ISU's Alumni Survey:
Unique and Valuable Information

By Norma J. Stumbo, Ph.D., CTRS

University curricula and faculty are evaluated in a number of ways. At Illinois State, the university conducts an intensive internal audit from the Provost's office every four years. Since the program is accredited, it is reviewed by the NRPA/AALR Council on Accreditation every five years. An Advisory Council has been re-initiated and will evaluate our program twice yearly. As faculty members, we are not only evaluated by students at the end of every course, these evaluations plus other materials are considered by a departmental committee in our annual merit reviews.

Another type of evaluation conducted is a survey of recent alumni. Unique information can be obtained from these surveys, such as past and current employment status, salaries, job satisfaction and future plans, as well as the assessment of the alumni's perceptions of the strengths, weaknesses and needed improvements in the RPA Program. This type of information cannot be gained from any other source and provides an important perspective on the calibre of the program.

The intent of this article is to describe the results of a recent alumni survey conducted by the Recreation and Park Administration Program at Illinois State University in the Fall of 1992. Alumni who graduated during the five-year period from 1988 to 1992 were selected as the target sample.

Of the 293 surveys mailed in late October through December, ninety-five (32.4%) were returned. The low return rate was attributed to the timing of the survey, the lack of accurate or complete addresses held at the ISU Alumni Office and the general drawbacks of a mailed survey. All percentages are rounded and may equal more than 100 percent when totaled.

Who Responded. Respondents represented all five years of the targeted group, with sixty-seven or 7l% being from 1990 to 1992. All three sequences and the comprehensive major were represented. Thirty-five (37%) graduated from the Program Management sequence, thirty (32%) from the Commercial Recreation sequence, twenty (21%) from the Therapeutic Recreation sequence and nine (9%) from the Comprehensive Major. The majority of the respondents (forty-four or 46%) graduated following a Summer semester, thirty-four (36%) graduated at the end of a Spring semester and seventeen (18%) graduated at the end of a Fall semester.

Seeking Employment in Recreation and Leisure. Of the ninety-five respondents, seventy-one (75%) stated they had actively sought employment in recreation and leisure positions immediately following graduation. Twenty-four (25%) did not actively seek leisure and recreation positions. Almost three quarters of the sixty-eight respondents who actively searched for a position and responded (forty-nine or 70%) found a position in recreation and leisure within three months of graduation. The average elapsed time was 3.34 months, with eighteen not yet having found full-time employment at the time of the survey. Those graduating from the therapeutic recreation and program management sequences were the quickest to find jobs in the field. Twenty-seven individuals did not respond to this question.

First Full-Time Position. Respondents were asked how related their first full-time position was to the recreation and leisure field. A three-point Likert scale from "Highly Related" (1) to "Not At All Related" (3) was used for this question. Fifty (53%) of all alumni considered their first position to be highly related, eleven (12%) considered it to be somewhat related and twenty (21%) felt their position was not at all related to recreation and leisure. The mean of the responses was 1.63 indicating that the average response was between highly and somewhat related. Thirteen (14%) had not held a full-time position at the time of the survey, and one chose not to answer the question. The majority (65%) of all alumni felt their first full-time position was related to the field. Regardless of graduating sequence, those who were currently employed in the field typically felt their first full-time position was more related to recreation and parks, thus possibly indicating that when the graduate's first position is in the field, s/he stays in the field.

First Job Titles. Respondents were also asked to list the job title and agency name of their first position. Eighty-nine individuals responded to this question. Of these individuals, eighteen worked in park districts or departments, thirteen worked in resort/hotel/travel positions, eleven worked in clinical therapeutic recreation, and five each worked in community-based therapeutic recreation and YM/WCAs. The remaining recreation positions included military, campus and outdoor recreation jobs, as well as Boys and Girls Clubs and the Boy Scouts of America. Twenty-six individuals held positions with various non-recreation companies such as concrete businesses, department stores and insurance companies. Approximately 70% of the respondents indicated titles and agencies within the recreation and leisure field as their first full-time employment.

Current Employment Status. When asked about their current employment status, fifty (54%) of the respondents indicated they held full-time positions in the recreation and leisure field, while another eight (9%) reported part-time jobs in the field. Twenty-seven (29%) were in full or part-time positions outside of recreation and leisure. Three individuals were full-time students, three were not employed and three did not respond to the question. The majority of all individuals (63%) were currently employed in full or part-time recreation and leisure jobs. By graduating sequence, 85% of therapeutic recreation, 70% of program management and 51 % of commercial recreation graduates were currently employed in their respective disciplines.

