Orientation Attendance Likelihood 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 155 156 113 50 43 Very Likely Likely Neither Unlikely Very Unlikely FIGURE 14. AVAILABILITY OF PART-TIME STUDENTS FOR GRADUATE STUDENT ORIENTATION Orientation Attendance Availability 250 200 186 226 150 100 59 73 50 0 Day Evening Weekend Not Interested

P a g e - 34 - FIGURE 15. PART-TIME STUDENT SATISFACTION WITH ADVISING AVAILABILITY Satisfaction with Advising Availability 250 240 200 150 91 127 100 60 50 18 0 Very Satisfied Satisfied Neither Unsatisfied Very Unsatisfied FIGURE 16. WEEKEND COURSE ENROLLMENT LIKELIHOOD OF PART-TIME STUDENTS Weekend Course Enrollment Likelihood 200 175 150 100 91 95 46 127 50 0 Very Likely Likely Neither Unlikely Very Unlikely

P a g e - 35 - FIGURE 17. WORK/FAMILY BALANCE PROGRAM PARTICIPATION LIKELIHOOD OF PART-TIME STUDENTS School/Work/Family Balance Program Participation Likelihood 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 129 113 116 79 86 Very Likely Likely Neither Unlikely Very Unlikely

P a g e - 36 - APPENDIX E PROGRAM EVALUATIONS FIGURE 18. SATISFACTION WITH DEGREE PROGRAM BY COLLEGE (2005-2009) Program Satisfaction by College 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 1.5 1 3.77 3.92 3.82 3.92 4.01 3.94 3.71 COBA COE CHHS CNAS COAL CHPA GC FIGURE 19. PROGRAM EVALUATION SCALE MEANS BY COLLEGE Longitudinal Scale Means by College 5 4.5 4 3.5 3 2.5 2 2005 2007 2009 1.5 1 COBA COE CHHS CNAS COAL CHPA GC

P a g e - 37 - TABLE 5. PROGRAM EVALUATION SCALE MEANS BY COLLEGE AND YEAR. COLLEGE YEAR 2005 2007 2009 College of Business Administration 3.72 3.80 3.79 College of Education 3.98 3.90 3.87 College of Health and Human Services 3.89 3.82 3.74 College of Natural and Applied Sciences 4.04 4.01 3.65 College of Arts and Letters 4.13 3.94 4.03 College of Humanities and Public Affairs 4.07 3.90 3.84 Graduate College 3.53 3.89 3.79 Readers should take caution when interpreting the results of programs with small sample sizes. TABLE 6. PROGRAM EVALUATION SCALE MEANS BY PROGRAM (2005-2009). PROGRAM SCALE SIZE (N=) MEAN ACCOUNTANCY 3.82 67 0.60 ADMINISTRATIVE STUDIES 3.84 31 0.65 APPLIED ANTHROPOLOGY 3.21 3 0.73 AUDIOLOGY 3.75 29 0.76 BIOLOGY 3.88 41 0.72 BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION 3.67 263 0.67 CELL AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY 4.01 14 0.62 CHEMISTRY 4.11 12 0.41 COMMUNICATION 4.07 54 0.63 COMMUNICATION SCIENCES AND DISORDERS 3.74 53 0.76 COMPUTER INFORMATION SYSTEMS 4.39 14 0.62 CONFLICT AND DISPUTE RESOLUTION CP 4.03 8 0.73 COUNSELING 3.77 121 0.89 CRIMINOLOGY 4.15 12 0.53 DEFENSE AND STRATEGIC STUDIES 3.97 16 0.84 EARLY CHILDHOOD AND FAMILY DEVELOPMENT 4.08 14 0.46 EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION MASTERS 4.08 26 0.71 EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION SPECIALIST 4.23 20 0.74 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP 3.94 24 0.60 ELEMENTARY EDUCATION 4.06 52 0.65 ENGLISH 3.99 46 0.48 GEOSPATIAL INFORMATION SCIENCES CP * * * SD

P a g e - 38 - GEOSPATIAL SCIENCES 3.69 23 0.88 HEALTH ADMINISTRATION 4.07 29 0.55 HEALTH PROMOTION AND WELLNESS MGMT 3.37 14 0.86 HISTORY 3.95 42 0.56 INSTRUCTIONAL MEDIA TECHNOLOGY 3.91 9 0.50 INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS AND ADMINISTRATION 3.80 30 0.56 MATERIAL SCIENCE 3.80 11 0.55 MATHEMATICS 4.35 14 0.35 MUSIC 3.92 22 0.47 NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES 3.94 28 0.73 NURSE ANESTHESIA 3.78 19 0.85 NURSING 4.14 28 0.77 ORIENTATION AND MOBILITY * * * OZARKS STUDIES CP * * * PHYSICAL THERAPY 3.65 23 1.05 PHYSICIANS ASSISTANT STUDIES 4.13 36 0.58 PLANT SCIENCE 3.97 119 0.87 POST MASTERS NURSE PRACTITIONER CP * * * PROJECT MANAGEMENT 4.32 7 0.43 PROJECT MANAGEMENT CP * * * PSYCHOLOGY (2002 & 2005)** 4.06 32 0.65 PSYCHOLOGY (CLINICAL) 3.50 3 0.57 PSYCHOLOGY (EXPERIMENTAL) * * * PSYCHOLOGY (INDUSTRIAL/ORGANIZATIONAL) 4.57 11 0.34 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 3.86 22 0.66 PUBLIC HEALTH 3.82 42 0.70 READING 4.33 23 0.40 RELIGIOUS STUDIES 4.12 29 0.71 RELIGIOUS STUDIES CP * * * SECONDARY EDUCATION 3.64 55 0.81 SOCIAL WORK 3.49 64 0.80 SPECIAL EDUCATION 4.01 61 0.72 SPORTS MANAGEMENT * * * STUDENT AFFAIRS 3.77 11 1.11 TEACHING 3.49 41 0.81 TESOL * * * THEATRE 3.97 8 0.60 WRITING 3.85 14 0.55 *DATA FROM SMALL PROGRAMS ARE NOT SHOWN TO PROTECT CONFIDENTIALITY. **IN 2007 & 2009, RESPONDENTS SPECIFIED WHICH DEGREE TRACK.