Are We Giving Housing Residents What They Want or What They Need? Darlena Jones, Ph.D. Director of Education and Program Development EBI
Feb 25, 2016
Are We Giving Housing Residents What They Want or What They
Need?Darlena Jones, Ph.D.
Director of Education and Program DevelopmentEBI
Who is EBI?Founded in 1994 by Joseph Pica, Ed.D and Glenn Detrick (retired in 2002)Over 1500 Colleges and Universities (U.S.A. and 15 other countries like Australia, Mexico, Spain, and Egypt) have participated in EBI’s studies
Surveyed over 12 million people
Nearly 100 Assessments in 10 areas of higher education
Over 500 custom assessments for schools like MIT, Ohio State, UCLA, University of Georgia, and University of Florida
Produced over 17,000 customized reports
Creation of WESS (Web-Enabled Survey System) that collects, analyzes, reports, disseminates, and manages assessment data
MAP-Works
Student Affairs
College of Nursing
College of Engineerin
gCollege of Business
College of Education
Family of EBI Assessments
ACUHO-I/EBI Housing Assessments
• Began in 1998, nearly 650 institutions• Satisfaction measures like dining, programming, and fellow
residents• Learning Outcomes measures like Peer Interactions and
Diversity
Resident Assessment
• Began in 1999, nearly 220 institutions• Satisfaction measures like job training and supervisor• Learning Outcomes measures like personal and practical
competencies
Student Staff Assessment
• Began in 2000, 150 institutions• Satisfaction measures like lease and environment• Learning Outcomes measures like personal growth and
managing time
Apartment Assessment
Assessment Highlights
• Tested and reliable instruments• Mapped to ACUHO-I, CAS, NASPA/ACPA Learning
Reconsidered• Customize by coding area/hall/floor; add additional
questions
Survey Items
• Online and paper reports• Benchmarks against Select 6, Carnegie Class, and National
Norm• Longitudinal trends analysis• Executive summaries, interactive reporting, Action Planning
(NEW!)
Reporting
• Annual administration (either fall or spring term)• Online reporting available immediately• Full comparative reporting available in summer
Process
What’s important to your students?
What’s Important to Residents?
Factor Description% of Institutions
Strong Predictor Weak Predictor Not a Predictor
Personal Interactions 84.3% 6.3% 9.4%
Room Assignment or Change Process 52.8% 27.3% 19.9%
Manage Time, Study, Solve Problems 52.3% 30.7% 17.1%
Dining Services 46.3% 41.8% 11.9%
Room/Floor Environment 20.9% 42.9% 36.2%
Sense of Community 8.4% 37.3% 54.4%
Personal Growth 5.6% 17.4% 77.0%
Fellow Residents are Respectful 5.2% 25.1% 69.7%
Diverse Interactions 4.9% 32.4% 62.7%
Facilities 4.2% 23.3% 72.5%
Safety and Security 3.5% 18.5% 78.0%
Services Provided 2.4% 13.6% 84.0%
Hall/Apt Programming 1.7% 29.6% 68.6%
Hall/Apt Student Staff 1.4% 16.7% 81.9%
Fellow Residents are Tolerant 1.0% 28.2% 70.7%
Peer Interactions has been the top predictor since 1998
Dining Services and Room have been top predictors since 1998
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment (284 institutions)
2011 Residence Hall Performance
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
Dining ServicesOverall Program Effectiveness
Manage Time, Study, Solve ProblemsServices Provided
Hall/Apt ProgrammingRoom/Floor Environment
FacilitiesOverall Learning ExperienceOverall Resident Satisfaction
Room Assignment or Change ProcessPersonal Growth
Fellow Residents are RespectfulPersonal InteractionsDiverse Interactions
Sense of CommunityCollege/University
Hall/Apt Student StaffFellow Residents are Tolerant
Safety and Security
4.805.05
5.125.205.215.245.255.295.325.345.365.39
5.455.52
5.615.69
5.855.865.86
Lower Rated
Factors
Higher Rated
Factor but still below
“Goal”
Services ProvidedPersonal Interactions
Manage Time, Study, Solve ProblemsPersonal Growth
FacilitiesHall/Apt Student Staff
Safety and SecurityRoom/Floor Environment
Room Assignment or Change ProcessDining Services
Fellow Residents are Tolerant
-0.30 -0.20 -0.10 0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50-0.19
-0.10-0.02
0.060.130.14
0.180.21
0.280.44
Changes from 2005 to 2011
NOTE: Data from the 79 institutions who continuously participated in ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment from 2005 to 2011. All differences shown are statistical to p < .001
Unfortunately, we have a decline in Personal
Interactions (the Top Predictor), hmm…
Room/Floor Environment shows great
improvement!
