University of Minnesota Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010 February 16, 2011 – Results

University of Minnesota Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010

February 16, 2011 – Results

Objectives

2

• To measure “top of mind” attitudes and opinions regarding the University

among the general public and opinion leaders in Minnesota.

• To examine the quality of relationships between the University and external

stakeholder groups, particularly regarding the economic impact of the

University.

• To gather feedback on how to improve these relationships.

• To compare 2010 results with findings over the past several years.

Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010

Method

3

• Survey was conducted during the first two weeks of December 2010.

• Respondents did not work for the University of Minnesota, the state of Minnesota

or a public relations, advertising or research company. Respondents were 25

years or older to avoid having current students in the sample; average age was

49.

• Total general public sample was 1,054. Sample selection was updated this year

to include an online as well as phone sample, and both were stratified by age

and gender to match state population.

- N = 653 online throughout Minnesota: to improve representation of population without landline phones, particularly in younger age and minority groups

- N = 401 throughout Minnesota: by phone, randomly selected

- N = 214 opinion leaders: drawn from samples above (online: N=138; phone: N=76; about 20% from each group) – college graduates who vote and read local and state news regularly

• Margin of error for general public sample was ± 4 percent.Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010

Results


Summary of results – 1

5

• Overall perceptions of the University are favorable and stable. Results over

time indicate the public continues to have long-term positive perceptions of

the University. Favorable perceptions are similar among Twin Cities’ metro and

outstate Minnesota residents.

• Reasons for positive attitudes focus on the University’s reputation for (1)

educational excellence; (2) strong medical and research programs; and (3) the

combined benefit of education and research excellence for Minnesota’s

economy.

- A majority of Minnesotans believe the University is a major contributor to Minnesota’s economy.

- “The University of Minnesota is … a contributing factor to innovation in numerous industries.”

• Most Minnesotans believe the University should not receive less funding from

the state. However, they think the University could spend less and maintain a

high quality of education.

- More people than last year (but not a majority of respondents) support an increased share of tuition, rather than taxes, to pay for a University education.

- “Be fiscally responsible with taxpayers dollars!”



6

• Most important University goal to respondents: Providing a high-quality

education.

• Respondents also believe the University should produce highly-skilled and

educated employees, and they think the University is doing a good job of this.

• Opinion of the University’s economic impact showed no changes from last year

on both its importance to the public and the University’s performance.

Economic impact measures include creation of jobs and businesses, providing

skilled and educated employees, being a good manager of financial resources

and conducting research that improves quality of life.

• Since the Driven to Discover campaign resumed in fall 2010, awareness has

increased significantly for messages about “solutions for societal problems”

and “boosting the state’s economy.” Respondents are most aware of messages

about “discovering cures and treatments” and “providing an outstanding

education.”Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010


7

• This year’s survey shows the strongest point of connection for the general

public is with the University’s health and medical system rather than sporting

events.

- About one-third of the public receives care for themselves or their family from a University facility, while slightly less (29 percent) attend sporting events at the University.

• Many respondents said the University could connect with them better through

more publicity and advertising. They suggested greater communication about

events and campus news, rather than sports.

- “We see too much about athletics … How about publicizing the research heroes and the scholar heroes?”

- “Have more coverage of science and health care discoveries.”

- “Let the public be aware of what they’re doing.”


Overall perceptions of the University are favorable


• Nearly two thirds of the general

public and three quarters of

opinion leaders hold the

University in high esteem.

• Opinion leaders’ positive

perceptions are more intense

than those of the general public –

that is, there are fewer neutral

responses among opinion

leaders. Q1: First, we have some general questions about the University of Minnesota. How would you rate your overall feelings toward the University of Minnesota? [1 =very unfavorable; 5 =very favorable]

Very unfavorable

2

3

4

Very favorable

1.7%

5.0%

32.1%

39.4%

21.8%

Very unfavorable

2

3

4

Very favorable

0.9%

4.2%

25.4%

43.2%

26.3%

General Public – Overall feelings

Opinion Leaders – Overall feelings

Mean = 3.75

Mean = 3.90

Public holds long-term positive perceptions of the University


• On average, the public’s rating of the University is similar to last year, and

results over time indicate the public has long-term positive perceptions of

the University. Differences between 2009 and 2010 are not statistically

significant for general public or opinion leaders.

