2010 HEDS Senior Survey Report

Prepared November 2010

by Mary Ann Weaver and Nyantara Wickramasekera

Introduction and Method

In this report, we describe various characteristics of our students as they are preparing to move beyond Earlham.  This research summarizes such aspects as the students' family backgrounds, the types of activities in which they participated while at Earlham and their satisfaction with their undergraduate experience.  In addition to this, the survey also looks at their future plans and priorities.  The survey attempts to make cross-sectional comparisons of many of these students’ self-reported attitudes, values, and perceptions with those of the seniors of prior years.

This survey instrument was designed by the Higher Education Data Sharing Consortium (HEDS).  We have included in this report comparative data from our peer institutions provided by HEDS.  (See Appendix  for a list of schools included in the peer group and the response rate for each school.) 

Click here for links to the tables contained in this report.

Characteristics of the Sample

One hundred and fourteen seniors (38%) completed the HEDS Senior Survey online. Of these seniors who responded, 39.5% were male and 60.5% were female.  A total of 76% of the fathers and 78.2% of the mothers of these students had at least a college degree and 50.1% of the mothers and 53.9% of the fathers had a graduate degree.  In this sample 8.8% of the mothers as well as 22.1% of the fathers had completed a doctorate degree.

Several questions were asked of these seniors about their activities during their time at Earlham.  Table 1 assesses some of the students' activities during college. The survey shows an increasing percentage of seniors participating in study abroad in 2010 compared to 2005. The percentage of seniors who applied for a grant or fellowship decreased significantly from 2002 and remains less than the peer schools.

Table 1

Percentages of Seniors Who Participated in Different Academic Activities

Activities During College

Earlham 2000

Earlham 2002

Earlham 2005

Earlham 2010 Peer Group 2010

Semester or Year Abroad

79%

70.3%

65%

80% 53%

Independent Study

64%

43.9%

51%

43% 57%

Off-Campus Internship

53%

42.5%

49%

40% 43%

Summer Paid Internship

29%

24.5%

31%

21% 34%

Apply for Grant or Fellowship

29%

17.5%

31%

18% 33%

Racial/Cultural Awareness Program

25%

14.6%

28%

8% 23%

Summer Travel Abroad

27%

27.8%

25%

27% 27%

Leadership Training

22%

21.2%

21%

19% 27%

Gender Studies Program

25%

15.1%

18%

12% 16%

Residence Hall Assistantship

24%

14.6%

14%

14% 14%

Sexual Harassment Program

18%

12.3%

11%

11% 5%

Honor Society

16%

10.8%

8%

11% 31%

 

The seniors were asked in which years during college did they actively participate in various activities.  Table 2 shows the percentage of students who actively participated for one year and the percentage who actively participated for more than one year.  The remaining columns show the percentage increase or decrease in participation from their first to fourth years in college. 

The activities in which the greatest percentage of students  participated for more than one year were intramural athletics, volunteer service and performing arts. It is understandable why the level of activity that increased the greatest from first to senior year was faculty research.  Participation in literary magazine also increased significantly from first year to senior year, while participation in religious groups decreased significantly. Unlike prior year seniors, the 2010 seniors increased their participation in volunteer services from the first year to fourth year.

Table 2

Percentages of Seniors Who Actively Participated in Each Activity

Activity

Participated for one year

Participated for more than one year

Percent Increase or Decrease from first to fourth year

Seniors in 2000

Percent Increase or Decrease from first to fourth year

Seniors in 2002

Percent Increase or Decrease from first to fourth year

Seniors in 2005

Percent Increase or Decrease from first to fourth year

Seniors in 2010

Faculty Research

18% 10%

+52

+62.5

+44.0

+67.8

Campus Media

4% 10%

+21

+27.2

+25

+18.7

Literary Magazine

11% 9%

+28

+6.3

+16.7

+56.5

Performing Arts

16% 38%

-16

+7

+4.5

+8.2

Intercollegiate Athletics

8% 23%

-17

-16.2

+2.3

-20.0

Intramural Athletics

7% 44%

+32

-1.3

+1.7

+3.5

Cultural Group

4% 10%

+7

+13.8

0

+18.7

Volunteer Service

15% 41%

-23

-5.8

-5.5

+7.9

Religious Group

13% 12%

-23

-5.9

-6.1

-44.9

Student Newspaper

7% 9%

+39

+6.2

-8.1

+11.1

Political Club

8% 8%

-40

-24.4

-9.5

-11.1

Social Action Group

10% 30%

-22

-2.9

-16.3

+15.6

Student Government

3% 14%

+18

+14.3

-41.6

+21.0

Table 3 illustrates the frequency of the following academic, cultural, and religious activities throughout the seniors' undergraduate career compared to our peer group.

