The ten staff members in University Planning and Analysis (UPA) serve the campus, UNC system, and the public by:  providing information about NC State University; surveying campus populations for information useful in evaluating effectiveness; coordinating university planning processes including strategic, compact, and enrollment planning; and handling matters related to institutional accreditation.  2009-10 was marked by a notable increase in projects, the shift to a new Student Information System, and staff changes.

Programs:  Changes in Scope and Volume, Achievements, and Special Reviews

The survey team (Nancy Whelchel, Melissa House, and Jennifer Marks) initiated several new surveys:  the five-year review of deans, a First Year First Term Survey, and Staff Senate nominations and elections.  They also reported weekly on items from a new University Budget Suggestion Box and completed reports on the National Study of Student Engagement survey and the COACHE faculty survey.

The survey team also increased the quality and efficiency of several routine surveys.  For example, the process for administering the Graduating Senior Survey was redesigned to accommodate the change to online Application for Degrees, and the First Year Survey was shifted from a paper-and-pencil survey administered during orientation to an online survey administered shortly after orientation. 

In addition, the survey team administered several non-routine surveys, including one supporting the Campus Police Department’s national accreditation, and another supporting the Office of Scholarships and Financial Aid’s evaluation of Pack Promise. 

UPA’s institutional research team (Lewis Carson, Alice Taylor, Kay StewartNewman, Celeste Drayton, and Trey Standish) successfully completed its biggest challenge in years:  completing a full cycle of producing data files and reports using the new Student Information System.  The IR team also expanded its activities by responding to an increased number of questionnaires that will provide more opportunities to showcase the University’s strengths through national and international rankings.

In the area of planning, UPA (Karen Helm and Trey Standish) provided coordination and staff support to the University’s Budget Working Group which allocated new resources and budget reductions in response to changes in the State’s economy during summer 2009.  In addition, UPA worked with the Enrollment Planning Committee to draft a new new ten-year enrollment plan.

Accreditation matters also required an unusually high level of effort this year from UPA (Karen Helm and Jan Henderson).  NC State’s Fifth Year Report to SACS included 15 compliance reports, a final report on the University’s Quality Enhancement Plan, additional special reports, and completion of a substantive change audit. 

Compact Plan:  Major Initiatives

UPA’s most recently approved compact plan (2007) included several  new initiatives that are now well established, including ClassEval, providing a home base for the LITRE (“Learning in a Technology-Rich Environment”) project, and creating new tools for decision makers. 

Other projects required more staff resources and started more slowly, such as the University Data Mart.  This year, in partnership with OIT and SAS, UPA finally launched the data mart project.  A university-wide task force was created to provide advice, and focus groups were organized to identify users’ needs.  UPA created longitudinal data files for a pilot focused on admissions, and SAS designed a dashboard to replace various admissions reports and Web sites across the University.  The project will improve efficiency by reducing duplication in reporting.

The survey team took an important step forward toward improving the University’s overall efficiency in survey research.  UPA has long been concerned about the over-surveying of NC State students, alumni, faculty, and staff, which can lead to lower response rates and thereby reduce the value of the results.  By providing tools and incentives to campus survey researchers, UPA hopes to coordinate surveys of campus populations and reduce unnecessary duplication among research projects.

The loss of our full-time assessment professional made it necessary for UPA to redefine its role in assessment. In preparation for the next SACS reaffirmation, the office initiated a compliance review of assessment in all areas.  In addition, with support from the Provost, UPA also organized a workshop on assessment for administrative units.

Diversity:  Initiatives and Progress

Working with the Office of Equal Opportunity, UPA created an advisory team to help launch its Faculty Salary Equity Study.  This triennial report has been used as a tool for allocating salary dollars in a way that improves salary equity among faculty. 

The UPA survey team has also worked closely with the University Diversity Advisory Committee, Faculty Well-Being Advisory Committee, and a Staff Diversity Task Force to draw on results from the faculty and staff surveys and make recommendations for improving the campus climate and equity across campus.  They also added new questions to the First Year survey that will allow results to be reported by sexual identity and by veteran status, and they began developing the foundation for the fall 2010 campus climate survey.

The entire office adapted programs and reporting procedures to accommodate new state and federal requirements for reporting race categories.  This affected all programs, analyses, and surveys using student and personnel data.

Staff:  New Appointments, Kudos, Professional Activities, and Recognition

Kay StewartNewman, who administers and reports on ClassEval, NC State’s online end-of-course evaluations, earned the Award for Excellence in the Chancellor’s Division. 