Dining shows great improvement!
Program Enhanced Skill
Skill Important to Career
5% 52%
8%
43%
91%
Not at all Moderately Extremely
Interactions Important to Alumni
Data: 2800 alumni from 25 institutions in the 2009, 2010, 2011 EBI Undergraduate Business Alumni Study
9 out of 10 graduates of business school say that one-on-one
interpersonal relationship skills is extremely important to a successful
career…
…but, only 4 out of 10 graduates say they received good training within their
program
Ability to deal with ambiguity
Ability to think globally
Ability to think creatively
Ability to manage change
Ability to apply business theory to practice
One-on-one interpersonal skills
Ability to solve quantitative business problems
Listening skills
Ability to apply technology
Ability to apply a systematic approach to solving business problems
Leadership skills
Ability to define business problems
Decision making skills
Ability to think strategically
Written communication skills
Ability to think critically
Ability to think analytically
Oral presentation skills
Ability to work in teams
4.79
4.85
4.88
4.93
5.02
5.05
5.10
5.12
5.12
5.13
5.20
5.26
5.28
5.30
5.41
5.43
5.48
5.53
5.64
Ability to think globally
Ability to apply business theory to practice
Ability to solve quantitative business problems
Ability to think creatively
Ability to apply a systematic approach to solving business problems
Ability to deal with ambiguity
Oral presentation skills
Ability to define business problems
Ability to work in teams
Ability to think strategically
Ability to manage change
Ability to apply technology
Written communication skills
Ability to think analytically
Ability to think critically
Leadership skills
Listening skills
Decision making skills
One-on-one interpersonal skills
5.72
5.79
5.89
6.12
6.16
6.19
6.29
6.29
6.38
6.38
6.41
6.44
6.45
6.45
6.45
6.50
6.57
6.59
6.62
Data: 2800 alumni from 25 institutions in the 2009, 2010, 2011 EBI Undergraduate Business Alumni Study
Highest Importance – one of
the lowest in training
Interactions Important to AlumniSkill is Important to Career Program Enhanced Skill
Interactions Important to Persistence
Left School
Persisted
41%
10%
45%
45%
14%
45%
Low levels Moderate levelsHigh levels
First-Year students with low levels of peer connections are more likely to leave school
Data Set: Fall 2009 MAP-Works Fall Check-Up Survey and Fall Outcomes
Peer Connections
Left School
Persisted
25%
11%
48%
39%
27%
51%
Low levels Moderate levelsHigh levels
First-Year students with low levels of social integration
are more likely to leave school
Social Integration
Re-CapInteraction is extremely important for student
development, housing satisfaction, career, and
retentionPersonal Interactions is higher
performing but is trending downward, overall
Dining Services is improving (increased convenience?) - at
what cost?
Personal Space is improving (increased single room usage?)
– at what cost?
Trends in Family and College Housing
• 21st Century’s trends affecting residence architecture– “Media Rooms” becoming standard – not conducive to interaction– Average size of home is growing (but maybe now start shrinking
due to economy)
Trends in Family Housing
Ref: The Fax of Life: Work Invades the Refuge, Christian Science Monitor, Sept 2002
YR: 1950 YR: 1970 YR: 2000 YR: 2010
10001500
20002500
Average Square Footage of Residential Housing
• World War II Housing (1940s)– Large front porches wrapped
around front of home– 1 bathroom (if you were lucky!) and 2-3 bedrooms– 3.4 people per household– 3-4 people per bathroom?– 2-3 people per bedroom?
• 21st Century Housing– Advent of air conditioning made the front porch
unnecessary– Backyard patios are popular– 2 to 3 bathrooms and 3 to 4 bedrooms is “normal”– 2.6 people per household – one person per bedroom/bathroom?
Trends in Family Housing
Ref: U.S. Census, HGTV
• Mid 20th Century– Most residence halls were built
between World War II and the 1970s due to swelling enrollment numbers
– Each hall housed 100s of students– 2-3 students per room– Small rooms (example = 10’x15’)– Hall bathrooms shared by 20-30
people
Trends in College Housing
Pictures: Oklahoma State University website
• 21st Century Housing – Suites, Super Suites, Apartments– Fewer people per bedroom– Bathroom(s) used only by
roommates– Larger bedrooms– Separate living space becoming
more common
Trends in College Housing
Image from Oklahoma State University website
Individ
ual C
ontra
ct Apt
(S)
Modifie
d Trad
itiona
l (S)
Adjoinin
g Suit
e (S)
Supe
r Suit
es (S)
Individ
ual C
ontra
ct Apt
(M)
Tradit
ional R
oom (S
)
Modifie
d Trad
itiona
l (M)
Supe
r Suit
es (M
)
Adjoinin
g Suit
e (M)
Tradit
ional R
oom (M
)
60%38%
22% 27%43%
23%8% 11% 4% 1%
34%52%
68% 61%43%
50%62% 55% 60%
17%
7% 10% 10% 12% 14%27% 31% 34% 36%
82%
Not at all Neutral Extremely
To what degree do you feel that the following room types are conducive to interaction and engagement for freshmen residents?
