Alumni Survey – EC Class of 1996 and the Peer Group Classes of 1996

Office of Institutional Research

Prepared by Mary Ann Weaver

 and George W. Ferriell, Jr.

February 5, 2007

 

The Class of 1996 was invited to complete the HEDS Alumni survey in the spring of 2006.  This report compares responses from Earlham’s Class of 1996 and the Classes of 1996 from some of our peer institutions.  Institutions represented in the 1996 Peer Group include Colorado College, Connecticut College, St. Olaf College, and University of the South.

 

The response rate for Earlham was 42% and the gender breakdown consisted of 68.8% female respondents.  For the Peer Group, the response rate ranged from 12.5% - 25.5% and 63.4% of the respondents were female.

 

Looking at the ethnicity breakdown, whites made up 91.3% of Earlham respondents while 95.4% of the respondents within the Peer Group identified themselves as being white.

 

For Earlham, 76.3% were married or living with a partner while 71.7% of the Peer Group indicated the same.  Along the same line, 36.3% of Earlham respondents indicated that they had 1 or 2 children and 5% had more than 2 children.  For the Peer Group, 37.8% stated that they had 1 or 2 children and 3.3% stated that they had more than 2 children.

 

Table 1 shows the undergraduate majors of the respondents.  Many of the respondents from Earlham and the Peer Group majored in Social Science, Humanities or Life Sciences.  Differences among the groups were most notable in the number of Arts and Music majors, Social Science majors, Humanities majors, and Life Sciences majors.

 

Table 1

Classification of Respondents’ Undergraduate Major

 

 

When surveyed 10 years after graduation, 20% of Earlham respondents indicated that their major was unrelated to their career.  This compares to 17.3% of the Peer Group that indicated that their major was unrelated to their career.  On the other hand, 45% of Earlham respondents revealed that their major was directly related to their career while 39.9% of the Peer Group indicated the same.

 

Table 2

Evaluation of Undergraduate Education

Extent enhanced by undergraduate experience

 

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

 

When evaluating the extent to which certain abilities or knowledge was enhanced by their undergraduate education, the Earlham respondents and the Peer Group had similar feelings.  However, when rating the extent to which their social/moral awareness was enhanced, Earlham respondents gave higher ratings than the Peer Group.  Additionally, Earlham respondents gave higher ratings for the extent to which their relationship skills were improved.

 

How important are these skills in their current activities?  Table 3 compares Earlham respondents and the Peer Group.  The importance of various abilities that were acquired at their undergraduate institution were similar for both groups.

 

Table 3

Importance in current activities

 

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

 

 

The participants were asked about their satisfaction with various services or aspects of their college.  Table 4 shows that with few exceptions the level of satisfaction is similar among Earlham respondents and the Peer Group.  A slight difference in satisfaction is seen within campus climate in student voice in policies and ethnic/racial diversity where Earlham respondents indicated greater satisfaction.

 

Table 4

Satisfaction with College Experiences

 

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

 

To what extent did their undergraduate experience fulfill their original expectations?  Table 5 shows all expectations at least moderately and often times greatly fulfilled for Earlham respondents and the Peer Group.

 

 

 

Table 5

Expectations

 

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

 

The mean score of their rating of overall satisfaction with their undergraduate education was 3.7 for Earlham respondents and the Peer Group (scale: 4=very satisfied, 1=very dissatisfied).  For Earlham respondents, 69.1% indicated they were very satisfied with their Earlham education while 68.5% of the Peer Group indicated they were very satisfied with their undergraduate education.

 

Would graduates encourage others to attend their chosen undergraduate institution? 

Among Earlham respondents, 76.5% revealed that they definitely would encourage others to attend Earlham.  None of the Earlham respondents indicated that they definitely would not encourage others to attend Earlham; however five respondents said they probably would not.  Along the same lines, 71.2% of the Peer Group respondents stated that they definitely would encourage others to attend their undergraduate institution.  On the other hand, 1% of the Peer Group revealed that they definitely would not encourage others to attend their undergraduate institution.

 

The alumni were asked to indicate their level of involvement in extracurricular activities while in college and then to evaluate the contribution of these various activities to their personal or professional life after graduation.   Table 6 shows the mean scores.

 

Earlham respondents were slightly more involved in most of the activities with the exception of student publications and intramural sports.  The difference was most apparent in their involvement in study abroad and on-campus employment.  Differences can also be seen in intramural sports, performing arts/music, work on faculty research, and political groups.

 

Table 6

Level of Involvement in Activities

 

Table 7 shows that, for the Earlham graduates, many of the following activities made a larger contribution to their personal or professional life after graduation compared to the Peer Group.  The Peer Group gave higher ratings for their student publications and religious groups.

 

Table 7

Contribution of Activities to Personal/Professional Development

 

Scale: 4=Extensive 3=Moderate 2=A Little 1=None

 

Table 8 shows to what extent these graduates felt their undergraduate experience prepared them for various post-graduation activities.  Earlham respondents felt slightly more prepared for their current career, interpersonal relationships, and social and civic involvement.  However, Earlham respondents and the Peer Group felt equally prepared for post-baccalaureate education.

 

Table 8

Level of Preparedness for post-graduation Activities

 

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

 

To determine the amount of involvement these graduates have had with their alma mater, they were asked how frequently they participated in various activities that were sponsored by their undergraduate institution.  Table 9 shows there was very little difference in the level of involvement among Earlham respondents and the Peer Group with the exception of visiting campus where graduates from the Peer Group were more likely to visit their undergraduate institution.

 

Table 9

Involvement with Alma Mater

 

Scale: 4=Frequently 3=Occasionally 2=Briefly 1=Never

 

Among Earlham respondents, 72.9% indicated that they strongly or very strongly identified with their Alma Mater while 68.9% of the Peer Group indicated the same.

 

Table 10 shows alumni involvement in organizations since graduation.  Earlham respondents are more involved in civic organizations, political organizations, recreational organizations and youth activities than the Peer Group.  However, Earlham respondents were less involved in religious organizations.

 

Table 10

Involvement in Organizations

 

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

 

Currently, among Earlham respondents, 74.4% are working full time, 14.1% are attending graduate school full time and 3.8% are attending graduate school part time.  Within the Peer Group, 70.9% are working full time, 13.6% are attending graduate school full time and 5.8% are attending graduate school part time.

 

For Earlham respondents, 11.1% of the respondents have received a doctoral degree while only 5.3% of the Peer Group indicated the same.  More Peer Group respondents indicated that they have received a master’s degree compared to Earlham respondents.  Table 11 further indicates the percentage of respondents who have received or are currently enrolled in a particular program.

 

Table 11

Degrees

 

 

Table 12 shows the current annual income of the respondents.  More respondents within the Peer Group indicated that their current annual income was more than $120,000 compared to the Earlham respondents.  All other annual income ranges were relatively similar.

 

Table 12

Current Annual Income

 

 

The data collected from the HEDS Alumni Survey of the Earlham Class of 1996 and the Peer Group has allowed Earlham to compare its academic structure with its peers.  Careful analysis of this information can allow Earlham College to assess individual academic areas and improve the overall educational experience.

 

Return to Earlham Home Page

Return to Office of Institutional Research

Created by Mary Ann Weaver
weavema@earlham.edu
May 7, 2007