Strategic Priorities Consultation Survey OverviewStrategic Priorities Advisory Committee

November 6, 2013

Agenda • Introduction

• Survey #1• Respondent overview

• Priority Selection

• Analysis

• Considerations

• Survey #2• Preliminary Results

Survey 1

Oct. 15 – Oct. 23

Respondent Overview

1700 total respondents

381

215 16

6 127 78233

183

201

8521 35

56

127

53 44

135

11059

35 2648

710

N/A

>10

6-10

3-5

1-2

<1

23

Yrs w/TRU

Respondent Overview

1700 total respondents

Student42%

Alumni22%

Faculty13%

Staff10%

Community7%

Admin5%

Other1%

Sig. over-rep Sig. under-rep

Overall Priority Selection

Consistency Across Groups:

6 of 13

We would expect the breakdown by respondent group to be reflected in each priority.

This was the case in the following priorities (top 7 are

highlighted):

• Student Engagement

• Innovative and Accessible Academic

Programming

• Learning and Teaching Innovation

• Life-long Learning

• Research, Scholarly, and Creative

Capacity

• Research-Informed EducationTop 7 priority

Inconsistency Across Groups:

7 of 13

This was not the case in the following priorities

(top 7 are highlighted):

• Flexible Course and Program Delivery

• Partnerships with Educational

Institutions, Communities, and the

Private Sector

• Professional Development

• Community-Relevant Research

• Aboriginal, Local, and Global

Understanding

• Innovation and Entrepreneurship

• School Pride Based on Academic and

Athletic Excellence

Top 7 priority

We would expect the breakdown by respondent group to be reflected in each priority.

Flexible Course & Program Delivery

Partnerships

Professional DevelopmentInconsistent Selection Rates Statistically Sig.

The Bottom Line

Most groups picked the same top 7 priorities, with some exceptions.

A Closer Look at

the Faculty Response

Group

• Unique perspective• Less frequent priorities

• Flexible Course & Program Delivery

• Partnerships• More frequent priorities

• Research, Scholarly & Creative Capacity

• Aboriginal, Local, Global Understanding

• 13% of total respondents (215)• 67% have been affiliated

with TRU for more than 6 years

A possible area to keep in mind for town halls

A Closer Look at the Student Response Group

• For consideration: students did not rate “Student Engagement” as one of the highest priorities;

• However, we know from other sources (like NSSE and the CUR) that students value the components of student engagement

• 42% of total respondents (710)• 33% have been affiliated

with TRU for less than 1 year

Other Suggeste

d Priorities:

Comment Boxes

• 788 additional priorities were suggested in the comment boxes (460 respondents)

• Grouped into overall themes, including: • Course and program expansion

and development• Experiential learning• Affordable education

• Grouped into original priorities where appropriate

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Counts of All Priorities

Original Suggested

Counts of All Priorities

None of the comment box themes were mentioned frequently enough to change the top 7 priority.

Questions about Survey 1?

Survey 2- Preliminary

Results

Oct. 28 – Nov. 4

Respondent Overview

1110 total respondents

6-10 yrs

188

N/A

>10 yrs

3-5 yrs

1-2 yrs

<1

515

194182

10175

3112

Preliminary

Respondent Overview

1110 total respondents

Student46%

Alumni18%

Faculty16%

Staff9%

Community3%

Admin7%

Other1%

Preliminary

Overall Priority Ranking

1. Flexible Course & Program Delivery

2. Innovative and Accessible Academic Programming

3. Learning and Teaching Innovations

4. Student Engagement

5. Partnerships with Educational Institutions, Communities, and the Private Sector

6. Professional Development

7. Life-long Learning

1st Group

2nd Group

3rd Group

4th Group

Descriptive Statistical

1st

Questions about Survey 2?