Survey Results

Employee Survey

A campus employee survey with 3 open-ended questions was administered in October 2025 through February 2026. Respondents were not required to respond to all 3 questions. The survey was actively shared with campus leaders, at meetings with various groups, etc. A total of 104 responses were collected.

Qualitative responses were analyzed using an AI-assisted thematic coding process followed by human validation. A summary of the results from each question is provided below.

1. What are some of the most impactful changes our campus has seen since it was last accredited in 2019?

2. Do you have a campus success story that might help shape our Institutional Report?

3. What are some of Chico State’s most important areas for improvement right now?

Student Leadership Survey

A short 3-question student leadership survey with 3 open-ended questions was administered in March 2026. The first two questions were “plus/delta” free-form questions where students were asked what worked (the “plus”) and what can be improved (the “delta”). The third question asked about the type of student the respondent was when admitted to Chico State. A total of 37 responses were collected.

Qualitative responses were analyzed using an AI-assisted thematic coding process followed by human validation. A summary of the results from each question is provided below.

1. Chico State aims for every student to feel they belong, to be excited about learning, and to feel prepared for their future. How well has Chico State met these goals for you? Please share one or two specific experiences - inside or outside the classroom - that illustrate your answer.

Overall Sentiment Distribution

Based on coding the responses into Positive / Neutral / Negative / No Response, the results are:

• 78% — Highly Favorable (Strong Positive)
  • Explicitly state Chico State has met or exceeded goals ("very well," "amazingly well," "I feel prepared," "I belong")
  • Provide detailed examples of belonging, engagement, and preparation
• 17% — Moderately Favorable (Mixed Positive)
  • Generally positive but more tempered or conditional
  • Emphasize student agency ("you have to find your own belonging")
  • Focus on specific areas rather than holistic experience
• 5% — Neutral / Minimal
  • "It’s okay"
  • "Super" (ambiguous but likely positive)
  • "N/A"
• 0% — Negative
  • No clearly negative responses were present

Key takeaway: Belonging + Faculty + Preparation form a tightly integrated student experience
ecosystem.

Key Thematic Findings

• Strong Sense of Belonging (Most Dominant Theme)
  • Students repeatedly describe Chico State as:
    • "home away from home"
    • "welcoming"
    • a place where they "found community"
  • High-impact contributors to belonging:
    • Student organizations and clubs
    • Affinity centers and cultural programming
    • Informal peer interactions (e.g., "someone comes and talks to me")
  • Interpretation: Belonging is not just present—it is deeply internalized and socially reinforced.
• Faculty Relationships as a Major Driver
  • Faculty are one of the strongest positive signals across responses.
  • Students highlight:
    • Professors who "check in" personally
    • Engaging, interactive teaching styles
    • Support outside class (office hours, mentoring)
  • Interpretation: Faculty interaction is a primary institutional strength tied to both belonging and excitement about learning.
• High Levels of Engagement and Excitement About Learning
  • Students report being:
    • "excited to learn"
    • engaged through interactive teaching
    • motivated by hands-on experiences
  • Examples include:
    • Study abroad
    • Research opportunities
    • Internship experiences
    • Creative and applied coursework
  • Interpretation: Excitement about learning is strongly linked to active and experiential learning environments.
• Clear Evidence of Future Preparedness
  • Students frequently connect their experience to future readiness.
  • Key contributors:
    • Advising and mentorship
    • Career fairs and internships
    • Academic support programs (REACH, EOP, MESA, LSAMP, TRIO)
    • Skill-building in courses
  • Interpretation: Students perceive preparation not abstractly, but through tangible pathways (career, academic, experiential).
• Importance of Support Infrastructure
  • Students explicitly credit:
    • The Well (mental health and wellness)
    • Tutoring and academic support
    • Orientation and transition programs
    • Cultural and identity-based programming
  • Interpretation: Institutional support services are highly visible and actively used, not just passively available.

