Dual Navigation of Computerized
Self-Administered
Questionnaires and Organizational Records
Kent Norman,
Laura Slaughter, Zachary Friedman, Kirk Norman, Rod Stevenson
Human-Computer
Interaction Laboratory
Institute
for Advanced Computer Studies
Department
of Psychology
University
of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742-3255
Introduction
Questionnaires for businesses and other
organizations pose challenges that differ in a number of ways from questionnaires
for individuals (Dillman, 2000). For instance, business questionnaires often
have tight deadlines for completion due to time critical economic information
being reported. One of the major obstacles that impede the successful
completion of organizational questionnaires is that responses must often be
retrieved from records rather than from personal opinion or memory. Respondents
for business questionnaires are required to find specific information, make
assumptions about the organization that they are representing, and at times
calculate or synthesize responses from available data. Additionally, business
and organizational surveys are often repeated annually or semi-annually making
it necessary for the respondent to answer the same questions at every cycle and
sometimes maintain a file of essential data.
Computerized self-administered
questionnaires (CSAQ) can be an effective method of collecting data from
organizations, and they can help to facilitate the process of data acquisition
and overcome difficulties. On-line questionnaires offer a number of
administrative advantages such as the ability to quickly disseminate and
retrieve questionnaire data as well as having responses already in electronic
form, preventing the need for manual entering of data. Furthermore, CSAQs can
be formatted to a specific organization’s needs and the preferences can be
stored for later use. In the case where respondents must search on-line
organizational records, CSAQs can require less manual entry of data by automatically
copying information. However, new problems arise with the interaction of CSAQs
and organizational records. One problem is that of dual navigation of on-line
records and the questionnaire in tandem. In order to understand dual navigation
of organizational records and CSAQ’s, this research explores how respondents
traverse a questionnaire and a web site containing information about an
organization. This research is being conducted with the U.S. Bureau of the
Census to help understand issues surrounding dual navigation of on-line
questionnaires and organizational records.
The majority of research about
questionnaire design focuses on questionnaires for private individuals. Norman
et al. (2000) states that when questionnaires are answered from personal memory,
they should be designed in a way that is congruent with human knowledge
structures. They also concludes that when there is a match between the order of
questions in a survey and the order of retrieval of information, processing is
most efficient. In the case of organizational questionnaires, the structure of
external information (as opposed to internal human memory) influences how the
questionnaire will be processed and perceived by the respondent. The major
problem with organizational surveys is that the respondent does not always have
knowledge of the overall structure of the organizational records and it is
difficult to design for the wide array of possible external information
structures that different organizations have.
If an organizational CSAQ cannot be
designed to take advantage of internal or external knowledge structures, it may
nevertheless be possible to learn something from the navigation patterns of
respondents. What design features are useful for organizational CSAQs when the
user must navigate between the questionnaire and records? What types of
navigational patterns do respondents develop to complete the survey?
Dual navigation: CSAQ’s and Records
Completing an organizational CSAQ
requires that a respondent, who may not be familiar with either the
organizational site or the questionnaire, search and retrieve answers that will
be transferred to the questionnaire forms. This process requires dual
navigation; the respondent must navigate not only the questionnaire but also
files of on-line records.
A respondent may be completing the
questionnaire for the first and the only time or repeatedly filling it out on a
monthly or yearly schedule. Thus, there are four possible scenarios. A
respondent may be 1) familiar with the organizational site, but new to the
questionnaire, 2) familiar with the questionnaire but the organizational
records are unfamiliar, 3) familiar with both the questionnaire and the
organizational records, or 4) unfamiliar with both the questionnaire and the
organizational records.
Respondents may be performing a number of
different types of tasks while completing the questionnaire. The most common
task is entering the data during a first pass through the questionnaire either
in a linear or a non-linear sequence (perhaps due to idiosyncratic files of
organizational information). Alternatively, a respondent may be making edits by
going back to enter missing information or to re-enter data that was found to
be in error. The task of either mentally or physically storing information that
will be helpful for the next cycle may occur when the respondent has knowledge
that the questionnaire will be re-administered.
Current exploratory research
This study is an extension to the work on
the design of computerized self-administered questionnaires by Norman et al.
(2000). The current research will analyze what can be learned from the
systematic study of dual-navigation between a set of organizational records and
a questionnaire. Two different questionnaire design alternatives, a form-based
and an item-based, were constructed for the questionnaire. In the form-based
design, question items were grouped into four discrete semantic sections with
all the question items in each section shown on a single screen. The item-based
design had only one question item on each screen. Both interface designs
provided a side index for navigation to the sections of the questionnaire. The
item-based questionnaire format was thought to be more difficult to navigate
due to loss of context and number of operations required when navigating.
