Public Perception of Iowa Residents Towards the University of Iowa

1
Public Perception of Iowa Residents Towards the
University of Iowa
Prepared for

• April 2007

2
Presentation Outline

• Purpose Methodology of the Study
• About the Sample
• Attitudes Towards State Institutions
• Value of the University of Iowa
• Comparing the University of Iowa
• Conclusions Recommendations

3
Purpose Methodology Research Objective (I)

• Gauge attitudes and opinions of residents of the
  state of Iowa toward the University
• Determine the impression Iowans have toward the
  University and its impact on the state in both a
  direct and indirect manner
• Compare the UIs value proposition versus other
  public entities
• Insights generated by the study will be used
  beyond traditional student marketing (e.g. to
  attract top undergraduate and graduate students)
  to include public relations and marketing to
  other stakeholders and constituencies

4
Purpose Methodology Research Objective (II)

• In addition to the areas of top of mind
  awareness, importance, satisfaction and other
  concepts, topics explored in the survey
  instrument include
• The Universitys mission
• The Universitys role and effect on the states
  economy and economic development
• The Universitys position as a major employer
• Effects on workforce development
• The importance and role of technology transfer
• Intellectual capital and its development

5
Purpose Methodology Survey and Data Collection

• Survey Instrument
• Survey instrument designed with
  previously-conducted research in 2003 in mind
• Data Collection
• Telephone-based interviewing
• Respondents chosen randomly from residential
  database
• Survey conducted between March 22-27, 2007
• Survey averaged 19 minutes to complete

6
Purpose Methodology Sampling Plan

• 403 total respondents (margin of error 4.88)
• Ages 25-64
• Balanced for gender
• Equal numbers from Iowas 5 Congressional
  Districts
• Census-reflective split between urban rural
  counties
• Urban metro
• Non-urban metro
• Rural (adjacent to urban metro)
• Rural (non-adjacent to urban metro)

7
Presentation Outline

• Purpose Methodology of the Study
• About the Sample
• Attitudes Towards State Institutions
• Value of the University of Iowa
• Comparing the University of Iowa
• Conclusions Recommendations

8
About the SampleAge
The sample included only those between the ages
of 25 and 64. Of respondents, the median age was
in the 45-54 range.
9
About the Sample Gender
The sampling plan called for a distribution of
gender to be no more than 60/40 of female to male
respondents. The gender balance in this data met
this criteria.
10
About the Sample County Residence
11
About the Sample Urban vs. Rural Counties (I)
12
About the Sample Urban vs. Rural Counties (II)
The demographic spread of respondents living in
these 4 county types is representative of census
figures.
13
About the Sample Congressional District (I)
Data included in this report is representative of
all 5 congressional districts in the state.
14
About the Sample Congressional District (II)
Data included in this report is representative of
all 5 congressional districts of the state.
15
About the Sample Zip Code
16
About the Sample Race/Ethnicity
The data included in this survey is
representative of census figures on race for the
state of Iowa.
17
About the Sample Marital Status
Given the age range of 25-64, marital status
would reflect a higher percentage of married
respondents than the general adult population at
large.
18
About the Sample Employment Status
19
About the Sample Educational Attainment
Educational attainment of the respondents
included in this data is slightly higher than
census figures.
20
About the Sample Household Income
Census data indicates the median household income
to be within the 40,000 to 59,999 range.
Reflecting the higher education level of the
sample, household income is slightly higher than
average.
21
About the Sample Athletic Program Following
On a state-wide basis, 58 of the sample
describes themselves as a Hawkeye fan. This
question was included to learn how sports
affiliation affects general attitudes towards UI.
22
About the Sample News and Information Consumption
Nearly the entire sample consumes some type of
widely distributed news broadcast or publication
multiple times per week. The local and network
news broadcasts are viewed by the majority of the
sample frequently each week.
23
Presentation Outline

• Purpose Methodology of the Study
• About the Sample
• Attitudes Towards State Institutions
• Value of the University of Iowa
• Comparing the University of Iowa
• Conclusions Recommendations

24
Attitudes Towards State InstitutionsDrivers of
Quality of Life in the State
In an unaided format, the economy, K-12
education, and healthcare are thought of as the
top three areas that could improve the quality of
life in the state. Post-secondary education was
indicated by a combined 5 as the most important
aspect.
25
Attitudes Towards State Institutions How Public
Institutions Can Address Quality of Life
Q.2 In your own words, how can public
institutions in Iowa, like state and local
governments, universities, school systems, etc.
best address that issue?