Overall Conclusion

Chico State is performing extremely well on this question from the student perspective.

• Key Takeaways:
  • Belonging: Exceptionally strong and widely experienced
  • Excitement about Learning: High, especially when faculty engagement is strong
  • Future Preparedness: Clearly demonstrated through programs and applied experiences
• Bottom Line:
  • Student responses indicate a highly favorable institutional climate, with
    particularly strong alignment between student experiences and the university’s
    stated goals.

2. Thinking about your overall experience, what are the most important areas where Chico State could improve? What changes - big or small - would make the greatest positive difference for students?

Overall Sentiment Distribution

Unlike the previous question, this prompt elicits constructive criticism, so responses should be interpreted as:

• ~85–90% — Improvement-Oriented (Majority)
  • Students are generally engaged and offering actionable suggestions—not expressing dissatisfaction with the institution overall.
• ~5–10% — Affirming / No Change Needed
  • A small number explicitly state Chico State is doing well.
• ~5% — Minimal / Unclear
  • Very short or vague responses ("Not sure," "A big experience").

• The tone is constructively critical, not negative—students are invested and want to improve their experience.

Note: Each response may cover multiple themes.

Key Thematic Findings

• Campus Life and Belonging Needs Strengthening (Top Theme)
  • Students want:
    • More consistent events throughout the semester (not just at the start)
    • More daytime engagement opportunities
    • Increased club visibility and variety
    • Stronger school spirit
  • Interpretation: Belonging exists, but students want more sustained and visible community-building opportunities.
• Gaps in Access and Communication
  • Students highlight:
    • Limited service hours (career center, advising)
    • Difficulty finding information (scholarships, services, faculty)
    • Need for better communication systems
  • Interpretation: The issue is not absence of services—but visibility and accessibility.
• Strong Call for DEI and Representation Improvements
  • Students explicitly request:
    • More cultural representation (Latino, Black students)
    • Continued or increased DEI funding
    • Better integration of identity-based programming
  • Interpretation: This is a high-salience equity signal.
• Facilities and Campus Environment Concerns
  • Most frequent issues:
    • Parking and housing (very prominent)
    • Lack of study spaces / extended hours
    • Campus lighting and safety
    • Food quality and affordability (EBT access)
  • Interpretation: Physical environment significantly shapes student experience and belonging.
• Academic Experience: Mixed but Actionable
  • Students note:
    • Course bottlenecks (limited sections)
    • Concerns about teaching quality in some areas
    • Desire for more applied/engaged learning formats
    • Infrastructure issues (outdated software, lab equipment)
  • Interpretation: Academic experience is generally positive but uneven across departments and courses.
• Desire for Stronger Institutional Accountability
  • A small but important set of responses mention:
    • Lack of follow-through on issues
    • Concerns about fairness, teaching quality, and serious issues (e.g., misconduct response)
  • Interpretation: While not widespread, these responses are high-impact and risk-relevant.

Overall Conclusion

Student responses to this question reflect a highly engaged and improvement-oriented student body. Rather than expressing dissatisfaction, the majority of responses offer specific, actionable recommendations to enhance the student experience. Key areas for improvement include expanding access to student services, strengthening campus life and co-curricular engagement throughout the academic year, increasing visibility and representation in diversity efforts, and addressing capacity constraints in advising, course availability, and facilities. Students also expressed a desire for greater institutional responsiveness and communication. These findings suggest that while core structures are in place and valued, improvements in access, consistency, and responsiveness would yield significant gains in student success and belonging.

3. Were you admitted into Chico State as a ... freshman / transfer student / graduate student / other (please explain below)?

The 37 respondents were distributed as follows:

• 54% — freshman
• 22% — transfer student
• 8% — other
• 3% — graduate student
• 3% — freshman, graduate student

Compliance with WSCUC Standards Survey

The submission of a completed Compliance with WSCUC Standards Form is one of the required elements when submitting an Institutional Report for WSCUC reaffirmation. To get feedback in completing this form, a Compliance with WSCUC Standards Survey was administered in AY 2025-26.

