Tag: SATISFACTION

  • The Student Satisfaction Inventory: Data to Capture the Student Experience

    The Student Satisfaction Inventory: Data to Capture the Student Experience

    Student Satisfaction Inventory: Female college student carrying a notebook
    Satisfaction data provides insights across the student experience.

    The Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) is the original instrument in the family of Satisfaction-Priorities Survey instruments.  With versions that are appropriate for four-year public/private institutions and two-year community colleges, the Student Satisfaction Inventory provides institutional insight and external national benchmarks to inform decision-making on more than 600 campuses across North America. 

    With its comprehensive approach, the Student Satisfaction Inventory gathers feedback from current students across all class levels to identify not only how satisfied they are, but also what is most important to them. Highly innovative when it first debuted in the mid-1990’s, the approach has now become the standard in understanding institutional strengths (areas of high importance and high satisfaction) and institutional challenges (areas of high importance and low satisfaction).

    With these indicators, college leaders can celebrate what is working on their campus and target resources in areas that have the opportunity for improvement. By administering one survey, on an annual or every-other-year cycle, campuses can gather student feedback across the student experience, including instructional effectiveness, academic advising, registration, recruitment/financial aid, plus campus climate and support services, and track how satisfaction levels increase based on institutional efforts.

    Along with tracking internal benchmarks, the Student Satisfaction Inventory results provide comparisons with a national external norm group of like-type institutions to identify where students are significantly more or less satisfied than students nationally (the national results are published annually). In addition, the provided institutional reporting offers the ability to slice the data by all of the standard and customizable demographic items to provide a clearer approach for targeted initiatives. 

    Like the Adult Student Priorities Survey and the Priorities Survey for Online Learners (the other survey instruments in the Satisfaction-Priorities Surveys family), the data gathered by the Student Satisfaction Inventory can support multiple initiatives on campus, including to inform student success efforts, to provide the student voice for strategic planning, to document priorities for accreditation purposes and to highlight positive messaging for recruitment activities. Student satisfaction has been positively linked with higher individual student retention and higher institutional graduation rates, getting right to the heart of higher education student success. 

    Sandra Hiebert, director of institutional assessment and academic compliance at McPherson College (KS) shares, “We have leveraged what we found in the SSI data to spark adaptive challenge conversations and to facilitate action decisions to directly address student concerns. The process has engaged key components of campus and is helping the student voice to be considered. The data and our subsequent actions were especially helpful for our accreditation process.”

    See how you can strengthen student success with the Student Satisfaction Inventory

    Learn more about best practices for administering the online Student Satisfaction Inventory at your institution, which can be done any time during the academic year on your institution’s timeline.

    Source link

  • Using Motivational and Satisfaction Assessments to Elevate Your KPIs

    Using Motivational and Satisfaction Assessments to Elevate Your KPIs

    In my recent conversations with student success leaders on campuses across the country, I have been hearing more focus on Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). Knowing and tracking appropriate KPIs are essential for gauging a college or university’s success in achieving its objectives. Specific KPIs that matter most will vary based on institutional selectivity, mission, and strategic goals. Some critical KPIs that many institutions track include:

    • enrollment yield
    • net tuition revenue
    • first-year fall to spring persistence
    • second-year return (official retention rate)
    • student learning outcomes
    • student engagement
    • overall student satisfaction
    • graduation rates/time-to-degree (four-year, five-year or six-year)
    • career placement rates
    • alumni giving/engagement rates

    Increasingly, institutions are recognizing the power of data-informed decision-making and leveraging student feedback to drive improvements in key areas and to see the results in their targeted KPIs. Critical components of this approach involve regularly assessing student motivation and student satisfaction.

    Proactively addressing challenges to enhance the student experience

    Motivational and satisfaction assessments provide valuable insights into the student journey, allowing institutions to proactively address challenges and enhance the student experience. These assessments, administered at various points throughout a student’s academic career, can reveal areas of strength and opportunities for improvement, directly impacting a range of KPIs.

    By regularly collecting and analyzing this student feedback, institutions can move beyond reactive problem-solving and instead cultivate a proactive, student-centered approach for continuous improvement. Beyond traditional data points, incorporating the students’ voice provides a richer understanding of the factors influencing student success and retention. The data gathered from these assessments are not only about identifying problems; they uncover the nuances of the student experience and understanding what truly drives engagement and success.

    Improving persistence with targeted interventions

    Understanding student motivation levels, particularly during the critical first and second years, allows for targeted interventions to improve persistence. Early identification of at-risk students, coupled with proactive support, can significantly impact first-year and second-year retention rates. Why stop there?

    Measuring satisfaction with services like advising, instruction, career services, and access to classes can significantly impact student persistence, graduation rates and, ultimately, career readiness. A positive campus climate, characterized by safety, inclusivity, and a strong sense of belonging, fosters student engagement and satisfaction, and student success, which may lead to improved alumni engagement. Furthermore, demonstrating a commitment to student feedback (and acting upon it) can enhance the institution’s reputation and attract prospective students who value a supportive and responsive learning environment.