Table 3

Frequency of Activities

                                               Activity

Earlham 2002 Mean Scores

Earlham 2005 Mean Scores

Earlham 2010 Mean Scores

Peer Group 2010 Mean Scores

Academic Discussions with Students

3.3

3.5

3.4 3.4

Class Presentations

3.2

3.3

3.0 2.9

Group Projects

3.0

3.2

2.8 2.7

Discussions with Students of Different Beliefs

3.0

3.0

3.0 2.9

Cultural Events

2.9

3.1

3.1 2.8

Guest in Faculty Member's Home

2.3

2.2

2.1 1.9

Multimedia Presentations

2.2

2.5

2.3 2.5

Religious Services

1.6

1.8

1.7 1.6

Organized Demonstrations

1.6

1.7

1.5 1.6

4=Very often, 3=Often, 2=Occasionally, 1=Never

Earlham seniors were more likely to attend a cultural event or be a guest in a faculty member's home than seniors at our peer institutions.

Table 4 shows some abilities and types of knowledge that may be developed in a bachelor's degree program.  The seniors indicated the extent to which each capacity was enhanced by their undergraduate experiences.

It appears that Earlham seniors feel their ability to relate to people of different races, nations, or religions has been enhanced somewhat more so than seniors from our peer institutions.  Most other abilities were enhanced to about the same degree as the peer group and previous Earlham seniors; however the enhancement of their ability to work under pressure, function independently, evaluate and choose alternatives, appreciate art, use a computer and use quantitative tools was rated somewhat below seniors from our peer institution. The 2010 Earlham seniors rated developing self-esteem higher than the Earlham seniors from prior years.


Table 4

Mean Scores of Enhancement of Abilities

Mean Scores of Enhancement of Abilities

Earlham 2000

Earlham 2002

Earlham 2005

Earlham 2010

Peer Group 2010

Gain In-depth Knowledge of a Subject

3.5

3.5

3.6

3.6

3.6

Acquire New Skills and Knowledge

3.5

3.5

3.5

3.6

3.6

Relate to people of Different Races,Nations, or Religions

3.1

3.2

3.5

3.3

3.0

Work Under Pressure

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.3

3.5

Write Effectively

3.4

3.4

3.4

3.5

3.4

Understand Myself

3.5

3.3

3.4

3.4 3.5

Function Independently

3.4

3.3

3.4

3.3 3.5

Think Analytically and Logically

3.4

3.3

3.4

3.5 3.6

Develop Awareness of Social Problems

3.4

3.2

3.4

3.4 3.3

Formulate Creative Ideas and Solutions

3.2

3.2

3.3

3.2 3.4

Understand Moral and Ethical Issues

3.3

3.2

3.3

3.1 3.1

Place Problems in Historical Perspective

3.3

3.2

3.3

3.3 3.3

Plan and Execute Projects

3.3

3.1

3.3

3.2 3.3

Establish Course of Action

3.2

3.1

3.3

3.2 3.3

Engage in Pursuit of Knowledge and Truth

3.3

3.1

3.3

3.3 3.3

Function Effectively as a Team Member

3.2

3.1

3.2

3.1 3.1

Communicate Well Orally

3.1

3.1

3.1

3.2 3.2

Develop Self-Esteem

3.1

2.9

3.0

3.2 3.2

Evaluate and Choose Alternatives

3.1

3.0

3.0

2.9 3.2

Lead and Supervise Groups

3.1

2.9

2.9

3.0 3.0

Appreciate Art

3.0

2.9

2.8

2.8 3.0

Use Computers

N/A

N/A

N/A

2.4 2.7

Understand Process of Science

2.8

2.7

2.7

2.6 2.6

Evaluate Role of Science and Technology in Society

2.8

2.7

2.6

2.7 2.6

Read or Speak Foreign Language

2.8

2.5

2.6

2.6 2.6

Use Quantitative Tools

2.5

2.5

2.5

2.4 2.6

Scale: 4=Greatly, 3=Moderately, 2=A Little, 1=Not at all

Table 5 refers to the quality of the seniors' academic experiences while they attended Earlham. As in 2005, the Earlham seniors were most satisfied with their interaction with faculty. First year advising was once again rated the lowest which was also true of the peer group seniors. Earlham students’ level of satisfaction is similar to that of our peer group in most areas with the exception of the quality of independent study, and availability of courses. 