Melissa House is a very active member of the NC State Staff Senate.  She co-chairs its Public Relations Committee, is a member of the Ad Hoc Communications Committee, and contributes to The Voice, the monthly Staff Senate publication.

As chair of the UNC survey research committee, Nancy Whelchel worked with other campus representatives and UNC-GA staff to complete recommendations for updating and for increasing efficiency in GA’s survey program.

All three members of the survey team were active in their professional associations.  Nancy served as Membership and Chapter Relations Chair for the American Association for Public Opinion Research; this involved assembling and presenting membership statistics and opinions.  She also presented her work on the NC State Staff Well-Being Survey at AAPOR’s national meeting.  Melissa presented her design for tailoring course evaluations to individual instructors at the North Carolina Association for Institutional Research.  Finally, Jennifer Marks was treasurer for the Southern Association for Public Opinion Research. 

UPA bade farewell to two staff members:  Jeannette Atkinson, who prepared student data files, and Jennifer Marks, a member of the survey team.

Recommendations and Concerns for the Future

The answer to one question leads to more questions.  Information fuels the demand for more information.  For this reason, institutional research offices are always asked for more and more.  Whether the client is a campus committee, a magazine selling rankings, or an external compliance organization like SACS or the NCAA, there are always new metrics, redesigned reports, and a greater need to know.

Over time, non-routine or “ad hoc” projects become routine.  For example, the survey research team typically carves out time for a few non-routine surveys each year, such as this year’s Pack Promise survey.  However, over the last few years, some “one-time” surveys have become mandates.  These are substantial projects, typically requiring multiple series of “sub-surveys:"  Faculty Well-Being Survey, Campus Climate Survey, NSSE, COACHE, and the leadership surveys used in the review of deans and administrators.  Just a few years ago, UPA administered four routine surveys; now there are more than a dozen. 

The Data Mart Project, once completed, will provide another major step forward in both efficiency and quality of service.  OIT is providing excellent leadership, support, and coordination with SAS, which is providing the software.  Nonetheless, UPA is struggling to keep up the pace that will be necessary to implement this next generation of online business intelligence. 

In general, UPA has kept up with increasing demands by increasing efficiency.  However, efficiency alone has not provided enough capacity.  Because we have less time for responding to daily campus requests for assistance, some units have hired their own institutional researchers and created their own web sites for data reporting.  For the University as a whole, this may be an unnecessary duplication of services, not to mention the potential confusion created when reports differ.  It might be more efficient for the University as a whole if UPA had staff resources sufficient to meet campus needs.

With free or easily accessible survey tools like Survey Monkey, and lacking any central coordination, campus surveys are proliferating.  Students and faculty are being over surveyed, and UPA’s response rates are at historic lows.  UPA will be proposing new strategies to coordinate surveys on campus and will appreciate executive support for our proposals to strengthen coordination of survey research on campus.

Accreditation now requires full-time attention.  A few years ago, little was required between decennial reaffirmations.  Now, however, substantive changes such as dual degrees, off-campus sites, and online programs are proliferating and require documentation and regular correspondence.  Off-campus sites need to be monitored for compliance.  Assessment, once a requirement only for degree programs, is now a requirement for research, extension, and administrative functions.  SACS requires a Quality Enhancement Plan to improve student learning campus wide.  Reaffirmation is moving in the direction of a five-year process.  The University is at risk if UPA falls behind on any of these tasks, yet well less than one FTE is assigned to these tasks.

Finally, some UPA salaries are quite low and not competitive with other NC State offices or UNC institutions, let alone the private sector.  Delays in salary increases are exacerbating remaining equity issues, and lack of competitive salaries makes filling vacancies a challenge.

Contributions to Focus Areas

Producing Leaders for the State, Nation, and World:  UPA supported consideration of the Korea campus by developing a tool to find the most efficient general education program, analyzing space needs in relation to targeted enrollment, and projecting teaching loads.  In addition, UPA built a foundation for the documentation and approvals that would be required for SACS before a campus could be established overseas.

Creating Educational Innovation:  UPA provided a home for LITRE, NC State’s Quality Enhancement Plan aimed at improving student learning with technology in the classroom (http://litre.ncsu.edu/index.html).  The final report included many recommended pedagogical strategies, principles for the allocation of technology resources, and ideas for supporting faculty interested in technology-fueled innovation.