    Boost student success by tracking the right KPIs

    What KPIs are you regularly tracking and how have you incorporated student feedback data into your efforts and your documented indicators?  If this is an area where you would like to do more, contact me to discuss how student motivation and satisfaction data can best help support your KPI efforts.

    Source link

  • Exploring the motivation and satisfaction of higher education staff

    Exploring the motivation and satisfaction of higher education staff

    For all the criticisms leveled at the sector as a group of employers, the number of staff working in higher education keeps on growing.

    Understanding why they choose to work in higher education, what they value about their work, and how well the organisation they work for lives up to their expectations can help inform questions about what matters the most when resources are tight – pay and conditions are obviously important but people work in HE for a whole range of reasons, and not all of those expectations require resource to meet.

    In our summer staff survey we gathered nearly 5,000 responses on these topics from people who currently work in or around the sector. We don’t make any claims that this is a representative sample – we can’t say with certainty what the sector as a whole feels but comparing similar groups of staff (for example by contract type) with each other yields fascinating insights and points the way towards understanding this fundamental issue.

    For our motivation question bank we presented a range of possible motivations as follows:

    • Working in an organisation whose values I share
    • Opportunities for learning, development and professional growth
    • Working alongside and collaborating with like-minded colleagues
    • The generosity of the pay and benefits package
    • Having the autonomy to focus on the work that is important to me
    • Having a level of flexibility about where and when I work
    • My physical working environment and the resources I have access to within it
    • Receiving recognition for my hard work and contribution
    • Knowing the work I do makes a positive impact – on students, on the advancement of knowledge, on my community
    • Working in an organisation that I am confident is generally well run, and achieving its objectives
    • Having opportunities to engage in activities that enhance community connection eg networks, clubs and groups, volunteering, public lectures etc

    Then we asked people whether they felt each was an “important” motivation, and whether they were “happy” with their organisation’s performance against each one. A “yes” answer means that someone was happy, or agreed something was important.

    We’re not running any fancy statistics here, but our working assumption is that a difference of more than four percentage points between different groups is interesting and notable enough to report on. This would vary by the size of the groups in question.

    Two sectors?

    We don’t know for sure (it isn’t data that we collect via HESA for the population) but there’s as many professional and support services staff as there are academics. And the former are far more likely to have experience working outside higher education – from the responses to our staff survey we see that around 80 per cent of our professional and support staff had worked outside the sector, compared to 64 per cent of academics, though those numbers might be lower in both instances had we specifically excluded casual work such as temporary work while studying.

    The cliché of the unworldly professor in an ivory tower is clearly being left in the past – but the kinds of roles done by professional services staff are in demand right across the economy. On the face of it is far easier for them to find work elsewhere, and given the state of the sector, you’d assume this might be better paid.

    Given this, it was surprising to see that while 68.8 per cent of academic respondents cited pay and benefits packages as something that was important to them, nearly three quarters of professional and support staff found this area of the working experience important.

    In asking these kinds of questions you almost don’t expect people to say they are happy with their pay and benefits – so more than 40 per cent of our professional services respondents doing so is notable. After all, we hear enough from the various sector professional associations about the difficulty of recruiting and retaining skilled staff in a variety of key roles.

    [Full screen]

    Relative importance

    Of all the suggested motivations for working in higher education, only two were not selected as important by more than 80 per cent of respondents: pay and conditions (73.5 per cent) and having opportunities to engage in activities that enhance community connection (41.4 per cent) – the latter scoring significantly lower than every other suggestion.

    The three most important motivations selected were “knowing the work I do makes a positive impact” (87.5 per cent), “Working alongside and collaborating with like-minded colleagues” (86.9 per cent) and “Working in an organisation I am confident is generally well run” (84.5 per cent).

    Looking at the areas where there was the largest gap between those who said something was important to them and those that agreed they are happy with the extent they get to experience it in their working lives, by far the largest gap relates to confidence the organisation is run well and is achieving its objectives, only 31.7 per cent saying they are happy with this, a gap of 52.8 percentage points.

    The next highest gap relates to recognition: whereas 80.4 per cent of respondents said receiving recognition for their hard work and contribution was important, only 33.3 per cent said they were happy with this – a gap of 47.1 percentage points.

    The third highest gap was in opportunities for learning, development and professional growth: whereas 83 per cent of respondents said this was important, only 44.3 per cent said they were happy with this, a gap of 38.7 percentage points.

    Free as in freedom

    Academic respondents were far more likely to cite autonomy to focus on the work that is important to them as a key motivating factor (86.7 per cent), but the number is still high for other staff (79.6 per cent), whereas professional services staff (83.5 per cent) were slightly more likely than academics (79.9 per cent) to cite flexibility in when and where they work.

    Staff of all kinds are reasonably happy (c.65 per cent) with the levels of flexibility on offer. Clearly the experiences of Covid-19, and perhaps the drive for providers to rationalise estates – swapping offices for desks, or regular desks for hot desks – is also having an impact. You might expect that women would be more likely to value flexibility in working and you would be right – 84.8 per cent of women in our sample said this was important to them, compared to 76.5 per cent of men. However, similar proportions of men and women (around 65 per cent) reported being happy with the amount of flexibility on offer.

