Feedback for Classroom Services

submenu

Every year, Academic Health Center Classroom Services surveys students, faculty and staff regarding how well our classrooms meet their needs. In fact, we are nearly complete with a multi-year AV-equipment refresh influenced by survey results in 2014. This past spring, we asked our room users for feedback specifically about our services: scheduling rooms, providing tech support to our rooms, and assisting users with their advanced AV needs, for example. This was a survey about customer service.

2016 Survey and Results

We divided the survey into three sections --  Student/Attendee, Faculty/Presenter, and Staff/Scheduler -- because we believed that different users will have different measures for how well we provide our services. Participants only saw the sections pertinent to them; some saw more than one section. They answered questions about technology, room readiness, and scheduling using a five-point scale (1=poor, 3=average, 5=excellent), as well as gave open-ended

On the Minneapolis campus, we received 141 responses distributed among 27 rooms. On the St. Paul campus, we received 54 spread over five rooms. We manage 47 classrooms on both campuses.

We received above average ratings for questions regarding ease of use and reliability of AV equipment and services. We also received above average ratings for room readiness and room scheduling services. We intend to use these results as the baseline for future surveys. However, through the open-ended feedback, we learned where we have opportunities for improvement. Specifically, our users expressed the need for one high tech and one low tech change: Wireless networks in our rooms need to be able to handle more users simultaneously, and whiteboard supplies in our rooms have to be plentiful. We are working on both these issues.

Additionally, we are using the open-ended feedback about specific rooms to pinpoint areas for localized improvement. Even if only one user mentioned an issue, it has broad impact because of the repeated use of the room and potential repeated subpar experience by all participants in that room.

Our goal for the 2016-17 school year is to move our ratings closer to excellent and to increase our engagement with our classroom users to get a more accurate assessment of our services.