Table 5

Mean Scores of Quality of Academic Experiences

Mean Scores of Quality of AcademicExperiences

Earlham 2005

Earlham 2010

Peer Group 2010

Student Interaction with Faculty

3.6

3.6

3.6

Faculty Availability Outside of Class

3.6

3.5

3.6

Internship or Study Off-Campus or Abroad

3.6

3.5

3.5

Major Advising

3.1

3.3

3.3

Independent Study

3.1

3.1

3.4

Tutorial Help or Other Academic Assistance

3.1

3.1

3.2

Availability of Courses

3.0

2.9

3.1

First Year Advising

2.8

2.8

2.8

Scale: 4=Very Satisfied, 3=Generally Satisfied, 2=Generally Dissatisfied, 1=Very Dissatisfied

Table 6 shows how the seniors rated the quality of course instruction during their undergraduate experience at Earlham. As in the past, the Earlham seniors rated science and arts higher than business. The same was true for the peer group.

Table 6

Mean Scores of Quality of Course Instruction

Mean Scores of Quality of Course Instruction

Earlham 2002

Earlham 2005
Earlham 2010

Peer Group 2010

Social Sciences

3.3

3.5

3.4

3.5

Humanities and Arts

3.1

3.4

3.4

3.5

Science and Math

3.1

3.3

3.4

3.2

Business

2.8

2.6

2.2

2.8

Engineering

2.7

2.7

2.8

2.9

Scale:  4=Very Satisfied, 3=Generally Satisfied, 2=Generally Dissatisfied, 1=Very Dissatisfied

Table 7 shows the seniors' mean score of their overall satisfaction with their undergraduate education at Earlham. The 2010 seniors reported greater overall satisfaction with their undergraduate education compared to prior years and compared to the peer group.

Table 7

Mean Scores of Overall Satisfaction with Undergraduate Experience

Mean Scores of Overall Satisfaction with Undergraduate Experience

Earlham 2000

Earlham 2002

Earlham 2005
Earlham 2010

Peer Group 2010

Overall Satisfaction

3.4

3.4

3.3
3.5

3.4

Scale: 4=Very Satisfied, 3=Generally Satisfied, 2=Generally Dissatisfied, 1=Very Dissatisfied

Table 8 demonstrates the seniors' satisfaction with the quality of campus services and facilities. The level of quality of the student center facilities, student center programs and library facilities and resources was rated slightly higher by the seniors in 2010 than the seniors in 2005. Earlham seniors rated student health services and recreation/athletics facilities somewhat higher than the peer group seniors, but rated computer services and support, career services and food services lower.

Table 8

Mean Scores of Quality of Campus Services and Facilities

Mean Scores of Quality of Campus Services and Facilities
Earlham 2000
Earlham 2002
Earlham 2005
Earlham 2010
Peer Group 2010
Recreation/Athletics Facilities
3.4
3.4
3.4
3.4 3.2
Library Services
3.6
3.4
3.3
3.4 3.4
Library Facilities and Resources
3.4
3.3
3.3
3.5 3.5
Classroom/Laboratory Facilities
3.0
3.0
3.3
3.3 3.4
Student Health Services
2.9
2.9
3.2
3.0 2.7
Registrar's Office
3.4
3.3
3.2
3.1 3.0
Computer Facilities and Resources
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.2 3.3
Recreation/Athletics Programs
3.1
3.1
3.2
3.1 3.2
Financial Aid Package
3.1
2.9
3.1
3.2 3.1
Financial Aid Office
3.2
2.9
3.1
3.0 3.0
Computer Services and Support
2.8
2.9
3.0
2.9 3.1
Student Financial Services
3.1
2.9
3.0
3.1 3.1
Career Services
3.0
2.9
2.9
2.7 3.0
Counseling Services
2.0
2.7
2.9
2.8 3.0
Student Housing
2.9
2.8
2.8
2.8 3.0
Student Center Programs
2.7
2.9 2.8
Student Center Facilities
2.5
2.7 2.8
Food Services
2.5
2.5 3.0

Scale: 4=Very Satisfied, 3=Generally Satisfied, 2=Generally Dissatisfied, 1=Very Dissatisfied

Seniors were asked to rate the quality of campus life.  Table 9 shows that the 2010 Earlham seniors were more satisfied with cultural and fine arts programming than the 2005 seniors, but less satisfied with student voice in policies that the 2005 seniors. Earlham seniors are much more satisfied with ethnic/racial diversity and the climate for minority students on campus than the seniors from the peer group. Earlham seniors are slightly less satisfied with campus safety compared to the peer group seniors.