CHO Survey – Personal Interactions
NOTE: M = Multiple Occupancy Rooms, S = Single Occupant RoomsRef: 2008 EBI Chief Housing Officer’s Survey, 261 CHOs
82% of CHOs believe that Traditional Room (M) is extremely appropriate
60% of CHOs believe that Individual Contract Apt (S)
are not appropriate for freshmen
27%16%
7% 8% 4% 7% 5% 5% 7% 3%
59%
50%56% 53%
49% 44% 42% 42% 34% 34%
9%28% 32% 34%
42% 44% 48% 49% 55% 56%
Not at all Neutral Extremely
To what degree is the availability of the following room types helpful in recruiting freshmen to the college/university?
CHO Survey - Recruitment
NOTE: M = Multiple Occupancy Rooms, S = Single Occupant RoomsRef: 2008 EBI Chief Housing Officer’s Survey, 261 CHOs
56% of CHOs believe that Super Suites (S) would
definitely help in recruiting
27% of CHOs believe that Traditional Rooms (M) do not help
recruiting at all
Patterns?
Larg
er fa
mily
ho
mes De
crea
se
Inte
ract
ion
?
21st Century Families
Mor
e pr
ivat
e ro
oms
Decr
ease
In
tera
ctio
n?
21st Century
Residence Halls
Trends in Family and College Dining
Americans now spend nearly equal amounts on food at home and dining out
Food Consumption Trends
Percentage of Food Bill by Location of Dining
76.0% 73.7%
66.6%61.0%
55.1%52.1% 51.5%
24.0% 26.3%
33.4%39.0%
44.9%47.9% 48.5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2005
Per
cent
age
of F
ood
Bill
$ for Food at Home $ for Food Away from Home
Ref: AgMRC (resource center for producers of agriculture products) http://www.agmrc.org/agmrc/markets/Food/foodconsumptiontrends.htm
• 84% of teens prefer to have dinner with families than to eat alone
• Compared to teens who have frequent family dinners, those who have infrequent family dinners are:– More than twice as likely to have used
tobacco / marijuana– Almost twice as likely to have drunk
alcohol / gotten drunk– Not perform as well academically
Trends in Family Dining
Ref: “The Importance of Family Dinners”, National Center of Addiction and Substance Abuse (CASA) at Columbia University, www.casacolumbia.org
"Fast food has killed this [family dinners]. We have reduced eating to sitting alone and shoveling it in." Robin Fox, anthropologist, Rutgers University
• NACUFS suggests to target Generation Y or Echo Boomers with:– Information: Through the Web or on-premise notices,
advertise upcoming meals. – Choices: Offer/sell them the add-ons to make “their”
food and beverage purchases one-of-a-kind or to make existing items more appealing.
– Grab-and-go: This group is on the move.– Convenience: Convenient eating locations and times.
Ready-to-eat salads, fruits and vegetables.
Trends in Campus Dining
Ref: NACUFS website. “Leveraging Consumer Megatrends at Your College or University”
• Etiquette Dining Courses– Campuses are now offering websites / dinners teaching
students how to dine properly– Examples:
• Skidmore College “Real World Etiquette Dinner”• Minnesota State University “Business Etiquette Dinner”• MassBay Community College webpage: http://
www.massbay.edu/Current-Students/Dining-Etiquette.aspx
Trends in Campus Dining
Kind of sad, isn’t it?
Patterns?
Teen
s eat
ing
alon
e… Decr
ease
In
tera
ctio
n?
21st Century Families
Colle
ge
stud
ents
ea
ting
alon
e…
Decr
ease
In
tera
ctio
n?
21st Century
Residence Halls
Re-CapCHOs believe that traditional rooms are more appropriate to build interactions but apartments/suites are better for
recruitment
Students demand (and are getting!) increased privacy in their housing – at
what cost?
Students demand (and are getting!) increased convenience in dining/food –
at what cost?
Dining in “families” has a positive impact on student development and
self-esteem
What impacts Personal Interactions?
What Rooms Do They Live In?