Therefore, it was anticipated that this format would have a detrimental effect
on the performance of respondents as they attempted to navigate the
organizational records in addition to the CSAQ.
Our goal in this research is to develop
design principles for constructing organizational CSAQ’s. We examined 1)
completion time and accuracy of respondents, 2) patterns of navigation between
the organizational site and the CSAQ, 3) subjective satisfaction with the use
of an organizational CSAQ, and also, 4) comments that respondents made about
the task. Navigational patterns for the item-based group were predicted to show
more traversals back and forth between the organizational records and the CSAQ
as respondents sought to find the answer to each question out of context.
Respondents using the form-based design were expected to fill out the
questionnaire in a non-linear sequence. It was thought that they would use the
questions displayed for each section to get an overview and then use the
majority of their time in the organizational records, thus transferring answers
in the order that they appear in the records.
Method
Participants
Thirty-eight undergraduates (25
males, 13 females), ranging in age from 18 to 24 with a median age of 19,
participated in this experiment. The participants were enrolled in an
introductory psychology course at the University of Maryland and took part in
the investigation in order to satisfy a course requirement.
Materials
Set-up
The study was administered to
participants on either a Macintosh G3 or G4 computer with dual Apple Studio
Display 15-inch flat screen monitors. Figure 1 shows a photograph of the
experimental set-up. The participants were instructed to view the
organizational records on one monitor and the computerized questionnaire on the
second monitor. Participants worked independently through the experiment but
were given the opportunity to ask questions at any point. The experiment was
administered to each participant individually in a testing room. All of the
experimental materials were web-based documents and all data was recorded to a
web server using javascript and cgi scripts.
|
Figure
1: Experimental set-up with dual monitors. |
Computerized self-administered questionnaire design
The questionnaire constructed for this study consisted of 41 questions, arranged into 4 topic sections each containing 10 questions with 1 extra question that asked about the URL for the organizational records pages. The four topic sections were labeled: Information, Activities, Positions, and Finances. The majority of the question answers were directly available in the organizational records. Some questions required that the participant calculate answers from several pieces of information available in the records. For example, to answer the question “How many officers does the organization have?” the participant must count the number of officers from a list in the organizational records since the answer to the question is not explicitly written. A few questions could not be calculated precisely, but instead the participant needed to make an approximation using the organizational records. The questionnaire was created independently from the organizational records. The full questionnaire is shown in Appendix A.
Two
interface designs were used to display questionnaire items. In both designs, an
index to the questionnaire was shown in a frame on the left side of the screen.
The index listed 1) an instruction section with directions on how to navigate
and complete the survey, 2) four topic section links to questionnaire items,
and 3) a link marked ‘Done’ that was required to submit the completed survey.
The difference between the two interface designs used in the study pertained to
the number of questions presented on the right side “questionnaire” page. In
the form-based design, all the questions from each topic section (10 questions)
were presented as a single scrollable web page. The participant was able to
view all questions in a section by clicking on the topic links in the adjacent
index. In the item-based design, the questions were listed one per screen with
links provided at the bottom of each question item page labeled ‘next’ and
‘previous’ to allow forward and backward movement through each section of the
questionnaire. When a participant clicked on a topic section link in the index,
only the first question was displayed for that topic. The participant was
required to click ‘next’ to view the other 9 questions within that particular
topic section. Figures 2 and 3 show the form-based and item-based interface
designs respectively.
Organizational records design
The
organizational records were created as a set of web documents about a
fictitious University of Maryland Break-Dancing Club. The records consisted of
eight scrollable web pages. Each page contained information on one of the
following eight topics: Introduction to the Break-Dancing Club, Officers,
Events, Committees, Members, Minutes of Meetings, Budget and Financial
Information, and Bylaws. An index in a frame on the left side of the browser
window provided links to each section. Figure 4 shows the Introduction page for
the Break-Dancing Club organizational records.
|
Figure 2: Form-based design |
|
Figure 3: Item-based design |
|
|
|
|
Figure 4: First page of the
organizational records |
|
Participants were randomly assigned
to participate in the experiment using the form-based or the item-based
questionnaire. The experimenter, prior to the start of the experiment, verbally
explained all directions. The participant then read and signed an experimental
consent form. Instructions were then given about how to operate the browser
windows, particularly how to set up the records window on the left hand monitor
and the questionnaire on the right.
