College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources Image Study

1. College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources Image Study East Campus Union August 18, 2005

2. Today’s Agenda… • Background • Response • Purpose was to investigate our image and determine the awareness of academic offerings in the College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources • Conduct of the Study • Objectives • Methods • Key conclusions and recommendations • Open discussion

3. Background… • Eight years of downward undergraduate enrollment trends • “Production majors” enrollments decreasing • Shift in urban/rural population base in state

4. Response… • CASNR faculty meeting to discuss college name (October 22) • Discussed at November meeting of FAC • Straw poll taken from faculty within departments and communicated back at our December meeting • Communicated at the January FAC meeting the Food Processing Center could take the lead on the development of a survey • FAC subcommittee formed to implement a study • Dann Husmann (chair), Duane Reese, Rick Stowell, Larkin Powell • Met for the first time on February 2, 2005

5. Conduct of the Study… • High priority issue • Guided by KSU study (starting point) • Shared philosophy • Comprehensive • Quantitative and Qualitative • Scientific, rigorous, publishable • Facts guide college image and potential recommendations • Study implemented by Food Processing Center at UNL • IRB approved

6. Study Objectives… • Evaluate CASNR image and influence on choice of major • Identify awareness of CASNR program offerings and career opportunities • Determine influence of CASNR name • Identify actionable changes in CASNR’s recruiting approach and proposed name change

7. Populations sampled and surveyed High School Students Mailed survey UNL Students E-mail survey UNL Faculty & Academic Advisors E-mailed survey Alumni, Stakeholders, & Influencers Mailed survey The Food Processing Center constructed the four different surveys and determined the instruments demonstrated solid face validity for data collection to proceed…

8. Alumni, Stakeholders, and Influencers… • 4,214 selected • 850 high school teachers - 850 employers • 264 senators, advisory, Ag Builders • 800 parents of CASNR students - 600 alumni • 850 parents of high school seniors • 21 % return rate Reliabilities (Cronbach’s Alphas) for Scaled Items

9. UNL Faculty & Academic Advisors… • 2,116 UNL faculty, library staff, and community college advisors selected • 2,100 UNL faculty and library staff • 16 community college advisors • 20 % return rate Reliabilities (Cronbach’s Alphas) for Scaled Items

10. UNL Students… • 2,427 students selected • 1,500 non-College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resource Students • 927 College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resource Students • 18 % return rate Reliabilities (Cronbach’s Alphas) for Scaled Items

11. High School Seniors… • 4,500 seniors selected • 2,454 metro students (city or nearby city of 50,000+) • 993 micro seniors (city or nearby city of 10,000 to 49,999) • 1,053 rural seniors (less than 10,000) • 11 % return rate Reliabilities (Cronbach’s Alphas) for Scaled Items

12. For Combined Groups… Reliabilities (Cronbach’s Alphas) for Scaled Items Frequencies for Origin of All Surveyed Groups Note. Valid percentages only.

13. Image of the College… Frequencies for CASNR Name and Recommendation of CASNR to Prospective Students by High School Seniors Note. Valid percentages reported.

14. Image of the College… Frequencies for CASNR Name and Recommendation of CASNR to Prospective Students by All Surveyed Groups Note. Valid percentages reported.

15. Level of Perceived Knowledge of CASNR… Frequencies, Mean and Standard Deviation for Level of CASNR Knowledge of High School Seniors(n=479) Note. 1=No Knowledge to 5=Extensive Knowledge. Valid percentages only.

16. Level of Perceived Knowledge of CASNR… Frequencies, Mean and Standard Deviation for Level of CASNR Knowledge of All Surveyed Groups(n=2056) Note. 1=No Knowledge to 5=Extensive Knowledge. Valid percentages only.