    In terms of autonomy – the ability that a member of staff has to focus on work that is important to them – a little under half of both academic and professional staff were happy with what was on offer. It is worth bearing in mind that autonomy is always limited in some way in any role; for example, marking and exam boards pretty much need to happen when they do.

    Value judgement

    Despite frequent accusations of cultural relativism, a strength of universities is their values. Intriguingly, 60 per cent of professional services staff by just 45 per cent of academics were happy with the way that this manifests – despite similar levels of importance (85.8 per cent for academics, 82.7 per cent for professional) being placed on sharing the values of the organisation one works for.

    If we think back to the idea that professional services staff would be more likely to work in other sectors, this does make sense. Values, and the sense of having a positive impact (86 per cent said this was important to them), are clearly going to be key motivations to work in a sector where perhaps pay and conditions don’t stack up.

    An amazing 90 per cent of academic staff said that knowing that the work they did has a positive impact (on students, the advancement of knowledge, and/or on their community) was important to them. But just 53 per cent of academics and of professional staff saw this in practice. To be fair, this was one of the best performing motivations in our survey – but it is interesting that staff are no longer seeing the good that higher education does, especially when it is becoming so important to make this case culturally and with the government.

    Recommend to others

    It’s easy to get disheartened when you think about the staffing needs of higher education providers and how they are met. Although academics are clamouring to work in the UK sector, it feels like the terms and conditions are worsening and newer staff – in particular – are getting a raw deal. With professional staff, the fact that many specialisms can get better paid work elsewhere has some wondering about the quality of the staff we are able to recruit.

    We asked all of our respondents whether they would recommend working in the sector to someone they cared about – and perhaps surprisingly three-quarters said “yes” or “maybe”. And there was very little difference between those making “yes”, “no”, or “maybe” on any of the motivation axes we discuss above (those who said “yes” were very marginally less likely to say pay and benefits were important to them).

    However those that were more likely to recommend the sector to others were significantly happier with every aspect we examined. In contrast more than 80 per cent of those who would not recommend working in the sector were not happy with the amount of recognition they got for their hard work and contribution, and more than 85 per cent felt that their organisation was not run well. Recommendation is generally considered a good proxy for job satisfaction, and this survey seems to bear that out.

    What people want to change

    We asked respondents to say more where they had identified a gap between something they consider to be important, but the degree to which they are happy with the extent they actually experience that.

    There were comments on workload and wellbeing, small-scale or systemic failures to offer recognition for achievement and, particularly from those in professional services, a desire for greater recognition, and development and/or progression opportunities. Some commented that the economic environment makes these asks more difficult.

    But in terms of messages for leaders there is a lot about communication and consultation – a sense that the people who work in the sector understand the financial problems the university faces but want to be told the truth about them and be constructive in helping to solve them.

    Clearer lines of communication and wider consultation on significant changes.

    Greater dialogue with leaders when major decisions are made which impact the way in which I can carry out my role and an opportunity to demonstrate my expertise to build trust in my decision making.

    Clear, transparent and timely sharing of strategy and the impact of the changes to come from the changes.

    Another challenge is on the perceived values driving strategy and tactics – there’s a sense that management decisions are perceived as being short term, and that it is financial expediency rather than an underlying (and shared) purpose that is informing decisions.

    There’s also commentary on issues around execution of strategy – the sense that while plans are spoken about they are not always put into practice or cascaded down the institution, or become snarled in bureaucracy.

    Greater consistency, both between faculties and also on strategic planning. At the moment there are so many different initiatives that, while we talk about working smarter, the opposite is actually the case.

    We need a clear strategy as to how we are going to get through the next couple of years which needs to be properly communicated. At the moment it feels like we are stuck in a vortex of chaos, with school level projects being put on hold whilst we wait for university level decisions, but the months go by and no meaningful direction or plan seems to be in place.

    Better delegation and direction from above, more collaboration across the institution as a whole but also with core departments where the work intercepts with others work, creating a network of colleagues in those core teams.

    A key takeaway is that the kind of organisational complexity in decision-making that has long been tolerated in higher education may not serve staff well when resources are stretched and bandwidth is low. Complexity may serve various legitimate organisational purposes but it can also cut staff off from understanding what’s happening, and what they personally need to do about it. It also creates a lack of consistency as multiple messages emerge from different quarters.

    But also, while we were specifically focused on areas for improvement, it’s worth adding that a good few comments gave a general thumbs up – their working environment was clearly motivating them in the right ways – and that shows that it can be done.

    The biggest risk of an exercise like this one is to suggest that where there is discontent or concern, that it is attributable to the wider environment, and not something that can be addressed or mitigated. While there’s clearly very little scope in most institutions to roll out shiny new initiatives, most comments suggest that some attention to hygiene factors – praise, involvement, honesty – could make a difference in sustaining staff motivation during these trying times.

    We’ll be picking up the conversation about sustaining higher education community during tough times at The Festival of Higher Education in November. It’s not too late to get your ticket – find out more here.