Alumni were also asked the number of months they had held their current positions. Responses ranged from one to sixty-two months. The average was 13.46 months. Fifty (55%) had held their current position for one year or less, with 74 (80%) having held it for two years or less. Six individuals did not respond to the question. Graduates from the program management sequence tended to hold their current position for the longest time.

Current Salaries. Respondents were also asked about their current salary. There were twelve salary categories— generally in $5,000 increments—provided, although no respondent marked the categories above the $40,000 range. Nineteen (21%) reported salaries below $14,000, twenty-four (27%) reported making between $15,000 and $19,000, twenty-eight (31%) reported making $20,000 to $24,999, twelve (13%) were making $25,000 to $29,999, six individuals had an income of $30,000 to $34,999 and one individual reported making $35,000 to $39,999. The overwhelming majority of recent alumni (eighty-three or 92%) had an income of $29,999 or less. The average salary was between $15,000 and $24,999. Five people chose not to respond to this question. According to individual sequences, therapeutic recreation graduates averaged the highest salaries, with program management and commercial recreation close behind. Those currently employed in positions within the field made higher salaries than those outside the field.

Current Job Satisfaction. Job satisfaction with their current positions also was highlighted. The question used a four-point Likert scale from "Very Satisfied" (1) to "Very Dissatisfied" (4). Sixty-six (72%) were either very satisfied or satisfied with their current positions. Twenty-two (24%) were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied in their current jobs. The mean (average) was 1.88, indicating that the respondents were generally satisfied. Four individuals felt the question was not applicable to them and an additional three did not respond. Program management graduates who held RPA positions were the most satisfied, followed by commercial recreation and therapeutic recreation. Those in the field, regardless of sequence, were most satisfied, on average, than those employed elsewhere.

Future Job Plans, One of the last questions asked respondents about their future job plans. They were given eight, choices, ranging from keeping the same position in the same agency to no plans for finding employment. Fifty-six (59%) wanted to stay in the same agency; thirty-nine (41%) wanted to stay in the same position while seventeen (18%) wanted a higher position. Fifteen (16%) wanted to move to a different agency, with five (5%) wanting a similar position to the one they were in and ten (11%) wanting a higher position. Six (6%) wanted to leave their position for another field, sixteen (17%) wanted to find employment in recreation and leisure, no one wanted to find employment outside RPA and two (2%) had no plans to find employment in the next six months. The majority (fifty-six or 59%) wanted to stay at the same agency in which they worked. Sixteen (17%) reported wanting jobs in recreation and leisure, with no one reporting wanting to get out of the field. Reflecting job satisfaction, program management graduates, at 78%, were more likely to want to stay at the same agency, while this held true for 75% of the therapeutic recreation graduates and 64% of the commercial recreation alumni.

Job Preparedness. The last quantitative question on the survey asked alumni to indicate how prepared they felt to enter a full-time position in recreation and leisure after graduating from the ISU RPA program. Responses were to be made on a four-point Likert scale, from "Very Prepared" (1) to "Not At All Prepared" (4). Forty-one (44%) felt very prepared, forty-three (46%) felt adequately prepared, nine (10%) felt somewhat prepared and none responded they felt unprepared. The mean (average) to this question was 1.66, indicating that the majority (90%) felt very to adequately prepared to hold a recreation and leisure position upon graduation. Two individuals did not respond to this question. Program management graduates who held current positions in the field averaged 1.44, with therapeutic recreation at 1.57, and commercial recreation at 2.00.

Qualitative Data. Recent alumni were also asked four open-ended questions regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the program, potential improvements and other comments. Most individuals chose to provide answers to some or all of these questions. Data was analyzed by creating categories of responses and then tabulating answers within each category.

Strengths of the ISU RPA Program. The primary strength of the program, as viewed by the respondents, was the faculty. Sixty-nine individuals reported positive aspects of the faculty including close faculty/student contact, expertise and genuine concern for the well-being of students. Internships was the second most mentioned strength with forty-three responses. Strengths in this area included internship requirements, progression of experiences and "real world" applicability. A closely related strength was the "hands on" approach to education, with seventeen responses, and feeling prepared for the work force, with fifteen responses. The variety, diversity, comprehensive-

ness, well-roundedness and/or flexibility of the RPA courses were mentioned in 23 instances. Overall, the respondents viewed the faculty, internship program, curriculum, hands-on experiences and job preparedness as strengths of the ISU RPA program.