The results of this survey will be used to validate completion of the required Compliance with WSCUC Standards Form.

Respondent Demographics

There was a total of 40 respondents to the survey.

• 40.0% — Administrator (MPP)
• 22.5% — Department Chair or Program Coordinator (of an academic program)
• 17.5% — Faculty
• 10.0% — Staff
• 5.0% — Faculty, Director (of a non-academic program)
• 5.0% — Student

Survey respondents were asked to indicate their perception of our campus's compliance with each WSCUC Criteria for Review (CFR), where Agree=1, Somewhat Agree=2, Somewhat Disagree=3, and Disagree=4. So, larger average response values meant lower compliance.

The following table shows the ranking of all WSCUC CFRs based on respondents' ratings, from the lowest perceived compliance to the highest perceived compliance.

Thematic Analysis of Comments on the 6 Worst-Ranked CFRs

Thematic analysis of comments associated with CFRs 3.3, 3.7, 2.6, 3.1, 3.10, and 3.2 reveals a campus community that is deeply committed to students, shared governance, and institutional improvement, while also expressing concern regarding institutional capacity, communication, consistency, and resource allocation.

Across these CFRs, respondents frequently acknowledged the dedication of faculty, staff, and administrators, but emphasized that current budgetary pressures, staffing limitations, and uneven institutional processes create barriers to effectiveness.

The strongest recurring themes included:

• Uneven access to professional development and institutional support
• Budget pressures and concerns regarding resource allocation
• Need for clearer communication and governance transparency
• Growing but uneven culture of assessment and data-informed decision-making
• Concern regarding institutional coordination and organizational efficiency
• Recognition of dedicated employees working under difficult conditions
• Desire for stronger institutional planning, prioritization, and alignment

Respondents generally perceived the institution as mission-driven and student-centered, but operating under substantial structural and financial constraints.

CFR 3.3 (Average Response: 2.658) The institution provides professional development and evaluation for faculty, staff, and administrators.

• Major Themes
  • Professional Development Opportunities Exist but Are Uneven
    • Respondents acknowledged that meaningful professional development opportunities exist, especially for faculty.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "The FDEV faculty development office is particularly good with an immense trove of resources."
      • "It does for staff, a lot of it is done in house."
  • Uneven Access to Professional Development Resources
    • Several respondents described inequitable access to travel funds, release time, or development opportunities.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "All of my professional development has been denied."
      • "It is hard to work on professional development when the workload is more than can be managed."
  • Need for More Formalized Evaluation Processes
    • One respondent specifically identified concern regarding leadership evaluation practices.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Chair evaluation needs to be formalized."
• Overall Interpretation
  
  • The comments suggest that the institution possesses meaningful professional development infrastructure, but implementation and access vary substantially across units and employee groups.

CFR 3.7 (Average Response: 2.077) The institution operates with appropriate autonomy governed by an independent board or similar authority that is responsible for mission, integrity, and oversight of planning, policies, performance, and sustainability. The governing board selects and evaluates the chief executive officer.

• Major Themes
  • Limited Awareness and Communication
    • The dominant theme involved lack of awareness or insufficient communication regarding governance structures or institutional decision-making.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "No information given to faculty."
      • "I don’t know enough about this."
  • Desire for Greater Transparency
    • Comments suggested a need for stronger communication and broader engagement regarding institutional governance.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Faculty need more visibility into these processes."
• Overall Interpretation
  • The limited number of comments suggests either low engagement with governance structures or uncertainty regarding institutional processes. Existing comments point primarily to communication and transparency concerns.

CFR 2.6 (Average Response: 2.00) The faculty exercise effective academic leadership and act consistently to ensure that the quality of academic programs and the institution’s educational purposes are sustained.