    Source link

  • US takes the lead on student satisfaction, survey finds

    US takes the lead on student satisfaction, survey finds

    Global student satisfaction has remained steady in 2025, but pressures on inclusivity, affordability and the quality of student life are beginning to show, according to the Global Student Satisfaction Awards: Summary Report 2025.

    Studyportals’ 2025 Student Satisfaction survey tracked responses from over 102,000 students around the world, with the US, Belgium and Austria leading the charge in overall satisfaction, ranked at 4.32, 4.29 and 4.28 stars out of five respectively.

    The biannual survey looked at reviews from students of 180 nationalities studying at institutions in 124 countries, recording an average satisfaction score of 4.18 out of 5. While stable compared to 2023 (when the last survey was published), this represents a slight dip of 0.71%.

    Meanwhile Pakistan, France, Ireland and Türkiye saw some of the steepest declines in satisfaction. The UK and India bucked the trend with improved scores, both climbing above the global average.

    Pakistan recorded the most significant drop since 2023’s survey (-11.3%), moving significantly further below the global benchmark. France also fell by -3.2%, Ireland by -2.4%, and Türkiye by -1.2%.

    By contrast, Finland (+3.3%) and the Netherlands (+0.2%) registered modest improvements, though both remain below the global average. The report warns that unless these downward trends are addressed, strong challengers like India and the UK could capture greater student interest.

    Students are more confident about career prospects, but increasingly concerned about diversity and their quality of life
    Edwin van Rest, Studyportals

    The report also tracked other factors such as admissions processes, career development, student diversity and student life.

    Winners were honoured across seven categories at an awards ceremony hosted by Studyportals in collaboration with Uni-Life and IELTS at a fringe event during last week’s European Association for International Education (EAIE) conference in Gothenburg.

    Key indicators revealed a mixed picture. Student diversity (-5.03%) and student life (-4.39%) suffered the largest declines, reflecting growing concerns around integration, housing shortages and rising costs in popular destinations. Admissions processes also weakened (-3.85%), with students calling for clearer communication, smoother transitions and more user-friendly digital systems.

    On the positive side, career development (+1.23%) recorded notable gains, with the US, India and Switzerland leading thanks to stronger links with employers, internships and industry engagement. Online classroom experience, long the weakest category, also improved modestly (+1.30%), particularly in the US, India and South Africa.

    Studyportals said the findings underline shifting student priorities. Employability outcomes and structured cross-cultural experiences are increasingly valued, while inclusivity and transparency remain pressing challenges.

    “These results show where universities are winning student trust, and where they risk losing it,” noted Edwin van Rest, CEO & co-founder of Studyportals. “Students are more confident about career prospects, but increasingly concerned about diversity and their quality of life.”

    Source link

  • Using QILT data to up student satisfaction – Campus Review

    Using QILT data to up student satisfaction – Campus Review

    Students need to know universities are actively using Quality Indicators for Learning and Teaching (QILT) survey data to change processes, the director of the survey said on Thursday.

    Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

    Membership Login

    Source link

  • Job Satisfaction and Retention in Higher Education – Faculty Focus

    Job Satisfaction and Retention in Higher Education – Faculty Focus

    Source link

  • Alumni Connection and College Student Satisfaction

    Alumni Connection and College Student Satisfaction

    Julie Bryant

    This post was co-authored with Julie Bryant, Vice President for Student Success at RNL. Julie oversees the RNL Satisfaction-Priorities Surveys used by colleges and universities nationwide. She provides service to educators by assisting them in determining relationships between perceptions of importance and satisfaction of students, special populations, campus personnel, and the parents of currently enrolled students. Julie identifies ways these data can inform retention planning and be shared with the campus community. She also oversees the annual national reporting and trend analysis of these data.

    Collaborating with 21 institutions as part of our second annual National Alumni Survey was a privilege. Nearly 51,000 alumni participated, and from their direct feedback, we learned more about what inspires their volunteer activity, what is likely to motivate future engagement, generational trends, and how student debt impacts charitable giving.

    We also invited alumni to share more about their satisfaction with and current connection to their respective alma maters. Survey responses confirm what feels intuitive: Alumni with a favorable student experience are more likely to feel connected to and give back to their alma maters.

    Student satisfaction makes a major difference in the likelihood to give

    Alumni who report feeling “very satisfied” with their student experience and the education they received are up to 40x more likely to have donated to their alma mater in the past year than their “neutral” counterparts, and up to 80x more likely than those who report feeling “not very” or “not at all” satisfied with their student experience and the education they received.

    Of the eight insights highlighted in this year’s report, this strong correlation between student satisfaction and alumni giving feels important for advancement teams to share with colleagues across departments, campus stakeholders, and executive leadership.

    Alumni satisfaction and connection are shaped long before graduation. The interaction students have with faculty, staff, advisors, coaches, and the administration sets the groundwork for satisfaction, affinity, and a philanthropic relationship post-graduation. Therefore, the responsibility of improved alumni engagement, participation, and giving can’t rest solely on the shoulders of the advancement division. It’s a team sport (or should be).