Q1: How would you rate your overall feelings toward the University of Minnesota? [1=very unfavorable; 5=very favorable]

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

20.0%

25.0%

23.0%

22.0%

34.0%

21.8%

36.0%

31.0%

33.0%

34.0%

27.0%

39.4%

38.0%

36.0%

36.0%

32.0%

29.7%

32.1%

5 4 3 2 1

General Public – Overall feelings (six-year trend)

Mean = 3.83

Mean = 3.54

Mean = 3.8

Mean = 3.8

Mean = 3.7 2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

23.0%

26.0%

34.0%

23.0%

34.0%

26.3%

38.0%

38.0%

37.0%

49.0%

39.8%

43.2%

34.0%

29.0%

25.0%

21.0%

20.9%

25.4%

5 4 3 2 1

Mean = 4.02

Mean = 3.85

Mean = 4.0

Mean = 3.9

Mean = 3.8

Opinion Leaders– Overall feelings (six-year trend)

Mean = 3.75 Mean = 3.90

Reasons for positive and negative perceptions are consistent with previous years’ research

10

• Reasons for positive attitudes focus on the University’s reputation for:

- Educational excellence;

- Strong medical and research programs; and

- The combined benefit of educational and research excellence for Minnesota’s economy.

> “They are an excellent school; they support the state and community. The people I know who went through there have gotten an excellent education.”

> “The University of Minnesota is an important research institution in the state and a contributing factor to innovation in numerous industries throughout the country.”

• Reasons for negative perceptions center mainly on the cost of tuition and the

management of the University’s financial resources, which are consistent

themes over time, as shown on the upcoming slides on economic impact.


Q1A: What are the main reasons you feel favorably toward the University of Minnesota? [Only respondents who reported 4 or 5 to Q1] Q1B: What are the main reasons you feel unfavorably toward the University of Minnesota? [Only respondents who reported 1 or 2 to Q1]

Opinion leaders feel greater connection than the general public


• Similar to 2009, opinion

leaders, more than the

general public, feel connected

to the University.

• While the majority of the

general public (52 percent) do

not feel a connection, this

number is less than last year

when 64 percent did not feel a

connection.

• Only 38 percent of opinion

leaders reported they do not

feel a connection.Q12: How connected you feel to the University of Minnesota? [1 =unconnected; 5 =connected]

General Public – Feeling of connection

Opinion Leaders – Feeling of connection

Mean = 2.41

Mean = 2.74

Not connected

2

3

4

Connected

28.3%

23.4%

32.3%

11.3%

4.7%

Not connected

2

3

4

Connected

16.6%

21.8%

39.3%

15.6%

6.6%

Positive opinion relates to connection to University


• People who feel strongly connected to the University have more favorable

feelings toward the University.

• This is true for both the general public and opinion leaders. Pearson’s

correlation between favorable feelings toward the University (Q1) and

feelings of connection (Q12) were statistically significant for both the general

public (r=.39) and opinion leaders (r=.36).

• This year, feeling connected significantly increased for the general public:

Their average score is higher in 2010 (mean = 2.41), than in 2009 (mean =

2.15, p<.001).

- However, opinion leaders’ connection scores showed no difference between 2010 (mean = 2.74) and 2009 (mean = 2.73).

Q1: How would you rate your overall feelings toward the University of Minnesota? [1=very unfavorable; 5=very favorable]Q12: How connected you feel to the University of Minnesota? [1 =unconnected; 5 =connected]

Positive opinion relates to connection to University


Q11: Now we have a few questions about your relationship with the University of Minnesota. Do you…? [yes or no]

• Health care and sporting events create the strongest connections for both the general

public and opinion leaders.