• Employment/Economy
• Spend less on bricks and mortar and increase the
  quality of education
• They need to have more open discussions with the
  community. We may have good ideas to share
• Make more use of open forums and debates to
  encourage public opinion and educate the public
• By encouraging more small and private businesses
  to participate in the community more
• Create and provide a good educated work force
• Ensure that money is being spent in the state in
  order to try to keep people here
• Read projections of what jobs will be needed and
  focus on training people in those fields
• Colleges and universities need to interact with
  public companies about student internship
  opportunities

• Education
• They need to remember the slogan that no child
  should be left behind
• They can publicly promote education. They need
  to provide more funding for education and
  appropriately place that funding in areas of
  educational importance
• Money is always an issue. I think if the school
  systems had bigger budgets, they would be able to
  make changes. We need to make sure we keep high
  quality teachers in our system
• Making education more affordable through more
  grants or scholarships
• Give more grants for people to go to school. It
  is a crime to make college graduates accumulate
  60,000 in debt
• We need to ensure that our teachers spend more
  time with students

26
Attitudes Towards State Institutions Priority of
Issues
Education issues are viewed as a top priority by
respondents.
27
Attitudes Towards State Institutions Priority of
Issues by Demographic
Females are statistically more likely to feel
that finding ways to keep small communities
vibrant should be a priority of state leaders.
There are few other differences on this issue
based on age or gender.
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
28
Attitudes Towards State Institutions
Effectiveness of Programs and Institutions
State public universities are seen as by far the
most effective of the five state programs or
institutions listed in making Iowa a better place
to live.
29
Attitudes Towards State Institutions
Effectiveness of Programs and Institutions by
Demographic
Women were more likely to see the value or
effectiveness of IDOT. No other age or gender
differences were seen.
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
30
Attitudes Towards State Institutions Desired
Division of Tax Dollars (means)
Respondents, on average, are willing to devote
more of their tax money to higher education than
the other three listed state programs.
31
Attitudes Towards State Institutions Desired
Division of State Tax Dollars (trend)
A minority of respondents were willing to give
any program more than 30 cents of their tax
dollar.
32
Attitudes Towards State Institutions Desired
Division of State Tax Dollars (I)
28 of respondents gave half or more of their tax
dollar to higher education.
33
Presentation Outline

• Purpose Methodology of the Study
• About the Sample
• Attitudes Towards State Institutions
• Value of the University of Iowa
• Comparing the University of Iowa
• Conclusions Recommendations

34
Value of the U of I Familiarity with the
University of Iowa
Individuals have become familiarized with the
University of Iowa most often through a family
members medical procedure at UIHC. Athletic
events, knowing a graduate, and cultural events
at the university are other modes of familiarity.
Approximately 25 of the respondents indicated
No to all eight items.
35
Value of the U of I Overall Familiarity with
the University of Iowa
Overall, two out of every three respondents are
very or somewhat familiar with the University of
Iowa.
36
Value of the U of I Overall Familiarity with
the University of Iowa by Demographic
Men are statistically more likely to be somewhat
familiar with the University of Iowa than women.
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
37
Value of the U of I Other Post-Secondary
Institution Familiarity
Aside from the University of Iowa, over 60 of
the sample indicate having the most familiarity
with one of the other two Iowa public
universities.

• Q.12 What would you describe as the biggest
  differences between the University of Iowa and ?
• Common Iowa State Comparisons
• Iowa State is not as liberal as U of I.
• Iowa State is agricultural based and University
  of Iowa is medically based..
• ISU has the best program for Veterinary Science
• I guess Iowa State is more geared toward
  Engineering, where Iowa is more geared towards
  the Arts
• Common Northern Iowa Comparisons
• U of I is much larger than UNI.
• U of I is more liberal and UNI is more
  conservative.
• There is a difference in cultural events. There
  are more cultural events at U of I because the
  student population is more diverse.

38
Value of the U of I Higher Education in Iowa (I)
90 of the respondents agree than tax money spent
on higher education is a good investment. Less
than half feel that the University of Iowa is a
bargain for students. 70 feel that community
colleges offer many of the same benefits to
students.
39
Value of the U of I Higher Education in Iowa
(II)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
40
Value of the U of I Higher Education in Iowa
(III)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
41
Value of the U of I Higher Education in Iowa
(IV)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
42
Value of the U of I Higher Education in Iowa (V)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
43
Value of the U of I Higher Education in Iowa
(VI)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
44
Value of the U of I Best/Worst Choice Exercise

• The Best/Worst methodology is a measurement
  technique used for general ranking and choice
  data.
• The technique presents a series of choice tasks
  where a randomly sorted subset of attributes is
  presented. Respondents choose for each iteration
  the attribute deemed MOST and LEAST important to
  them.
• Resulting ordinal data signifies the relative
  importance of each attribute to all other
  attributes. Being ratio level data the importance
  ranking provides results of trade-off
  decisions.
• Also, this technique is preferred to rating
  scales when measuring services in that there is
  no concern of individual differences in the use
  of the scale.