17. Level of Perceived Knowledge of CASNR… MANOVA Comparisons of Overall, High School Students, Stakeholders’ and UNL Students Level of Perceived Knowledge by County Classification aDenotes significant difference between Metropolitan and Micropolitan as a result of Tukey Post Hoc tests. bDenotes significant difference between Metropolitan and Rural as a result of Tukey Post Hoc tests. Note. 1=No Knowledge to 5=Extensive Knowledge.

18. Frequencies for Career Pathways and Colleges for High School Seniors

19. Frequencies for Career Pathways and Colleges for All Groups

20. Career Pathways and Colleges Conclusions… • Respondents clearly matched a career path to a college name for all colleges except LSRM (Life Sciences and Resource Management) • Response levels for LSRM were consistently moderate – usually 2nd or 3rd choice and lowest standard deviation

21. Career Pathways and Colleges Conclusions… • It makes sense that college names should relate to published descriptions of career paths to facilitate understanding of a college’s programs • Career pathways provided in question are verbatim from literature that is available to high school students AND it is federally driven by the US Department of Education

23. Individuals Who Attended College… • Group 1 • Individuals who did not select CASNR as their college choice • Group 2 • Individuals who did select CASNR as their college choice Note: Excludes college faculty

24. Frequencies, Means and Standard Deviations for Factors That Influenced All Surveyed Groups’ Consideration NOT to Select CASNR as Their College Choice (excluding faculty) Frequencies, Means and Standard Deviations for Factors That Influenced All Surveyed Groups’ Consideration When Selecting CASNR as Their College Choice (excluding faculty) Note. 1=No Influence to 5=Great Deal of Influence. Valid percentages only.

25. Identify Awareness of CASNR Program Offerings and Career Opportunities… • Conclusions… • Agriculture is a positive word for those considering CASNR and it had largely no influence on those not considering CASNR • Therefore, it seems removing agriculture from the name would be a disadvantage for enrollment • The single most important factor was the perception of CASNR having/not having a major

26. Determine Influence of CASNR Program Offerings and Career Opportunities… Frequencies for High School Respondents Experiences with CASNR (n=479) Note. Respondents were encouraged to check all descriptions that applied.

27. Qualitative Data Descriptions and Analysis… • Dr. Ronald Shope • Research Associate and Projects Coordinator in the Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Education Program (QQME) in Education Psychology • Expert in the use of the ATLAS software program used to analyzed qualitative data • Analyzed the open-ended responses for the questions within the surveys…which are available at the Blackboard site

28. Conclusions… • No strong justification for changing the name of the college • The name “College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources” communicates a positive perception for those considering our college and largely had no influence on those not considering our college

29. Conclusions… • There are more important factors than the word “agriculture” that influence consideration of CASNR • Being aware of majors • Seeing career opportunities • Most people do not know CASNR and what they do know is largely incorrect

30. Sub-Committee’s Recommendations… • At this point in time, continue to use and promote the current name of the college • Increase awareness and development of majors and options promoting the career opportunities within CASNR…especially in the metro areas of Nebraska

31. Sub-Committee’s Recommendations… • Offer majors and options that interest students and place CASNR representatives in high school classrooms • Use this study as a “baseline” • replicate every 3-5 years to determine if findings/results change

32. Results, Findings, and Data… • Can be found at the CASNR Organization Blackboard site at: • Go to • my.unl.edu • Look for CASNR Faculty • Site will be “active” at 4:30 PM today • There will be a discussion forum at the site for faculty to voice their thoughts, concerns, suggestions, ideas, etc.

33. Acknowledgements… • Steve Waller • Dean of CASNR • Susan Fritz • Associate Dean of CASNR • Food Processing Center • Joan Scheel, Brad Zumwalt, Mark Hutchison, and Edward O’Neill • Ronald Shope • Qualitative analysis of open-ended responses • Faculty Advisory Council within CASNR

34. In closing… A CASNR student stated… The College of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources is “An amazing atmosphere where students and faculty are able to interact in a smaller setting. Students being able to learn in a comfortable environment and with professionals who truly care about the work that they are doing.”