• Across all ways to connect, opinion leaders are more likely to participate than the

general public.

• Additional strong connections for opinion leaders include their University degree and

attendance at cultural events. Ways of connection 2010 2009 2010 2009

Self or family member received health care at a University facility*

33% --- 34% ---

Attend sporting events at the University 29% 28% 39% 49%

Attend arts and cultural events at the U 17% 15% 25% 34%

Have a degree from the University 13% 23% 27% 27%

Have a child who is a current or former student at the University

12% 17% 18% 23%

Take classes or workshops 10% 9% 14% 14%

Make charitable contributions to the University 8% 12% 11% 26%

Work with the University on a professional basis 6% 8% 8% 11%

General public Opinion leaders

* New question added to the survey in 2010.

Connecting to the University

14

Q13: What could the University of Minnesota do to connect with you better?


• Most respondents suggested the University do more to advertise, publicize

and communicate as a means to connect better with people. Remarks

included:

- “Talk about all the things mentioned in this survey more frequently. We see too much about athletics, which is nice. How about publicizing the research heroes and the scholar heroes? I know that's not as exciting as another season of mediocrity for the football team, but much more positive and uplifting.”

• Other common responses include lowering costs and providing greater

access and outreach. Remarks included:

- “Be fiscally responsible with taxpayers dollars!”

- “They probably would have to reach out within the communities. Having classes all around or workshops in Community Ed in different parts of the state. To have more accessible classes in different areas of the state.”

Public perception of economic impact: Taxes or tuition

15

Q5: Education at the University of Minnesota is mostly paid by two sources: state taxes and student tuition. What do you think the balance between these two sources should be?


Source of funding 2009 2010

About even tuition and taxes*

61% 54%

Mostly with student tuition*

26% 34%

Mostly with state taxes 14% 13%

• Over half of all respondents

(54%) believe a University

education should be financed

with an equal share of state

taxes and student tuition.

• Another third of respondents

(34%) think a University

education should be financed

primarily with tuition.

- This percentage is significantly greater than last year: In 2009, a quarter of respondents said primarily tuition.

Source of funding 2009 2010

About even tuition and taxes

60% 50%

Mostly with student tuition

26% 33%

Mostly with state taxes 15% 17%

General public

Opinion leaders

* Significant differences found for general public responses between 2010 and 2009 (Chi-square=9.79; p<.01).

Public perception of economic impact: Spending cuts and quality

16

Q7: Which comes closer to your own view?


Minnesotans’ opinion on spending

General

public

Opinion

leaders

If the University of Minnesota cuts budgets, the quality of education will suffer

36% 40%

The University of Minnesota could spend less and still maintain a high quality of education

64% 60%

• Most Minnesotans (64%) say

the University could spend

less and still maintain its

high quality of education.

- This shows a concern for fiscal responsibility.

• This opinion is consistent

with national public attitudes

toward college spending

overall.

National opinion on college spending*

U.S. general public

If colleges cut budgets, the quality of education will suffer

43%

Colleges could spend less and still maintain a high quality of education

57%

* 2009 national sample data from Public Agenda for The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, report published February 2010

Public perception of economic impact: Verbatim comments

The following verbatim comments are a sampling that show a concern with fiscal responsibility:

- “Make efficient use of the tax dollars they receive – athletics is taking too much of a priority.”

- “Stop taking my tax dollars.”

- “Convince me that the tuition that is being paid by current and future students is competitive with neighboring states. Convince me that educating its residents is its primary mission.”

- “I have three kids that will be going to college, and if I have to pay higher taxes plus tuition, that's going to make a hardship on my finances.”

- “The cost to go is way too high, and wages paid to top employees is much, much too high.”

- “They need to be very fiscally responsible with the money that they get.”

- “The tuition for in-state students has gotten as high as private colleges.”

- “I am very disappointed; they spend too much money towards their sports.”