    Increasing student satisfaction can lay the foundation for long-term alumni engagement

    This research study underscores the importance of influencing student satisfaction while students are enrolled in order to build strong, long-term alumni engagement. Through RNL’s Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI), we measure student satisfaction and priorities, showing how satisfied students are as well as what issues are important to them. This is actionable data that colleges and universities can use today to inform and shape improved student programming and outreach.

    The results from the SSI clearly identify institutional strengths (areas of high importance and high satisfaction) that can be celebrated with current students, alumni, and as part of the recruitment process. Institutional challenges are also clearly noted. Challenges are areas that are still very important to current students, but where they may be more dissatisfied. Identifying these areas provides direction to campus leadership, as they prioritize areas for improvement to show students their feedback matters and that the institution is working on their behalf. By gathering and acting on student satisfaction data, colleges and universities can show that they value students and help set the stage for ongoing engagement.

    Through our RNL research, we have found that items related to campus climate and how students feel about being on campus are among the strongest indicators of overall student satisfaction and ultimately student retention. When institutional leadership works to change the experience or the perception students have around areas such as “it’s an enjoyable experience to be a student on this campus,” “the institution cares about me as an individual,” “I feel a sense of belonging here,” and “tuition paid is a worthwhile investment,” they can begin to see an impact on the long-term relationships ideally established between the student (future alum) and their alma mater.

    Four things you can do to increase alumni connection

    Blog on student satisfaction and alumni connection: image of a line of graduates in cap and gown.

    Good friend and strategic advisor on this project Howard Heevner is a fan of disrupting—leaning into new ways of genuinely connecting with students and alumni alike. He challenges fellow practitioners and leaders to:

    • Gather direct feedback and actively listen to learn what alumni need to feel our institution is a viable home for their philanthropic support.
    • Instead of touting institutional loyalty to inspire financial support, let’s build relationships that provide mutual value to both the individual and the institution.
    • Find new ways to support donor passions, choice, and self-determination in giving at all levels to attract a larger, more diverse set of donors.
    • Redefine philanthropy so that it is broader and more inclusive, recognizing gifts of service as well as financial gifts.

    If you haven’t done so recently, engaging students and alumni through a survey project is an important first step. Do you have budget dollars left to spend this spring? Looking for fresh feedback and useful qualitative data from the audiences you serve to help inform planning for the new fiscal and academic year ahead? If you’d like to learn more about RNL’s survey instruments, please reach to Julie Bryant (Student Satisfaction Inventory) and Sarah Kleeberger (Alumni Survey).

    Source link

  • “The accreditors are coming!” 4 ways to use student satisfaction scores to prepare

    “The accreditors are coming!” 4 ways to use student satisfaction scores to prepare

    Does your campus fully utilize its student satisfaction scores at accreditation time? As a reminder, regular assessments of student satisfaction provide data for four key institutional activities:

    • Retention/student success
    • Strategic planning
    • Recruiting new students
    • Accreditation documentation

    The accreditation process can be time-demanding and stressful for your campus staff and leadership, yet it is essential to complete on the designated cycle. And while the official process is something you address once every decade, regularly gathering data from your students and maintaining proactive processes can make the official requirements go much more smoothly.

    My colleague Charles Schroeder likes to say that during self-studies, people on campus begin running around gathering data and shouting, “The accreditors are coming! The accreditors are coming!” To avoid this reaction, our recommendation is don’t just assess student satisfaction as part of your self-study, but assess student satisfaction on a regular cycle, once every two or three years (if not annually).

    4 ways to use student satisfaction scores to prepare for accreditors

    How can you use data from student satisfaction surveys in your accreditation process? I have four suggestions for you.

    1. Match the survey items to your accreditation requirements. As a resource for you, we have mapped the individual items on the Ruffalo Noel Levitz (RNL) Satisfaction-Priorities Surveys (including the Student Satisfaction Inventory, the Adult Student Priorities Survey, and the Priorities Survey for Online Learners) to the individual criteria for all of the regional accreditors across the United States. You can download the relevant mapping document for your survey version and region here. By seeing how the items on each survey are mapped to the regional accrediting agency requirements, you can take  the guesswork out of determining how the student feedback lines up with the documentation you need to provide.

    2. Respond to student-identified challenge items. The RNL Satisfaction-Priorities Surveys identify areas of high importance and low satisfaction as challenge items. These are priority areas for improvement based on the perceptions of your students. By actively working to improve the student experience in these areas, you can potentially improve overall student satisfaction, which studies have correlated with better individual student retention, higher institutional graduation rates, higher institutional alumni giving, and lower loan default rates. Improvements in these areas are going to look good for your accreditation.

    3. Document your student-identified strengths. The RNL Satisfaction-Priorities Surveys also reflect student-identified strengths, which are items of high importance and high satisfaction. These are the areas that your students care about, and where they think you are doing a good job. Mentioning your strengths to your accreditors helps to position you in a positive light and to focus the conversation on where you are meeting or exceeding student expectations.