Table 9

Mean Scores of Quality of Campus Life

Mean Scores of Quality of Campus Life

Earlham 2000

Earlham 2002

Earlham 2005
Earlham 2010

Peer Group 2010

Campus Safety

3.5

3.2

3.1
3.2
3.4

Lectures and Speakers

3.2

3.0

3.2
3.2 3.3

Sense of Community on Campus

3.2

3.0

3.2
3.1 3.0

Cultural and Fine Arts Programming

2.8

2.9

2.8
3.2 3.3

Social Life on Campus

3.0

2.9

2.8
3.0 3.1

Student Government

2.9

2.9

3.0
2.8 2.7

Religious/Spiritual Life

3.4

2.9

3.0
2.9 2.9

Student Voice in Policies

2.8

2.8

3.1
2.7 2.7

Ethnic/Racial Diversity

2.5

2.8

3.0
3.1 2.5

Climate for Minority Students on Campus

2.4

2.6

2.8
3.0 2.5

Scale: 4=Very Satisfied, 3=Generally Satisfied, 2=Generally Dissatisfied, 1=Very Dissatisfied

Table 10 shows a comparison of where Earlham seniors had lived during their four years at Earlham.  Their first year, the majority of the 2010 seniors (97.3%) lived in the residence halls, while only 0.9% lived with their parents or relatives.  As the seniors progressed through their college education, there was a significant decrease in the number that lived in the residence halls.  And as the numbers of those who lived in the residence halls decreased, the number of those who lived in an off-campus apartment increased.  By their senior year only 42.5% of seniors lived in the residence halls, and 11.5% lived in an off-campus apartment or room. This is a significant change from the 2005 seniors who reported 20.2% living in a residence hall their senior year and 2002 seniors who reported 34% living in a residence hall. These fluctuations may be related to the closing of residence halls for renovation.


Table 10

Residence while at Earlham

 

Percentages

First Year

Second Year

Third Year

Fourth Year

 
2002
2005
2010
2002
2005
2010
2002
2005
2010
2002
2005
2010

Residence Hall

97.4%

96.1%
97.3%

70.3%

79.5%
83.2%

46%

44.5%
50%

34.0%

20.2%
42.5%

With Parents or Relatives

.5%

2.3%
0.9%

.5%

2.4%
0.9%

1.1%

3.1%
1.8%

1.5%

2.3%
1.8%

Interest Housing or Other Campus Housing

.5%

0
0

27.2%

15.7%
13.3%

41.8%

39.8%
36.8%

34.5%

41.1%
43.4%

Off-campus Apartment or Room

1.5%

1.6%
1.8%

2.1%

2.4%
2.7%

9.0%

11.7%
11.4%

30.0%

35.7%
11.5%

   

Table 11 represents the careers that 2010 seniors desired when they first entered Earlham, the first job they plan to have after graduation, and the long term career goal that they have in mind. Over 20% have long term goals related to education and 18% expect their first job to be in the field of education. This includes college teaching/research/administration, general education, teaching administration, library, or information science. It is interesting to note that 23% of the 2010 seniors reported being undecided about their career when entering college compared to 8.8% of the 2005 seniors. Also, 11.5% of the 2010 senior respondents indicated they were undecided about their first job upon graduation and 17.1% were undecided about their long term career goal.