• Major Themes
  • Strong Commitment to Students and Shared Governance
    • Several respondents pointed to governance committees and institutional collaboration as evidence of commitment to student success.
    • Representative comment:
      • "CAB does a lot of work that might be relevant here, as well as EPPC."
  • Inconsistency Across Faculty and Programs
    • A recurring concern involved uneven implementation of institutional values and expectations.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "I don’t believe every faculty member exemplifies this mission."
      • "There is a huge amount of inconsistency across individual faculty in this regard."
  • Organizational Efficiency and Collaboration Challenges
    • Respondents described a campus that works hard but not always cohesively.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "There is room for improvement so everyone is working smarter instead of working harder."
      • "Some are much more concerned with turf wars than with their students."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Respondents generally affirmed institutional commitment to student learning and success, while identifying inconsistency, collaboration challenges, and uneven implementation across units.

CFR 3.1 (Average Response: 1.949) The institution employs faculty, staff, and administrators sufficient in scale, professional qualifications, and background to achieve the institution’s educational and student success objectives, to propose and oversee policy, and to ensure the integrity of its academic, student support, and co-curricular programs and services and administrative processes.

• Major Themes
  • Budget Constraints and Enrollment Pressures
    • The strongest recurring theme involved financial pressures and declining enrollment.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Current budget environment and enrollment require some adjustments of scope and scale."
      • "Low-performing programs may need to be cut."
  • Concerns About Resource Allocation
    • Respondents questioned whether institutional resources are strategically aligned.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Certain University areas are chronically under-resourced."
      • "A graduate program was launched with only single-digit number of students."
  • Mixed Confidence in Personnel and Organizational Effectiveness
    • Some respondents expressed confidence in employees overall while acknowledging visible performance concerns.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Most employees are qualified and do their part … there are some obvious examples where that isn’t the case."
  • Interest in Structural or Organizational Reform
    • Comments referenced stalled or incomplete institutional restructuring efforts.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Reimagining Academic Affairs could’ve potentially addressed this issue."
• Overall Interpretation
  • This CFR generated some of the strongest concern-oriented commentary. Respondents consistently identified resource limitations, enrollment decline, and prioritization challenges as significant institutional issues.

CFR 3.10 (Average Response: 1.947) Data are regularly and systematically disseminated internally and externally, and analyzed, interpreted, and applied in institutional decision-making.

• Major Themes
  • Data Access and Reporting Challenges
    • Respondents repeatedly described difficulty obtaining timely, usable, or accessible institutional data.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Getting data is a continual struggle."
      • "Use of data to inform decisions is inconsistent."
  • Assessment Culture Still Developing
    • Several respondents recognized progress while emphasizing that assessment practices are not yet fully institutionalized.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "This is an area of recent improvement."
      • "Still not part of the campus culture."
  • Need for Training and Better Use of Evidence
    • Respondents emphasized the importance of training and capacity-building.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Can be better with training."
  • Concerns Regarding Survey Fatigue
    • One respondent noted that students may be over-surveyed.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Chico tends to over-survey our students."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Comments reflected cautious optimism regarding institutional research and assessment capacity. Respondents acknowledged improvement, while also describing uneven implementation and limited integration into institutional culture.

CFR 3.2 (Average Response: 1.944) Faculty, staff, and administrator recruitment, hiring, and orientation practices and workload expectations are aligned with institutional mission and priorities. The institution examines the extent to which its climate supports faculty, staff, and administrators and acts on its findings.

• Major Themes
  • 1. Concern Regarding Long-Term Financial Sustainability
    • Respondents repeatedly referenced budget pressures, declining enrollment, and uncertainty regarding future financial stability.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "The institution is struggling financially."
      • "Enrollment decline is creating significant budget challenges."
  • Need for Better Strategic Prioritization
    • Several respondents questioned whether institutional investments align with mission and long-term sustainability.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Resources need to be allocated more strategically."
      • "Some decisions do not seem aligned with institutional priorities."
  • Confidence in Institutional Leadership Efforts
    • Despite concerns, some respondents acknowledged that leadership is attempting to navigate difficult circumstances.
    • Representative comment:
      • "People are doing the best they can under current constraints."
  • Concern About Staffing and Operational Capacity
    • Respondents noted that staffing reductions and resource limitations may affect institutional effectiveness.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Too much work is falling on too few people."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Comments reflected concern regarding institutional financial sustainability and prioritization, while also recognizing the difficulty of managing enrollment and budget pressures.