    4. Show improvements over time. As indicated earlier, student satisfaction surveys should not be a “once and done” activity, or even an activity done just once every five to ten years. The institutions we work with which assess student satisfaction systematically every two or three years, and actively work to improve the student experience in the intervening years, are seeing student satisfaction levels increase year over year. This process shows your commitment to your students and to your accreditors, and reflects that continuous quality improvement is valued by your institution.

    Ready to learn more?

    Are you ready to regularly assess student satisfaction? Are you interested in connecting the results to your accreditation criteria? Do you want to learn more about moving forward with a satisfaction assessment? Contact RNL with any questions you have and we will look forward to assisting you.

    Note: This blog was originally published in November 2016 and was updated with new content in May 2025.

    Source link

  • Student Satisfaction at HBCUs | Ruffalo Noel Levitz

    Student Satisfaction at HBCUs | Ruffalo Noel Levitz

    Student satisfaction at HBCUs: Male student walking past a university building.
    How does student satisfaction at HBCUs compare to institutions nationally?

    Student satisfaction is a critical component for student success. At RNL, we have observed that satisfaction can vary based on the institution type. Student satisfaction levels at a four-year private may differ from a four-year public. In addition, we have seen that students at schools with a specific identity or mission (such as Christian colleges) may also have different levels of satisfaction. This is why it is helpful for institutions to have an external perspective for comparing their satisfaction scores with institutions that are most like theirs—by type, region of the country, or by the particular population of students they serve.

    The value and impact of Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs) is well known and documented. HBCUs play a crucial role in advancing educational equity, fostering leadership, and preparing students to excel in a global workforce. Despite comprising roughly 3% of U.S. colleges and universities, HBCUs produce nearly a quarter of all Black graduates, with impact extending beyond academic preparation, serving as powerful engines of economic growth, providing supportive learning environments, and culturally affirming communities at critical times in the student development cycle.

    HBCUs have experienced a surge in student interest over the past several years, leading many campuses to review and refine recruitment and student success strategies. As a result of the increased prioritization of student satisfaction, over the past three years, RNL has created a national comparison group of four-year private and public HBCUs, offering the best external comparison by which institutions may compare themselves. These data can also inform our understanding of the student experience at HBCUs.

    How satisfied are students attending HBCUs?

    The RNL Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) is a survey instrument that measures student satisfaction and priorities. The assessment informs campuses of satisfaction levels of various aspects of the student experience, including instructional effectiveness, academic advising, and recruitment and financial aid. The assessment then identifies how those satisfaction levels affect student decisions related to persistence. Over the past three academic years (2021-22, 2022-23, and 2023-24), 8,938 students attending 20 HBCUs have completed the SSI, providing an opportunity for us to assess their satisfaction and compare it to students at other four-year public or private institutions.

    Why do students choose HBCUs?

    The SSI asks students to rate the importance of factors that influenced their decision to enroll at their college or university. When we explore the results for students at HBCUs compared with students at the other two institution types, we see the following levels of importance placed on each factor:

    HBCUs and student satisfaction: Table showing that the top 3 factors to enroll at HBCUs are Financial aid, Cost, and Academic reputationHBCUs and student satisfaction: Table showing that the top 3 factors to enroll at HBCUs are Financial aid, Cost, and Academic reputation

    Note the higher importance levels HBCU students placed on recommendations from family and friends, underscoring the importance of highlighting student and alumni outcomes. These results invite university leaders, including admissions and enrollment officers, institutional advancement/transformation officers, and leadership within alumni affairs, to consider how they are positioning various factors and what messaging they may want to emphasize throughout the recruitment process.

    HBCUs and student satisfaction: Chart showing that 38% of students at HBCUs are satisfied with their institution compared to 55% at other four-year institutions, and that 48% would re-enroll compared to 60% at four-year institutions.HBCUs and student satisfaction: Chart showing that 38% of students at HBCUs are satisfied with their institution compared to 55% at other four-year institutions, and that 48% would re-enroll compared to 60% at four-year institutions.

    As this chart on overall perceptions indicates, students at HBCUs have lower levels over overall satisfaction and were less likely to say they would re-enroll at their institution if they had to do it all over again compared to four-year institutions nationally. Although several factors may contribute to differences in satisfaction levels, this indicates that there is potential for improvement in serving students at HBCUs and meeting their expectations. Several factors may contribute to the differences in satisfaction levels. The call to action, however, is clear—campuses must create and implement concrete action plans to address high priority concerns.

    The Power of Institutional Choice

    For years, RNL has noted that students attending their first-choice institution tend to have higher satisfaction than students attending their second- or third-choice institution. Ideally, an institution should strive to have the majority population believe the institution is their first choice, to be in the best position for higher satisfaction scores. In this HBCU data set, the impact of institutional choice is clearly seen. As illustrated in the chart below, only 47% of students indicate that the HBCU was their first choice, as compared with 64% of students at four-year public nationally and 63% of students at four-year private institutions.

