Are We Giving Housing Residents What They Want or What They Need?

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

http://www.casacolumbia.org/

• 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?

http://www.massbay.edu/Current-Students/Dining-Etiquette.aspx

http://www.massbay.edu/Current-Students/Dining-Etiquette.aspx

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


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


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



Impact of Roommates on Interactions

Single Occupancy: Lowest Levels of


Multiple Occupancy: Highest Levels of Personal

Interactions


Are They Involved?

Upperclassmen

Sophomore

Freshman/First-Year

48%

44%

36%

35%

42%

49%

17%

14%

15%

Never or rarely SometimesOften or very often


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



Students who are not involved experience low

levels of Personal Interactions

Students who are very involved

experience high levels of Personal

Interactions


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


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


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


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

Documents

Are We Giving Housing Residents What They Want or What They Need?