Upperclassmen
Sophomore
Freshman/First-Year
19%
33%
53%
10%
9%
8%
11%
21%
23%
9%
13%
9%
51%
25%
7%
Traditional Room Modified Traditional RoomSuite Super SuiteApartment
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
Majority of Freshmen/First-Year live in a Traditional
room
Majority of Upperclassmen
live in Apartments
Impact of Room Type on Interactions
Apartment
Super Suite
Modified Trad Room
Suite
Traditional Room
5.36
5.44
5.46
5.44
5.49
5.41
5.45
5.49
5.51
5.54
Personal Interactions
Freshman/First-Year All Students
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
Apartments: Lowest Levels of Personal
Interactions
Traditional Room: Highest
Levels of Personal
Interactions
Do They Have Roommates?
Upperclassmen
Sophomore
Freshman/First-Year
53%
25%
13%
47%
75%
87%
Single Occupancy Multiple Occupancy
87% have roommates
53% have a single room
Single Occupancy
Multiple Occupancy
5.36
5.47
5.40
5.53
Personal Interactions
Freshman/First-Year All Students
Impact of Roommates on Interactions
Single Occupancy: Lowest Levels of
Personal Interactions
Multiple Occupancy: Highest Levels of Personal
Interactions
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
Are They Involved?
Upperclassmen
Sophomore
Freshman/First-Year
48%
44%
36%
35%
42%
49%
17%
14%
15%
Never or rarely SometimesOften or very often
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
Over 1/3 of freshmen/first-year are not involved in
hall/apt activities
Nearly ½ of upperclassmen are not involved
in hall/apt activities
Impact of Involvement on Interactions
Never or rarely
Sometimes
Often or very often
5.03
5.65
6.03
5.07
5.68
6.03
Personal Interactions
Freshman/First-Year All Students
Students who are not involved experience low
levels of Personal Interactions
Students who are very involved
experience high levels of Personal
Interactions
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
LINK?
Personal Interaction
s
Room/Floor
Environment
Dining Services
• Meet other people• Live cooperatively• Resolve conflicts• Improve interpersonal
relationships
• Quality of food• Cleanliness of dining area• Dining environment• Service provided by dining
staff• Dining service hours• Variety of the dining plan
options• Value of your dining plan
• Study in room• Sleep without interruption• Degree of privacy• Noise level on your floor
Is there a link between Personal Interactions, Dining, and Room?
Link Between Dining and Interactions?
Dissatisfied with Dining
Neutral Dining
Satisfied with Dining
17%
5%
2%
46%
45%
19%
37%
50%
79%
Low Level of Interactions Moderate Level of InteractionsHigh Level of Interactions
79% of students satisfied with dining report high levels of
interactions
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
Link Between Room and Interactions?
Dissatisfied with Room/Floor
Neutral Room/Floor
Satisfied with Room/Floor
25%
6%
2%
50%
50%
23%
25%
44%
74%
Low Level of Interactions Moderate Level of InteractionsHigh Level of Interactions
74% of students satisfied with their room/floor report
high levels of interactions
NOTE: Results from the 2011 ACUHO-I/EBI Resident Assessment, 270 institutions submitting 376,000 responses
Re-CapTraditional rooms support
interactions more than apartments/suites
Having roommates (multiple occupancy) supports
interactions
Being involved in activities supports interactions
Satisfaction with Dining and Personal Space correlate with
Personal Interactions
How can we improve interactions among our residents?
Sit-down dinner or “grab and
go?”
Maitre D
Interaction or
Privacy
Front Desk
Choose one
I choose Privacy!
Choose one
I choose Grab and
Go!
Dilemma Facing Housing…
Or, give them what they need?
Give them what they want…
Dilemma Facing Housing…
Student Development and
Learning
CustomerSatisfactio
n
Student learning…
Your biggest contribution to student learning may be in teaching students how to interact…
Difficult Populations?
Students in Single Rooms
• ~23% of population (and growing steadily!)
• Do they hide in their room?
Abstainers of Alcohol
• ~43% of students• Where do they go on weekend
nights?
Introverts• ~25% of general population• We feel awkward among people in
social situations
How do we build their levels of Personal Interactions?
BrainstormingReshape RA
Position?• Move towards positions of
community building?
Use Dining Halls?
• Limit dining hours to force interactions in dining halls?
• Reduce amount of take-out to force students to eat in-house?
• Create dining clubs based on like interests to help build community?
More Community
Space?
• As more single-room units are built, consider increasing community space?
• Recent work suggests this is happening!*
* ACUHO-I Construction and Renovation Data: The Latest Trends in Housing Construction and Renovation, The Journal of College and University Student Housing, Vol. 36, No. 2, 2010
Darlena Jones, Ph.D.Director of Education and Program [email protected]
www.webebi.com