    HBCUs and student satisfaction: Chart showing that 47% of students at HBCUs are at their first-choice institution vs 60%+ for four-year institutionsHBCUs and student satisfaction: Chart showing that 47% of students at HBCUs are at their first-choice institution vs 60%+ for four-year institutions
    HBCUs and student satisfaction: Chart showing satisfaction levels by institutional choice, with 47% of HBCU students at their first-choice institution and 62% of students at their first-choice four-year institutions indicating they are satisfied. HBCUs and student satisfaction: Chart showing satisfaction levels by institutional choice, with 47% of HBCU students at their first-choice institution and 62% of students at their first-choice four-year institutions indicating they are satisfied.

    While these two charts look similar, the second one shows the percentage of students who said they were satisfied or very satisfied with their experience based on whether they thought the school was their first-, second- or third-choice. These percentages decline considerably for students who did not want to attend the institution.

    This indicates that HBCUs have an opportunity to better position themselves as a first-choice institution for the population of students they are actively recruiting and to communicate why their college is the best fit and the best option for the student. Larger sample sizes from HBCU campuses could further assist with understanding the impact of institutional choice on satisfaction levels.

    Many strengths and a few challenges

    The SSI asks students to indicate both a level of importance and a level of satisfaction with a variety of student experiences both inside and outside of the classroom. The combination of these scores lead to the identification of strengths (high importance and high satisfaction) and challenges (high importance and low satisfaction). Strengths and challenges are identified for individual institutions administering the survey instrument and can also be indicated for the national comparison data sets.

    When we reviewed the national HBCU group of 8,938 students, more strengths than challenges were identified.

    Strengths

    • My academic advisor is knowledgeable about requirements in my major.
    • Major requirements are clear and reasonable.
    • I am able to experience intellectual growth here.
    • Tutoring services are readily available.
    • Nearly all of the faculty are knowledgeable in their field.
    • My academic advisor is approachable.
    • The content of the courses within my major is valuable.
    • Library resources and services are adequate.
    • There is a strong commitment to racial harmony on this campus.
    • Faculty are usually available after class and during office hours.
    • There is a commitment to academic excellence on this campus.
    • Class change (drop/add) policies are reasonable.
    • Student disciplinary procedures are fair.
    • The student center is a comfortable place for students to spend their leisure time.
    • Library staff are helpful and approachable.
    • Bookstore staff are helpful.

    While many of these strengths overlap with what we see in the national four-year private and public data sets, it is still noteworthy to highlight that, despite the generally lower satisfaction scores at HBCUs, there are still many areas to celebrate. Students value the support received by faculty and staff. Students appreciate the availability of academic resources. Students are highly appreciative that their campus communities are accepting and affirming of who they are and support who they are seeking to become.

    Challenges

    Only five challenges were identified in the national HBCU data set:

    • I am able to register for classes I need with few conflicts.
    • Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
    • Security staff respond quickly in emergencies.
    • This institution shows concern for students as individuals.
    • Faculty provide timely feedback about student progress in a course.

    Again, most of these items overlap with challenges identified at the other institution types, which says that the experience students are having at HBCUs may be more similar than it is different. However, that does not discount the fact that the HBCUs bring something special to the marketplace for students.

    Survey your students

    While observing national norms is valuable, the greatest value comes when institutions survey their own student populations to determine satisfaction levels and to see specific strengths and challenges that apply to their college or university. Please contact Julie Bryant if you are interested in learning more about assessing student satisfaction on your campus. If you are an HBCU, RNL will provide the additional comparison group of just HBCUs to you at no additional charge.

    RNL supports HBCUs through various initiatives aimed at enhancing enrollment, student success, and fundraising efforts. Key contributions include:

    • Annual HBCU Summit: RNL organizes a yearly summit tailored for HBCU leaders to network, share data, exchange ideas, and develop actionable plans for immediate campus implementation. This year’s summit will take place July 21 in Atlanta, Georgia, and will focus on marketing, recruitment, student success strategies, the impact of trends and technology on HBCUs and the impact sociopolitical climate shifts will have on operational strategy.
    • On-demand webinars: RNL offers webinars such as “Amplifying Excellence: Enhancing Student Success and Retention at HBCUs,” which explore data on first-year students and HBCUS while providing strategies to support student retention and degree attainment.
    • Dedicated team for HBCUs: RNL has an established team of senior-level consultants focused on supporting HBCUs. I lead this team, and we aim to help institutions enhance service to students, meet enrollment and revenue goals, and fulfill their mission.

    Through these efforts, RNL demonstrates a commitment to empowering HBCUs with the tools and knowledge necessary to thrive in a competitive educational landscape.

    2025 RNL HBCU Summit

    July 21, 2025 in Atlanta

    Join us for this one-day Summit held before the RNL National Conference. You’ll hear key strategies for meeting your goals for marketing, recruitment, and retention. Registration is complimentary when you also register for the RNL National Conference.

    See more details and register

    2025 HBCU Summit, July 21 in Atlanta2025 HBCU Summit, July 21 in Atlanta

    Source link

  • College Student Satisfaction: Reflecting on 30 Years

    College Student Satisfaction: Reflecting on 30 Years

    College students have changed greatly in 30 years, but how has student satisfaction changed?