Thematic Analysis of Comments on the 6 Top-Ranked CFRs

Thematic analysis of comments associated with CFRs 2.1, 2.2, 2.5, 2.10, 2.12, and 4.2 reveals a campus community that is strongly committed to student learning and educational quality, while simultaneously concerned about consistency, institutional capacity, and uneven implementation across programs and units.

Several themes appeared repeatedly across the six CFRs:

• Concerns regarding the quality and consistency of online and distance education
• Need for curriculum modernization and innovation
• Strong commitment to advising and student support, but concern about staffing capacity
• Recognition that assessment and institutional research infrastructure have improved
• Uncertainty regarding how consistently evidence is used in institutional decision-making
• Challenges associated with student preparedness, retention, and changing student demographics
• Desire for stronger institutional coordination and clearer quality assurance processes

Respondents generally perceived the institution as caring deeply about students and educational quality, but operating under resource limitations and uneven organizational maturity.

CFR 2.2 (Average Response: 1.189) Degree programs engage students in an integrated course of study of sufficient breadth and depth. These programs ensure the development of core and professional competencies relevant to the level of the degree.

• Major Themes
  • Curriculum Modernization and Streamlining
    • Respondents identified the need for periodic curricular revision to ensure relevance.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Some programs need to update and/or streamline their curriculum to remain current."
  • Concerns About Online and Distance Education Quality
    • The dominant theme concerned online instructional quality and engagement.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Online programs still a concern."
      • "Many of our online classes are disappointing to students because they aren’t engaging and don’t have the depth of a traditional class."
      • "Some concerns about the quality of some of our distance education courses and programs."
  • Academic Culture and Student Expectations
    • One respondent raised concerns about instructional culture within a department.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Faculty in my department treat students like high schoolers."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Comments reflected broad confidence in educational quality overall, but substantial concern regarding consistency and rigor in online learning environments.

CFR 2.12 (Average Response: 1.211) The institution ensures that all students understand the requirements of their academic programs and receive timely, accurate, and complete information and advising about academic requirements.

• Major Themes
  • Strong Commitment to Advising and Student Support
    • Respondents generally viewed advising and support systems positively.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "We are good at this."
      • "The DPR helps with this, as well as academic advising."
      • "Recent use of CARS has significantly improved this process."
  • Advisor Workload and Staffing Concerns
    • The strongest recurring concern involved advising capacity.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Advising loads are high."
      • "We desperately need more advisors."
      • "This becomes compromised when the number of advisors is cut."
  • Inconsistency in Advising Experiences
    • Respondents also identified variability in student advising experiences.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Challenges with advising inconsistencies and challenges for students connecting with advisors."
  • High-Touch Student Support Culture
    • One administrator described the institution as highly student-centered in practice.
    • Representative comment:
      • “We do a lot of hand holding.”
• Overall Interpretation
  • Comments reflected strong institutional commitment to student support, while emphasizing sustainability concerns related to advisor workload and staffing.

CFR 2.1 (Average Response: 1.211) The institution’s degree programs are appropriate in content, educational objectives, and standards of performance relevant to the level of the degree. All degrees are defined in terms of entry requirements and levels of student achievement necessary for graduation.

