university of minnesota public perception and attitude survey 2010 february 16, 2011 – results
TRANSCRIPT
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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 20104
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!”
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
Summary of results – 2
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
Summary of results – 3
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.”
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
Overall perceptions of the University are favorable
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 20108
• 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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 20109
• 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.
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201011
• 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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201012
• 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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201013
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?
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
• 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?
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
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?
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
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 and Attitude Survey 201017
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?
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
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?
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
• 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]
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
• 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]
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
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?
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 2010
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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201024
• 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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201025
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
The University of Minnesota discovers cures and treatments for chronic illnesses and conditions
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
The University of Minnesota discovers cures and treatments for chronic illnesses and conditions
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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201026
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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201027
• 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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201028
• 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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201029
• 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
Public Perception and Attitude Survey 201030
• 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.