    Think back 30 years ago to 1995. What is different for you now? Where were you and what were you doing in the mid 1990s? Perhaps you were still in school and living at home, or not even born yet. Perhaps you were in your early years of working in higher education. Take a moment to reflect on what has (and has not) changed for you in that span of time. 

    Thirty years ago, I was just starting my position at what was then Noel-Levitz. What stands out for me was that I was about to become a mom for the first time. Now my baby is grown and will be a new mom herself later this year. And I find myself being on one of the “seasoned professionals” in the company, working alongside members of my team who were still in elementary school back in 1995. 

    Thirty years ago, we were just beginning to utilize email and the internet. Now they have become the primary way we do business, communicate professionally, and discover information.  Artificial intelligence (AI) is the new technology that we are learning to embrace to improve our professional and personal lives.   

    Thirty years ago, students were arriving on our campuses, seeking an education, guidance, growth, belonging, value for their investment and ultimately a better life.  That’s still the case today.  Plus, students are navigating more technology options, they are more openly seeking mental health support, and they are living in a world full of distractions. Online learning is a reality now and continues to become more accepted as a modality, especially after the experiences of 2020. As the demographic cliff looms, colleges are expanding their focus to include lifelong learners. 

    Thirty years ago is also when the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) was launched to provide four-year and two-year institutions with a tool to better understand the priorities of their students. (In the early 2000s, we added survey instruments specifically for adult and online populations.) The data identified where the college was performing well and where it mattered for them to do better in order to retain their students to graduation. The concept of looking at satisfaction within the context of the level of importance was new back then, but in the past three decades, it has become the standard for capturing student perceptions. Since 1995, we have worked with thousands of institutions and collected data from millions of individuals, documenting what is important and where students are satisfied or dissatisfied with their experience. As we reach this 30-year milestone for the SSI, I took some time to reflect on what has changed in students’ perceptions and what has stayed the same.

    Consistent priorities

    What stood out to me as I reviewed the national data sets over the past 30 years is that what matters to students has largely stayed the same. Students continue to care about good advising, quality instruction and getting access to classes. The academic experience is highly valued by students and is the primary reason they are enrolled, now and then. 

    Another observation is that there are two areas that have been consistent priorities for improvement, especially at four-year private and public institutions:

    • Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
    • Adequate financial aid is available for most students. 

    These two items have routinely appeared as national challenges (areas of high importance and low satisfaction) over the decades, which shows that institutions continue to have opportunities to communicate value and address the financial pain points of students to make higher education accessible and affordable. 

    Campus climate is key

    One thing we have learned over the past thirty years is how students feel on campus is key to student success and retention. The research reflects the strongest links between students’ sense of belonging, feeling welcome, and enjoying their campus experience to their overall levels of satisfaction. High levels of satisfaction are linked to individual student retention and institutional graduation rates. Campuses that want to best influence students remaining enrolled are being intentional with efforts to show concern for students individually, building connections between students from day one, and continuing those activities as students progress each year. It is important for institutions to recognize that students have lots of options to receive a quality education, but the environment and the potential student “fit” is more likely to vary from location to location. What happens while a student is at the college they have selected is more impactful on them than which institution they ultimately chose. Creating welcoming environments and supporting students’ sense of belonging in the chosen college is a way for institutions to stand out and succeed in serving students. Colleges often ask, “Why do students leave?” when they could be asking, “Why do students stay?” Building positive campus cultures and expanding the “good stuff” being done for students is a way to critical way to improve student and institutional success.

    One sector where the data reflect high satisfaction scores and good consistency, especially in the past five years since the pandemic, is community colleges. Students attending their (often local) two-year institutions want to be there, with high percentages of students indicating the school is their first choice.  Community college students nationally indicate areas such as the campus staff being caring/helpful, students being made to feel welcome, and people on the campus respecting each other, as strengths (high importance and high satisfaction). These positive perceptions are also reflected with overall high levels of satisfaction and indications of a likelihood to re-enroll if the student had it to do over again. The data indicate that two-year institutions are doing a nice job of building a sense of community among primarily commuter student populations. 

    Systemic issues and pockets of improvement

    Everyone talks about “kids today,” but in reality, they have been doing that for generations. It can’t be a reason not to change and respond appropriately to the needs of current students. When we consider the priorities for improvement in higher education that have remained at the forefront, we may need to recognize that some of these areas are systemic to higher education, along with recognizing that higher education generally has not done enough to respond. There are certainly pockets of improvement at schools that have prioritized being responsive and, as a result, are seeing positive movement in student satisfaction and student retention, but that is not happening everywhere. Taking action based on student feedback is a powerful way to influence student success. The campuses that have bought into that concept are seeing the results. 

    Current student satisfaction national results

    Want to learn more about the current trends in student satisfaction?  I invite you to download the 2024 National Student Satisfaction and Priorities Report. 

    This year’s analysis takes a closer look at the national results by demographic subpopulations, primarily by class level, to get a clearer view on how to improve the student experience. Institutions have found that targeting initiatives for particular student populations can be an effective way to have the biggest impact on student satisfaction. Download your free copy today.

    Source link