45
Value of the U of I Best/Worst Choice Exercise -
Most
67 of the time developing new treatments and
technologies was offered as an option it was
selected as the most important service provided.
A source of state pride was selected most
important only 7 of the time.
46
Value of the U of I Best/Worst Choice Exercise
- Least
Respondents were willing to select state pride as
the least important attribute listed 63 of the
time it was offered.
47
Value of the U of I Best/Worst Choice Exercise
- Calibrated
When compared side by side and calibrated to a
100 point scale, the order of importance on these
6 attributes is inversely proportional to the
order of least importance showing a great deal
of consensus among the services.
48
Value of the U of I U of I Service Admission
Standards
15 more respondents strongly favor system-wide
admissions standards, versus standards that vary
by institution.
OR
49
Value of the U of I U of I Service
Cost-Sharing Burden
The majority of respondents support using tax
money to offset the cost of tuition.
OR
50
Value of the U of I U of I Service
Educational Emphasis
38 more respondents support a mission allowing
the University of Iowa to offer a wide variety of
educational options than to train young
professionals for careers that are in demand.
OR
51
Value of the U of I U of I Service Benefits
of College Education
Respondents are split on who benefits the most
from a college education.
OR
52
Presentation Outline

• Purpose Methodology of the Study
• About the Sample
• Attitudes Towards State Institutions
• Value of the University of Iowa
• Comparing the University of Iowa
• Conclusions Recommendations

53
Comparing the U of I Overall Impression of the
University of Iowa
Respondents overall impression of the University
of Iowa is largely favorable. Nearly half gave a
rating of 6 or 7.
54
Comparing the U of I Overall Impression of the
University of Iowa by Demographic
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
55
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations (I)
Compared to others, the University of Iowas core
competency is advanced research and programs
graduate study, like medicine or law.
56
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
(II)
In areas like high academic standards and
reasonable tuition costs, the University of Iowa
is viewed as average or comparable with other
colleges universities.
57
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (I)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
58
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (II)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
59
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (III)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
60
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (IV)
Reflecting the values of Iowans
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
61
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (V)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
62
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (VI)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
63
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (VII)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
64
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (VIII)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
65
Comparing the U of I Comparative Evaluations
by Demographic (IX)
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
66
Comparing the U of I Changed Impressions Over
the Past 5 Years
Over the past 5 years the impression of most
respondents has remained unchanged.
67
Comparing the U of I Changed Impressions Over
the Past 5 Years by Demographic
There are not significant differences of changing
impressions when demographic subsets of
respondents are compared by either gender or age.
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
68
Comparing the U of I Influence on Impression of
the U of I (I)
Word-of-mouth discussion has influenced
respondents impression of the University of Iowa
more than other possible sources. The football
program and interaction with UIHC personnel has
also had a strong impact for many.
69
Comparing the U of I Influence on Impression of
the U of I (II)
Of the eight attributes tested, personal
interaction with U of I professors, publications,
or alumni has had the least influence on
impression of the university over the past 5
years.
70
Comparing the U of I Influence on Impression of
the U of I ()
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
71
Comparing the U of I Influence on Impression of
the U of I ()
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
72
Comparing the U of I Influence on Impression of
the U of I ()
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
73
Comparing the U of I Influence on Impression of
the U of I ()
Green Significantly Higher Red Significantly
Lower
74
Presentation Outline

• Purpose Methodology of the Study
• About the Sample
• Attitudes Towards State Institutions
• Value of the University of Iowa
• Comparing the University of Iowa
• Conclusions Recommendations

75
Conclusions (I)

• Iowans view education as the most critical
  element influencing quality of life. They see
  the connection between strong education
  institutions and economic growth.
• Respondents understand that higher education has
  a cost, and indicate a willingness to use public
  funds to support it.
• Even compared to other necessary services, higher
  education received a larger slice of tax money
  than other tested concepts.

76
Conclusions (II)

• Respondents overall have a very favorable
  impression of the University of Iowa. That
  impression is driven largely through informal
  communications.
• Athletics is a powerful impression driver, but
  limited in scope.
• Most respondents see community colleges as an
  acceptable lower-cost alternative to university
  education.
• Cost issues are the most prominent detractor from
  the University of Iowa. There may be some
  disconnect between the cost of tuition and the
  value received.

77
Conclusions (III)

• Respondents want tangible benefits from their
  University of Iowa investment issues of state
  pride are not enough. They expect progress in
  science and medical research, and a steady stream
  of qualified graduates ready to fill professional
  roles in the state.
• External rankings or qualitative measurements of
  prestige are of less importance.
• Respondents do see the benefits of U of I
  extending beyond Johnson County.

78
Conclusions (IV)

• Respondents seem to have a holistic view of
  Iowa public universities each fills a role, and
  each should have similar standards.
• There is not a consensus view regarding the
  burden-sharing of a college education. Some see
  it as an individual responsibility and benefit,
  while an equal number see it as a societal good.

79
(No Transcript)