Spring 2010
Instructor Survey on Uses of and Satisfaction with General University Classrooms
Compiled by Aneska Sanders
Academic Media Services

Response Rate:

• Response rate: 15.82%. Previous years response rate: 36.46%, 11% Third time administering online survey
• Sent out 1250 individualized e-mail invitations with individualized links and one group link for Vet Med
• Sent out “tickler” emails to non-respondents 1 week before end of survey timeframe
• 246 completed – no responses received from Vet Med
• Used email address list from Institutional Research to contact every user of a GUC (Vet Med emails unavailable – Cheryl Dhein distributed the group link to gather feedback from Vet Med faculty)
• Comprehensive results:
  • responses regarding all buildings with GUCs
  • responses regarding 126 rooms (all but 29 GUCs and includes 23 non-GUC spaces)
• Considerations for next year
  • Timing for delivery of the survey: Fall Semester had greater response rate.
  • Currently, responses are anonymous unless the respondent volunteers a name; consider non-anonymous surveys to allow feedback to individuals regarding their stated concerns
  • Change survey tool; Skylight is not user friendly for survey creation
  • Look for ways to improve the number of surveys delivered to user “trash” email folder

Use of technology and equipment in GUC:

• 71% “often” use AMS equipment – Up from 65% last year
• 7% provide and support their own equipment
• 36% were satisfied with the applications installed on the resident computers (47% had not opinion)
• Comments:
  • Many pleas to upgrade certain buildings (Sloan, Bryan, Clark, Fulmer, Avery and PEB were mentioned) to bring them in line with better-equipped rooms in other buildings
  • Make technology available in all classrooms – upgrade older rooms before doing “another” upgrade on some buildings
  • Pleased with resident computers, but want them in all rooms.
    • with CD/DVD, internet access, USB, remote mouse
    • with fully-enabled standard software (not view-only) to support teaching activities requiring document editing capability
  • Unhappy about having to bring their own audio/VGA cables when using their own laptop
  • Many requests for instructors to have the ability to turn wireless internet off – remove the distraction from students
  • Other equipment requests: improved wireless microphones and wireless mouse for resident computers
  • Many complaints about projectors, particularly problems with inadequate contrast and image size. Quite a few complaints were regarding CUE classrooms
  • Pleased with addition of document cameras, but some interest in higher quality
  • Multiple requests for old “Dukane” push button panels to be upgraded to touchscreens

Classroom set-up and logistics:

• Faculty surveyed prefer moveable seating (67%); generally prefer tables (59%) to tablet arms (35%); prefer rows of tables (36%) to individual seating (33%) and small group clusters (26%)
• 80% find the electronic equipment to be user or somewhat user friendly (up from 79% last year)
• 81% felt that they could easily or somewhat easily access the equipment (up from 78% last year)
• 74% were satisfied or somewhat satisfied with the equipment arrangement (down from 76% last year)
• 79% were satisfied or somewhat satisfied with cleanliness of the classroom (down from 81% last year)
• Document cameras are used more for showing printed materials than for writing or drawing, and are hardly ever used for showing 35 mm. slides with back lighting
• Areas of dissatisfaction:
  • Projector screens block the whiteboard so both can’t be used in the same class session; could be addressed by adding additional whiteboards to the rooms
  • Desire to wrote on white board and use video projector at the same time
  • Better light controls
  • Some complaints about touch screen and podium blocking student’s view
  • Several complaints about missing clocks, cramped seating and lack of ability to move amongst students
  • Great desire for all rooms to be the same

Support and Training:

• 71% were satisfied or somewhat satisfied with general support from AMS (25% no opinion)
• 55% were satisfied or somewhat satisfied with telephone support from AMS (42% no opinion)
• 46% were satisfied or somewhat satisfied with technician response time and efficiency (47% no opinion)
• 85% felt the technology was adequately maintained (6% no opinion)
• 35% of respondents attended a training session offered by AMS
• Many suggested training be more hands-on, interactive, not presentation

Interest in New Technologies:

• Interest in:
  • resident computer with internet access (74% very or somewhat interested; 8% no opinion)
  • electronic whiteboard (65% very or somewhat interested; 11% no opinion)
  • streamed media (64% very or somewhat interested; 9% no opinion)
  • media on demand (61% very or somewhat interested; 13% no opinion)
  • ability to record student speeches/presentations
  • ability to show multiple images
• No clear enthusiasm for: student response system (clickers), lecture capture, high definition image capability
• Disinclined to use:
  • videoconference capability (39% unlikely or very unlikely to use; 34% very or somewhat likely)
  • Podcasting (47% unlikely or very unlikely to use; 30% very or somewhat unlikely)

 

 

Contact Aneska Sanders at 335-5940 or aneska@wsu.edu if you would like a complete copy of the survey and results.