 

Table 11

Career Plans

Percentages of Career Plans Career Desired When Entered College First Job Upon Graduation Long Term Career Goal
Archeologist 0.9    
Architect, designer, or urban planner 1.8   2.7
Arts/Entertainment 3.5 6.4 3.6
Business Executive   1.3 0.9
Business Owner, Proprietor, Entrepreneur   1.3 2.7
Business sales person or buyer   2.6  
Clergy     1.8
Clinical Psychologist 5.3   1.8
College/University Administration   1.3  
College/University Teaching or Research 4.4 1.3 10.8
Computer Programmer/analyst 0.9    
Conservationist or Forester     2.7
Dentist (including Orthodontist)   1.3  
Education:teacher/administrator/counselor (primary/secondary) 6.2 16.7 9.9
Engineer 1.8   0.9
Event Coordinator   3.8 0.9
Farmer or Rancher 0.9 2.6 1.8
Finance  1.8    
Foreign Service, Diplomacy, International Relations 3.5 1.3 2.7
Government, Politics, Public Policy 0.9 1.3 0.9
Hospitality, Travel/Tourism   1.3  
Homemaker 0.9    
Law enforcement officer     0.9
Lab techmician or hygentist   1.3  
Lawyer (attorney) or judge 4.4   1.8
Librarian or information science 1.8 1.3 0.9
Museum curator/gallery worker 2.7 3.8 3.6
Music/Film industry 1.8    
Non-profit/Philanthropy 3.5 5.1  
Nurse 0.9 1.3 0.9
Physician 2.7   2.7
Scientific Researcher 8 6.4 4.5
Social activist/Community organizer 1.8    
Social welfare or recreation worker 4.4 3.8 3.6
Therapist 0.9   1.8
Veterinarian 0.9   0.9
Writer, journalist, or publisher 6.2 2.6 5.4
Other 4.4 20.5 11.7
Undecided 23 11.5 17.1

 

Table 12 takes a look at some of the important career considerations that the seniors reflected upon as they decided what career they wanted to pursue.  Many seniors had more intellectual rather than individualistic attitudes when it came to which career considerations were more important.  Topping the list of important considerations is interesting daily work intellectual challenge and creativity and initiative. Seeking a secure future social status or high income potential are less important to the Earlham seniors than to seniors from our peer group.

Table 12

Mean Socres of Important Career Considerations

Important Career Considerations

Earlham 2002

Earlham 2005
Earlham 2010

Peer Group 2010

Interesting Daily Work

3.3

3.3
3.3
3.4

Creativity and Initiative

3.3

3.3
3.1
3.2

Intellectual Challenge

3.2

3.2
3.2
3.2

Quality of Colleagues and Clients

3.2

3.2
3.0
3.1

Expression of Personal Values

3.2

3.2
3.0
3.0

Work for Social Change

2.9

2.9
2.9
2.8

Stable, Secure Future

2.8

2.9
2.8
3.1

Availability of Jobs

2.7

2.6
2.6
2.6

Leadership Potential

2.5

2.6
2.6
2.8

High Income Potential

2.1

2.2
2.0
2.4

Limited Working Hours

2.0

2.0
1.8
1.8

Social Recognition or Status

1.8

1.8
1.7
2.0

Scale: 4=Essential, 3=Very Important, 2=Somewhat Important, 1=Not Important

Students were asked about their plans for the fall after graduation. Table 13 indicates that 42.9% of the seniors were still searching for a position or waiting for an offer. Only 28.6% had accepted a position. 22% have not yet started job searching but plan to do so after graduation.

Table 13

Employment

  Frequency 2005 Percent 2005 Frequency 2010 Percent 2010
Accepted a position 13 9.9 18 28.6
Considering one or more specific offers 11 8.4 4 6.3
Currently searching for a position or waiting for an offer 38 29.0 27 42.9
Will begin searching for a position after graduation 27 20.6 14 22.2

Table 14 indicates that 13.6% of the seniors have been accepted into graduate school and will be attending in the fall of 2010.

Table 14

Graduate School

  Frequency 2005 Percent 2005 Frequency 2010 Percent 2010
Accepted and will be attending in the fall 20 15.3 15 13.6
Still awaiting responce     5 4.5
Will be applying this coming fall     19 17.3
Not applying this fall, but
might apply in the future
60 45.8 65 59.1
No plans to apply to
school now or in the future
    6 5.5

If these Earlham seniors had the chance to relive their college experience, would they choose to attend Earlham again? Table 15 shows that 73.7% of the Earlham respondents indicated they probably would or definitely would. While 10.5% of the Earlham seniors reported that they probably or definitely would not choose Earlham again, 8.4% of the peer group seniors said they probably or definitely would not choose the same institution again.

Table 15 

Choose same institution again?

Percentages of seniors who choose the same institution again?