- “Your new president makes $600,000 or so now, really? Is that truly necessary?”


Public perception of economic impact: Current state funding

18

Q6: Right now the University of Minnesota receives 22 percent of its funding from the state. Would you say that’s too much, not enough or just the right amount of funding from the state?


Current state funding at 22% of University budget

2009 2010

Not enough 50% 50%

The right amount 39% 39%

Too much 10% 11%

• Respondents were told the

University receives 22 percent of

its funding from the state.

- About 90 percent said the University should not receive less funding from the state.

- Exactly 50 percent believe this amount of state funding is not enough. This opinion has remained stable over the past couple years. Current state

funding at 22% of University budget

2009 2010

Not enough 57% 57%

The right amount 35% 34%

Too much 8% 10%

General public

Opinion leaders

No significant differences found between 2010 and 2009.

~ 90%

Public perception of economic impact: Current state funding

19

Q6: Right now the University of Minnesota receives 22 percent of its funding from the state. Would you say that’s too much, not enough or just the right amount of funding from the state?


• Respondents stating the University does not receive enough state funding

were not outstanding on any particular characteristic. We examined this

group with regard to the following and found their responses comparable to

the rest of the sample:

- College education

- Relationship to the University: degree, child student, donor, attending sports, collaborating on a professional basis, attending cultural events, taking classes, receiving health care

- Feeling a strong connection

- Children within any particular age category

Public perception of economic impact: Contribution to state economy

20

Q4: How much do you agree or disagree with the following statement: The University of Minnesota is a major contributor to Minnesota’s economy. [1=strong disagree; 5=strongly agree]


• The majority of respondents

(56% of the general public and

63% of opinion leaders) agree

the University is a major

contributor to Minnesota’s

economy. Strongly disagree

2

3

4

Strongly agree

1.9%

6.8%

35.4%

33.8%

22.1%

Strongly disagree

2

3

4

Strongly agree

0.5%

7.2%

29.3%

38.5%

24.5%

Mean=3.67

Mean=3.79

General public

Opinion leaders

Public perception of economic impact: Importance vs. performance

21

*Cronbach’s alpha is .83 for the importance index and .88 for the performance index, indicating a high degree of internal consistency among items.

Q2: How important do you feel each of the following goals should be for the University of Minnesota? [1=not at all important; 5=very important]

Q3: How well does each item actually describe the University of Minnesota? [1=does not describe at all; 5=describes completely]Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010

• Opinion regarding economic impact was also measured with an index – or

compilation of questions – and results are shown on the next slide. The

index* is based on these items:

- Creating jobs and businesses in the state

- Creating highly skilled and educated employees

- Being a good manager of University of Minnesota financial resources

- Conducting research that improves Minnesotans’ quality of life

- Discovering cures for chronic diseases, such as diabetes, heart disease and multiple sclerosis

- Providing health services to Minnesotans such as medical and dental clinics, hospital care and veterinary services

Public perception of economic impact: Importance versus performance

22

Q2: How important do you feel each of the following goals should be for the University of Minnesota? [1=not at all important; 5=very important]

Q3: How well does each item actually describe the University of Minnesota? [1=does not describe at all; 5=describes completely]


Economic impact 2009 2010

Importance index 4.28 4.29

Performance index* 3.70 3.69

• All respondents agree: it is

important for the University to

provide economic benefit

(items shown on previous

slide). They rated the index

above four on the five-point

scale.

- This has remained the same since last year.

• In addition, the perceptions of

the University’s performance

on economic impact have

remained the same.

General public

Economic impact 2009 2010

Importance index 4.28 4.25

Performance index* 3.73 3.69

Opinion leaders

No significant differences found for general public or opinion leader responses between 2010 and 2009.

Driven to Discover messages

23

Q8: Have you heard or seen anything recently about the fact that _____?Q9: Have you heard or seen anything recently about this work?


