Overview of Findings

The goals and objectives of the Department of Institutional Research at Bemidji State University, as stated in the FY 2003 Annual Report, are comprehensive, ambitious and are typical of what would be expected at a small to medium sized four year public university. The department seems well managed, well organized and based on interviews I conducted with various constituent groups who are primary consumers of its services, largely effective.

The annual Data Book, published by the department, is widely circulated and is perceived to be a reliable and useful source for student profile and trend analysis. Nearly all the constituent groups I spoke with had studied the information in the Data Book and used it for reporting and planning purposes for their respective areas. The information contained in the Data Book is particularly important to many university constituents because of the difficulty department and program heads report in accessing their own data from the large, complex and somewhat cumbersome MnScu Integrated Student Record System. Many areas rely on Institutional Research as their primary source of information concerning the universities students and programs. This places a large responsibility on Institutional Research for accessing, supplying and reporting on a wide variety of student data. As long as a centralized system for accessing and reporting data exists at the university the Department of Institutional Research will remain an essential information resource.

Another primary function of the Office of Institutional Research at BSU is the completing of a wide variety of standardized compliance reports. Many employees of a university do not realize the time and effort required to complete such reports or the importance associated with their timely and accurate completion. In larger institutions full-time positions have been dedicated to such reporting functions. Many of  these reports are critical to successful functioning of the university and may determine its continued accreditation, receipt of federal financial aid funds, appropriate allocation of state funds or the accreditation and certification of the institutions academic programs. This work, typically occupying a third or more of the Institutional Researchers time, often goes unnoticed and unappreciated. The System Cost Study alone may occupy large portions of several weeks or even months of an Institutional Researcher’s time.

A third area of concern for the department is the timely completion of adhoc data requests on an as needed basis. Due to the inability of many departments to access their own data from the Integrated Student Record System, the Department of Institutional Research along with the Computer Services Department expends substantial time and resources in an attempt to meet these needs. This is not so much an indictment of the various academic and support departments across the university as it is an indictment of the complexity and size of the home grown MnScu database that attempts to serve some 36 very different types of institutions. The effort required to become proficient at accurate and timely data extraction from the current system can take months or even years of a full-time commitment on the part of the user. This is neither practical nor a wise use of the universities resources. The down side of a centralized approach lies in the fact that the ability for data extraction, manipulation and presentation lies in the hands of a very few individuals or departments. This means that when staff turnover or position changes occur in these departments a major disruption in the campuses ability to satisfy its information needs may also occur. Unfortunately, this situation is fairly typical of most of our MnScu institutions.

Another function of the IR office is to provide assessment data to various academic departments and programs. This is both in response to the Higher Learning Commission mandate for required program assessment as well as for university required program review purposes. Although the assessment of learning outcomes is the responsibility of the academic programs, all university assessment and the provision of much of the information used in departmental program reviews is supplied by Institutional Research. After studying the assessment and program review process I still have a difficult time connecting the all university assessment data with the program assessment requirements. The surveys the IR department coordinate or administer are interesting and informative but I am not sure how the information from these surveys is integrated into the assessment goals or work plan of the university. Several persons I interviewed commented on the presentation and discussion of the findings but many people were unsure how the findings were being used to improve the university. The persons I interviewed instead seemed to be more interested in the survey needs that arose from the program and department levels and the use of the IR director as a resource person to help them construct surveys for their own purposes and needs. Many persons were interested in seeking assistance in constructing their own surveys and implementing and analyzing survey data to meet the assessment, planning or marketing needs of their individual areas. Having an IR director who is expert in this area appears to be a valuable resource for the university.

Page 1     Page 2     Page 3     Page 4     Page 5     Page 6              

Home | Institutional Research | 5 Year Review | Databook