Weakness of the ISU RPA Program. Reported weaknesses were much more diversified and, thus, more difficult to codify and analyze. The most frequently mentioned (seven) weakness was lack of extensive computer instruction, with some individuals indicating specific application programs, such as WordPerfect that should be taught. Six individuals indicated large class sizes as a weakness. Five each indicated need for more help with the job search after graduation, need for more information on hiring and supervising employees, and problems with the outdoor recreation focus.

Suggestion Improvements in the ISU RPA Program. Again, due to the diversity of responses, suggestions for improvement of the program are more difficult to report. Most suggested improvements parallel the strengths and weaknesses noted above. Thirteen individuals wanted the RPA program to maintain or increase hands-on experiences within the curriculum. Nine individuals suggested adding more computer courses or requirements to use them within classes. Six individuals each felt there was a need for more information on recreation programming as well as problems with job opportunities and low salaries. Five respondents wanted more guest speakers, while four saw the need to increase business course requirements.

Other Comments. The final question on the survey was open-ended and allowed the respondents an opportunity to provide any additional information. Analysis of these comments reflect similar trends found in the Strengths and Weaknesses sections. The most common (thirty-two) positive comment was about faculty members. Twelve students gave positive comments about the curriculum or program in general. Seven reflected positive attributes of the hands on experiences provided, while six stated positive comparisons with other universities, some noting ISU's reputation. Five reiterated being prepared for an entry level position in the field.

Summary of Findings. The data below summarizes both the numeric and written findings of the survey.

• Seventy-five percent actively sought employment in RPA immediately following graduation. Those currently in the field reported a more active search than those employed outside.

• Seventy percent of those who sought employment in RPA found a position within three months of graduation. Therapeutic recreation and program management graduates were quickest to find positions within the field.

• Sixty-five percent considered their first full-time positions to be highly or somewhat related to RPA. This ranged from a high of 85% in therapeutic recreation to 52% in commercial recreation.

• Seventy percent of the respondents indicated a first full-time job title in RPA.

• Sixty-three were currently employed in RPA positions. Ranges included 85% in therapeutic recreation to 51% in commercial recreation.

• Eighty percent had held their current positions for less than two years. Graduates from program management tended to hold their positions for the longest time.

• Seventy-nine percent were making under $24,999 in their current positions. Those currently in therapeutic recreation and program management positions made the highest salaries, on average.

• Seventy-two percent were very satisfied or satisfied with their current positions. Graduates employed in program management positions were the most satisfied of all alumni groups.

• Fifty-nine percent wanted to stay with the same agency for which they currently worked. Program management and therapeutic recreation alumni were more likely to want to stay at the same agencies.

• Ninety percent felt very to adequately prepared to enter the RPA work force. One hundred percent of therapeutic recreation alumni, 95% of program management and 82% of commercial recreation alumni felt very to adequately prepared.

• Strengths of the program included faculty, internships, hands-on experiences and job preparedness.

• Weaknesses of the program included lack of extensive computer instruction, large class sizes, lack of job search assistance, need for more instruction on employee management and the outdoor recreation focus.

• Suggested improvements included to maintain or increase hands-on experiences for students, increase computer requirements, increase information on recreation programming and provide data on job opportunities and low salaries.

What Comes Next. The results of the survey have given the ISU faculty a great deal of descriptive information, in addition to the recent alumni's perceptions of the strengths and weaknesses of the program, and how it might be improved. This type of information is invaluable to the direct improvement of the program as well as a baseline for comparisons to other programs and departments across the campus. With so many different types of evaluations being done at the university, perhaps our credo should be, "An unexamined curriculum is not worth teaching." However, each piece of the evaluation pie plays an important role in the future development and survival of the program.

About the Author

Norma J. Stumbo has been on faculty at Illinois State University for nine years and coordinates the Therapeutic Recreation sequence.

Acknowledgments

Special thanks to all the Recreation and Park Administration faculty for assisting in the creation and refinement of the survey. The students in HPR 376 Evaluating Agency Services in Fall 1992 also helped in proofreading, the final version of the survey and cover letter. Deb Mattes and Rhonda Southard, RPA graduate assistants, were responsible for creating the SPSS program and entering the quantitative data. Thanks to all of these students for their invaluable assistance. Our heartfelt appreciation is extended to all alumni who took the time to reflect on the RPA curriculum and provide us with insights and comments.