Percent who said “yes” 2010 2009 2010 2009

The University of Minnesota discovers cures and treatments for chronic illnesses and conditions

46% 45% 49% 56%

The University of Minnesota discovers innovative solutions to problems in society such as poverty and hunger

22% 14% 26% 17%

The University of Minnesota, through its education and research, helps to boost the state’s economy

38% 19% 45% 26%

The University of Minnesota provides a unique and outstanding education

47% 49% 51% 62%

The University of Minnesota is working with countries around the world to help them respond to new diseases that begin in animals and spread to people, such as the West Nile virus and avian flu.

23% 25% 30% 36%

• Respondents are most aware of messages about “discovering cures and

treatments” and “providing an outstanding education.”

• Message awareness increased significantly since last year for “solutions for

societal problems,” and “boosting the state’s economy.” Significant

increases are circled. General pubic Opinion leaders

Effects of Driven to Discover campaign


• This year, opinion of performance on “world-class medical school” and

“cures for diseases” significantly increased. Over time, awareness related

to Driven to Discover rose in 2007, peaked in 2008, declined in 2009 and

moved back up in 2010, despite a drop in opinion leaders’ message

awareness for “cures for diseases.”Message awareness and performance 2005 to 2010

Cam

paig

n

beg

ins

Perc

en

t sa

yin

g 4

an

d

5

Cam

paig

n e

nd

s

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20100%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100% Overall perception of the University(Opinion leaders)Performance: High quality education(All respondents)Performance: World-class medical school (All respondents)Message awareness: Cures for diseases (Opinion leaders)Performance: Cures for diseases (All respondents)

**

Cam

paig

n

beg

ins

* Increase in performance from 2009 to 2010 is significant for world class medical school (Chi-square=4.62; p<.05) and nearly significant for cures for diseases (Chi-square=3.55; p=.06)

**

Driven to Discover message saturation: Four-year trend analysis


Q8: Have you heard or seen anything recently about the fact that _____?

• Awareness of messages about solutions for poverty and hunger has

significantly increased since last year.

• Awareness regarding medical research has declined, particularly for opinion

leaders, since 2008.

General public

Percentage having recently heard or seen marketing messagesOpinion leaders

The University of Minnesota discovers innovative solutions to society’s issues such as poverty and hunger


16%

56%

14%

45%

22%

46%

48% 2010

2009

2008

2007*

The University of Minnesota discovers innovative solutions to society’s issues such as poverty and hunger


28%

65%

17%

56%

26%

49%

61% 2010

2009

2008

2007** **

** Increase from 2009 to 2010 significant for general public (Chi-square=11.08; p<.001) and opinion leaders (Chi-square=6.81; p<.05)

The University of Minnesota logo


Q13A: When you see this logo, which of the following do you associate with it?

• Most respondents (two-

thirds) associate the

University’s logo with the

entire state system.

• The majority of those

who associate the logo

with a particular campus

chose the Twin Cities. Of

those who selected the

Twin Cities, most were

metro residents.

Which do you associate with the logo?

Online sample (N=602)

The entire University of Minnesota system throughout the state

65%

A particular campus of the University of Minnesota, such as Crookston, Duluth, Morris, Rochester or the Twin Cities

35%

Those who selected the particular campus option

Online sample (N=208)

Crookston 3%

Duluth 6%

Morris 3%

Rochester 4%

Twin Cities (metro N=118; non-metro N=56)

84%

Familiarity with UROC has increased since 2008


• More North Minneapolis residents are becoming increasingly aware of the

University Northside Partnership program. Many who know about it (49

percent) stated positive attitudes toward both its impact on the

community and on them personally.

Q10A: How familiar are you with the University Northside Partnership or UROC? Q10B: How would you describe the impact of the University Northside Partnership or UROC on the North Minneapolis community? [1=very negative; 5=very positive]Q10C: How would you describe the impact of the University Northside Partnership or UROC on you personally? [1=very negative; 5=very positive]

North Minneapolis – Percentage familiar with UROC

2008

2009

2010

7%

12%

15%

15%

33%

34%

77%

55%

51%

Very familiar

Somewhat familiar

Not at all familiar

No significant differences found on responses between 2010 and 2009.