Earlham 2005 Earlham 2010 Peer Group 2010
  % % %
Definitely not 2.3 3.5 0.5
Probably not 6.2 7.0 7.9
Maybe 17.8 15.8 16.6
Probably would 34.9 38.6 31.8
Definitely would 38.8 35.1 43.2

Also included on the survey were questions unique to Earlham. Table 16 shows that the mean score showing the extent to which Earlham reached particular goals. A number of these goals show lower ratings than previous years. The greatest difference is in a grasp of the habits of thought and skills to gather and evaluate information from many sources. Proficiency in a foreign language improved with the 2010 seniors compared to the 2005 seniors.

Table 16

The extent to which Earlham reached particular goals

Mean Scores of Goals

2002

2005

2010

Skills in reading, reflection, writing, and oral communication.

2.16

1.89

1.93

A grasp of the habits of thought and intellectual methods of different disciplines

2.26

2.17

2.02

An understanding of the scientific method and its application in laboratory settings.

2.65

2.69

2.52

The ability to interpret a work, idea, text, or culture from different perspectives.

2.20

1.87

1.79

Skills to gather and evaluate information from many sources, including print and electronic media.

2.10

1.98

1.75

Experience in engaging interdisciplinary and integrative inquiries.

2.31

2.03

1.98

Recognize that consistence, commitment, and depth are critical ingredients for developing a system of ethnics, and for any thoughtful engagement with life.

N/A

2.33

2.43

A sense of responsibility that comes with knowledge.

2.31

2.13

2.31

Proficiency in at least one non-native language.

2.96

2.58

2.79

A global awareness and solid knowledge of other cultures.

2.52

2.18

2.25

An understanding of the formal dynamics of works of art.

2.99

2.94

2.95

Personal creativity and confidence in one's ideas.

2.31

2.32

2.20

Skills in group and cooperative learning.

2.38

2.12

2.21

An awareness of one's self as a biological organism, a political and social being, a maker of art, and a reflective and thoughtful moral agent.

2.33

2.31

2.18

A desire and the skills to be lifelong learner.

2.10

1.75

1.79

Scale: 1= As much as possible, 2= Quite a bit, 3= Moderately, 4= Somewhat, 5= Not at all 

In an attempt to determine the extent to which Earlham has influenced these students, the survey asks the students how likely they are to do certain activities based on their Earlham experience. Some students commented that this question was difficult to answer. For example, while they may feel they definitely will vote in a local election in the future, they are not necessarily convinced that they will be voting “as a result of the Earlham influence”. The greatest difference occurred in voting in a local election and travel abroad.

Table 17

Based on your Earlham experience, how likely are you to do the following?

Mean Scores of Activity

2005

2002

2010

Vote in a local election

4.34

3.85

4.45
Keep up with new developments and events in science

3.6

3.59

3.81
Regularly attend cultural/artistic events

4.08

3.89

4.24
Actively work on personal spiritual growth

3.55

3.41

3.63
Travel abroad

4.39

4.07

4.58

Scale: 1= Definitely not, 2= Probably not, 3= Maybe, 4= Probably would, 5= Definitely would

The survey allows respondents to amplify on any of their responses on the questionnaire or on any aspect of their undergraduate experience. Several students indicated that the fine arts program needed additional resources and some students took the opportunity to praise the incredible faculty. In addition to offering us insights into our seniors' lives and a source of information about their perception of the quality of their undergraduate education, we also hope that completing this survey gives seniors an opportunity to reflect upon their life as an Earlham student as well as their future lives as Earlham alumni.

Appendix

Peer Group

School Response Rate %
Pitzer College  
Scripps College  
University of the South  
College of Wooster  
Earlham College  

 

Tables in the Senior 2005 Report

Table 1 Percentage of Seniors Who Participated in Different Academic Activities
Table 2 Percentage of Seniors who Actively Participated in Each Campus Activity
Table 3 Frequency of Participation in Campus Activities
Table 4 Enhancement of Abilities
Table 5 Quality of Academic Experiences
Table 6 Quality of Course Instruction
Table 7 Overall Satisfaction with Undergraduate Experience
Table 8 Quality of Campus Services and Facilities
Table 9 Quality of Campus Life
Table 10 Residence while at Earlham
Table 11 Careers desired, first job, long term career goals
Table 12 Important Career Considerations
Table 13 Employment
Table 14 Graduate School
Table 15 Choose Earlham Again?
Table 16 The extent to which Earlham reached particular goals
Table 17 Likelihood of participation in various activities in the future

 

Created by Mary Ann Weaver
weavema@earlham.edu
November 2010