Student Satisfaction In A Fraternity

Introduction

Socialization plays an important role in life on a college campus. Student satisfaction rates are one of the most important metrics of a college in assessing its community’s strength, as measured by engagement with campus institutions.

When students are more involved and connected with their college's environment, they are more likely to feel satisfied (Elliott, 2003). Three of the main dimensions identified by Elliott and Healy (2001) were social interactions, social support, and a sense of fitting in. According to the 2006 incoming Dartmouth First-Year Survey findings, Expected Satisfaction could be predicted by whether or not one "joined a fraternity/sorority".

This study attempts to identify which social factors and affiliations

The null hypothesis for affiliation, athletes, and legacy followed the same structure; that the mean satisfaction of students who were affiliated, varsity athletes, or legacy students was equal to that of students who were not. The alternative hypothesis was that the students in the subgroup had different mean satisfactions than those not in the groups. The null hypothesis of partying and socializing were structured slightly different because the responses were not yes or no, but numbers of nights a week, either 0, 1, 2, 3-4, or 5-7. Partying three or more nights a week was considered “fratgoer,” and less than three nights a week was considered “nonfratgoer.” The alternative hypothesis for partying was that the fratgoer and nonfratgoer groups had different mean

We collected data through administering an e-survey to undergraduate students sitting in the Baker Library lobby and waiting in the Novack Cafe and King Arthur Flour Cafe (KAF) lines. We analyzed legacy and varsity athlete status, Greek life affiliations, and weekly occurrences of attending social events and parties, and we compared these statistics with self-reported student satisfactions. Results showed an overall mean of student satisfaction on a scale of 1-5 as 3.93, with a standard error of 0.87.

We have identified a few limitations in our study. First, the structure of Dartmouth’s D-plan results in less than all the students in the sophomore and junior classes being present on campus during the winter term. Second, the weather on the time of collection may have influenced the data. When the weather is warmer and student workload is lighter, students may report higher levels of satisfaction. We collected data in late February (poorer weather) near the end of the winter term (more schoolwork), satisfaction may have been lower than during another time of the term and year. Third, the nature of the study whereby the sample was chosen as a voluntary response from more social places on campus - Novack, KAF, and Blobby, could have led to a bias. Novack and KAF tend to be social spaces, thus we potentially collected data from students with higher levels of social and partying