School of Public Health questions


• Nearly one-third of the

general public in Minnesota

take aspirin on a regular basis.

• Of those who take aspirin

regularly, the majority (81%)

do so to avoid heart attack or

stroke.

QE: Are you taking aspirin on a regular basis? [yes or no]QF: For what purpose are you taking aspirin? [online format=two choice options above with Check all that apply; phone format=open end categorized into one of above two choice options]

General public N=999

Those taking aspirin on a regular basis 31%

General public – those regularly taking aspirin

N=306

Those taking aspirin to avoid heart attack or stroke 81%

Those taking aspirin for other reason(s) 19%

Metro and Outstate: Perceptions of University are similarly favorable


• Of 1,041 respondents, 60 percent

are Twin Cities metro residents,

and 40 percent are from outstate

Minnesota.

• The majority of both metro area

and outstate respondents hold

the University in high esteem.

• No significant difference was

found between the mean

responses for these two groups.

Q1: First, we have some general questions about the University of Minnesota. How would you rate your overall feelings toward the University of Minnesota? [1 =very unfavorable; 5 =very favorable]

Very unfavorable

2

3

4

Very favorable

2.0%

5.0%

31.0%

40.9%

21.0%

Very unfavorable

2

3

4

Very favorable

1.0%

4.9%

33.8%

37.3%

23.0%

Metro – Overall feelings

Outstate – Overall feelings

Mean = 3.74

Mean = 3.76

Note: Metro respondents were segmented by Zip codes in 11 counties: Anoka, Carver, Chisago, Dakota, Hennepin, Isanti, Ramsey, Scott, Sherburne, Washington and Wright (N=616 metro; N=425 outstate). Percentage aligns with actual state population.

Metro and Outstate: Metro residents have greater connection


• Metro respondents (20%) feel

more connected to the University

than outstate respondents (11%).

• The majority of outstate

respondents (57%) do not feel a

connection, whereas 48 percent

of metro area respondents do not

feel a connection.

• Metro area respondents feel a

significantly stronger connection

than outstate respondents

(p<001).Q12: How connected you feel to the University of Minnesota? [1 =unconnected; 5 =connected]

Metro – Feeling of connection

Outstate – Feeling of connection

Mean = 2.53

Mean = 2.25

Not connected

2

3

4

Connected

25.1%

22.4%

32.5%

14.6%

5.4%

Not connected

2

3

4

Connected

32.4%

24.8%

32.2%

6.9%

3.7%

Summary – 1

31 Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010

• Overall perceptions of the University continue to be favorable, and are

similar among Twin Cities’ metro and outstate Minnesota residents.

• The public is primarily concerned with prudent use of University financial

resources and tax dollars.

- Many believe the University could spend less and still maintain its quality of education; this opinion is consistent with national public attitudes toward college spending overall.

- Most Minnesotans do not want the University to receive less funding from the state. However, when asked how a University education should be financed, an increasing number (but not a majority) believe it should come from tuition rather than taxes.

• This year’s survey shows the University’s health and medical system

provides a stronger point of connection for the general public than do

University sporting events.

Summary – 2

32 Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010

• Driven to Discover awareness has significantly increased for messages

about “solutions for societal problems” and “boosting the state’s

economy.” Minnesotans are most aware of messages about “discovering

cures and treatments” and “providing an outstanding education.”

• The public believes the University is a major contributor to Minnesota’s

economy, and opinion of the University’s economic impact remains stable

from last year in these areas: job and business creation, skilled and

educated employees, good management of financial resources, and

research that improves quality of life.

• Many respondents said the University could better connect with them

through more publicity and advertising. They suggested greater

communication about events and campus news, rather than sports.

Documents

University of Minnesota Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010 February 16, 2011 – Results