Res Life Spring 2002 Quality of Life Survey

Overview:
Quality of Life — a satisfaction survey administered each spring to 50% of the on-campus resident population. The survey consists of items pertaining to eight content areas (e.g., academic environment, diversity, and facilities) (Appendix A). The results obtained from Quality of Life are used annually for residential area goal setting/attainment, marketing, and identifying staff accomplishments, as well as for longitudinal data analysis.

Traditional, Suite, and Apartment-Style Housing Snapshot:
Overall, items from the survey regarding staff/desk service scored the highest in percent Strongly Agree + Agree, while items regarding education/social programming scored the lowest. With regard to the largest percent Strongly Agree + Agree changes from spring 2001 to spring 2002, items pertaining to physical features (or facilities) and academic environment had the largest increases. Negative changes from 2001 to 2002 never exceeded 4.8%, and the items were from different content areas on the survey—no one area can be labeled as having an overall downward trend. Please see Appendix B for complete 2002 survey results.

Family Housing Snapshot:
Regarding highest and lowest percent Strongly Agree + Agree, family housing survey results generally reflect the same patterns as above. There are unique, family housing only, items that appear in the highest and lowest percent Strongly Agree + Agree results, though. For example, the item “The complex area is safe for my children” was one of the highest scoring items. The largest positive and negative percent Strongly Agree + Agree changes from the spring 2001 to the spring 2002 survey results exhibit the same patterns as traditional, suite, and apartment-style housing results as well: physical features and academic environment had the largest increases, while negative changes were found across several content areas. On the other hand, while negative changes from 2001 to 2002 never exceeded 4.8% for traditional, suite, and apartment-style housing, family housing saw negative changes as large as 17.0%. Appendix B contains complete 2002 survey results.

Longitudinal Data:
The Quality of Life administered by Residence Life each spring is analyzed both annually and longitudinally. For example, since we added the item “I am satisfied with the quality of the relationship I have with my roommate(s)” in 1999, we have identified a steady trend that 90% or more of the survey respondents agree with this statement (Figure 1). This data informs marketing, such as is done during Previews, as well as validates Residence Life policies regarding roommate selection and mediation of disagreements between roommates.

Figure 1

Another example of our longitudinal use of the survey involves results from the item “I would characterize my hall as an academically supportive environment.” When looking at aggregate results from apartment residents from 1999 to 2002, we see a steady increase in Strongly Agree + Agree percentages (Figure 2). Area Coordinators in Residence Life use this information to praise staff for their efforts to increase academic support in apartment-style housing. Additionally, this information leads us to analyze practices within apartment-style housing and examine the transferability of such practices to other halls. Complete results for Quality of Life longitudinal data (1998-2002) are available in Appendix C.

Figure 2

Return to Student Affairs Assessment Page

Northern Arizona University Office of Residence Life Quality of Life, Spring 2002 Executive Narrative
Overview: Quality of Life — a satisfaction survey administered each spring to 50% of the on-campus resident population. The survey consists of items pertaining to eight content areas (e.g., academic environment, diversity, and facilities) (Appendix A). The results obtained from Quality of Life are used annually for residential area goal setting/attainment, marketing, and identifying staff accomplishments, as well as for longitudinal data analysis. Traditional, Suite, and Apartment-Style Housing Snapshot: Overall, items from the survey regarding staff/desk service scored the highest in percent Strongly Agree + Agree, while items regarding education/social programming scored the lowest. With regard to the largest percent Strongly Agree + Agree changes from spring 2001 to spring 2002, items pertaining to physical features (or facilities) and academic environment had the largest increases. Negative changes from 2001 to 2002 never exceeded 4.8%, and the items were from different content areas on the survey—no one area can be labeled as having an overall downward trend. Please see Appendix B for complete 2002 survey results. Family Housing Snapshot: Regarding highest and lowest percent Strongly Agree + Agree, family housing survey results generally reflect the same patterns as above. There are unique, family housing only, items that appear in the highest and lowest percent Strongly Agree + Agree results, though. For example, the item “The complex area is safe for my children” was one of the highest scoring items. The largest positive and negative percent Strongly Agree + Agree changes from the spring 2001 to the spring 2002 survey results exhibit the same patterns as traditional, suite, and apartment-style housing results as well: physical features and academic environment had the largest increases, while negative changes were found across several content areas. On the other hand, while negative changes from 2001 to 2002 never exceeded 4.8% for traditional, suite, and apartment-style housing, family housing saw negative changes as large as 17.0%. Appendix B contains complete 2002 survey results. Longitudinal Data: The Quality of Life administered by Residence Life each spring is analyzed both annually and longitudinally. For example, since we added the item “I am satisfied with the quality of the relationship I have with my roommate(s)” in 1999, we have identified a steady trend that 90% or more of the survey respondents agree with this statement (Figure 1). This data informs marketing, such as is done during Previews, as well as validates Residence Life policies regarding roommate selection and mediation of disagreements between roommates. Figure 1 Another example of our longitudinal use of the survey involves results from the item “I would characterize my hall as an academically supportive environment.” When looking at aggregate results from apartment residents from 1999 to 2002, we see a steady increase in Strongly Agree + Agree percentages (Figure 2). Area Coordinators in Residence Life use this information to praise staff for their efforts to increase academic support in apartment-style housing. Additionally, this information leads us to analyze practices within apartment-style housing and examine the transferability of such practices to other halls. Complete results for Quality of Life longitudinal data (1998-2002) are available in Appendix C. Figure 2 Return to Student Affairs Assessment Page