• Major Themes
  • Need for Program Innovation and Modernization
    • Respondents emphasized the importance of updating programs to remain responsive to societal challenges and workforce needs.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Degree programs need to be updated or revamped to address societal problems. Innovation is good and should be infused into degree programs."
  • Concerns Regarding Distance Education Quality
    • Several respondents questioned the consistency and oversight of online education.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Unclear how we are doing with online programs."
      • "Review may be needed to ensure quality and compliance."
      • "Some concerns about the quality of some of our distance education courses and programs."
  • Questions About Program Strength and Distinctiveness
    • One faculty respondent expressed concern regarding rigor in specific disciplinary areas.
    • Representative comment:
      • "The university lacks rigorous and meaningful degrees in the environment and natural resources space."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Respondents generally supported the institution’s educational mission but emphasized the importance of innovation, curricular relevance, and stronger oversight of online education.

CFR 2.10 (Average Response: 1.263) The institution demonstrates that students make reasonable progress toward and complete their degrees in a timely manner.

• Major Themes
  • Existing Systems and Student Support Structures
    • Respondents generally acknowledged the existence of systems supporting student success.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Services and systems in place to support students and to provide reports on annual performance."
      • "According to the stats, we do."
  • Student Preparedness Challenges
    • Department chairs raised concerns regarding incoming student readiness.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Our new student body is much less prepared for academic success than they were 5–10 years ago."
  • Need for More Flexible Definitions of Student Success
    • One respondent emphasized that institutional assumptions about four-year graduation may not reflect student realities.
    • Representative comment:
      • "The university assumes that all students are full-time or should graduate in 4 years."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Respondents generally believed institutional systems support student achievement, but emphasized the need to adapt to changing student demographics and educational pathways.

CFR 4.2 (Average Response: 1.342) The institution collects, analyzes and acts on disaggregated student outcomes data including retention and graduation rates.

• Major Themes
  • Improved Access to Data and Reporting
    • Respondents acknowledged improvements in institutional research and reporting systems.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "The Fact Book and other IRSA-maintained reports have been very helpful."
      • "The data and reporting are available."
  • Limited Evidence of Data-Informed Decision-Making
    • A major recurring concern involved uncertainty regarding whether evidence is consistently used to guide institutional decisions.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Use of this data to inform operational decisions is still unclear."
      • "There is not much evidence of their utility."
      • "I am unsure that people are actually using it to make decisions."
  • Assessment Culture Still Developing
    • Several respondents emphasized that outcomes assessment remains uneven institutionally.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Systematic outcomes-based assessment of academic programs still under improvement. It needs to be part of the culture."
  • Desire for More Longitudinal and Real-Time Data
    • One administrator highlighted ongoing efforts to improve dashboard and trend-based reporting.
    • Representative comment:
      • "Work is underway to have reliable year-over-year data to allow better analysis at any time."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Respondents viewed institutional research infrastructure positively, but described institutional assessment culture and evidence utilization as still developing.

CFR 2.5 (Average Response: 1.342) The institution has faculty with the capacity and scale to design and deliver the curriculum and to evaluate, improve, and promote student learning and success.

• Major Themes
  • Strong Commitment to Student Engagement
    • Respondents generally viewed the institution as highly committed to student engagement and student-centered practices.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Chico does this well."
      • "We do a good job supporting student engagement and belonging."
  • Variability in Student Experience Across Units
    • Several respondents suggested that student experiences vary significantly depending on department, instructor, or program.
    • Representative comments included:
      • "Some programs do this extremely well while others lag behind."
      • "Student experience is not always consistent."
  • Need for Greater Coordination Between Academic and Student Support Areas
    • Respondents noted that collaboration between instructional and student-support units could be improved.
    • Representative comment:
      • "There needs to be better coordination across divisions and departments."
  • Concern Regarding Capacity and Workload
    • Some respondents noted that strong student engagement efforts are difficult to sustain under current workload and staffing conditions.
    • Representative comment:
      • "People are trying very hard, but capacity is limited."
• Overall Interpretation
  • Comments reflected strong institutional commitment to student engagement and student-centered practices, while also highlighting inconsistency and organizational capacity limitations.