Participants were informed of the steps required to complete the
experiment, navigating between the questionnaire and the records. They were
allowed to ask questions during any point of the experiment. They were told
that they were to use their best judgment when answering questions that did not
have a specific answer in the organizational records (such as answers that
needed to be estimated from several pieces of data). The participants were then
shown the link marked “Done” and instructed to submit the questionnaire once
finished.
Participants initially filled out a pre-questionnaire
questionnaire demographics form requiring age, gender, level of familiarity
with computers, knowledge of the Internet, and previous experience with
surveys. Following the pre-questionnaire questionnaire, participants were
required to complete the experimental questionnaire, answering questions by
navigating the organizational records. After completing the experimental
questionnaire, participants answered a brief post-questionnaire questionnaire
describing their subjective assessment of 1) the experimental questionnaire’s
organization and navigation tools, 2) the organization of the Break-Dancing
Club records, and 3) computerized questionnaires in general. The questions for the pre- and post-
questionnaire questionnaires can be found in Tables 1 and 2.
Data
Recorded
The
main goal was to examine the navigational data collected as participants
traversed between the organizational record web pages and the computerized
questionnaire. For each participant, these data included 1) the time (in
seconds, starting from zero) when the participant clicked on a particular
questionnaire item or organizational record page, 2) a record of visited nodes
indicating which page of the organizational records or questionnaire item was
clicked on and 3) the participant’s responses to the computerized questionnaire
items. An independent groups design was used to make comparisons of participant
performance and responses in terms of questionnaire type. The
independent variable, questionnaire type, was defined as either form-based or
item-based.
An analysis of
participant accuracy was assessed by scoring each set of responses using an
answer key created by the experimenters. Each participant received a percentage score for the number
of correct items answered. Participants in the item-based group (N=20) obtained
a mean percentage correct of 56% with a range of 46.3% to 73.2% correct.
Participants in the form-based group (N=18) obtained a mean percentage of 59%
correct with a range of 43.9 % to 92.7% correct. There was no significant
difference in accuracy between the two groups (t(36) = -0.91, n.s.).
Completion times
The mean time of
completion for the form-based group was 26 minutes, 25 seconds. The mean time
of completion for the item-based group was 24 minutes, 36 seconds. There was no
significant difference between form-based and item-based groups (t(36) =
-.9331, n.s.).
The mean ratings
for the pre-questionnaire questionnaire are listed in Table 1. Each of the
question items was rated on a scale from 1 to 9 with “no experience” anchoring
the right end and “very experienced” on the left. No significant difference was
found between form-based and item-based for any of the pre-questionnaire
questions.
The mean ratings
for the post-questionnaire questionnaire are listed in Table 2. Each of the
question items was rated on a scale from 1 to 9 with negative adjectives
anchoring the right end and positive on the left. For each item, there was no
significant difference between item-based and form-based.
Table 1. Pre-questionnaire questionnaire.
|
||
Rating scale item |
Mean rating (standard deviation) |
|
1 = no experience; 9 = very experienced |
Form-based (n = 18) |
Item-based (n = 20) |
1. Overall use
of computers |
6.89 (1.37) |
6.80 (1.40) |
2. Use of the
Internet |
7.11 (1.37) |
7.10 (1.25) |
3. Use of the
World Wide Web |
7.00 (1.50) |
6.85 (1.46) |
4. Completing
on-line surveys |
5.28 (2.08) |
4.95 (1.88) |
5. Use of
email |
7.61 (1.04) |
7.68 (1.29) |
6. Shopping on
the Internet |
5.11 (2.65) |
5.70 (1.89) |
Table 2: Post-questionnaire questionnaire.
|
||
Rating scale item |
Mean (standard deviation) |
|
|
Form-based (n =
15) |
Item-based (n = 20 ) |
1. Ease of
moving through the survey (1 = very hard; 9 =very easy) |
7.50 (1.65) |
6.45 (1.90) |
2. Ease of moving
around through the parts of the organization records (1 = very hard; 9 =very
easy) |
6.61 (1.82) |
6.25 (1.68) |
3. Ease of
finding information in the organization records (1 = very hard; 9 =very easy) |
4.11 (1.88) |
4.8 (1.79) |
4.
Organization of questions and sections of survey (1 = poorly organized; 2 =
well organized) |
5.56 (1.76) |
5.85 (2.08) |
5.
Organization of information in organization records (1 = poorly organized; 2
= well organized) |
5.06 (1.73) |
5.55 (1.79) |
6. Overall completing
this survey was (1 = very hard; 9 =very easy) |
5.22 (1.70) |
5.85 (2.18) |
7. I tended to
have trouble with the two browser windows and would frequently get lost (1 =
highly disagree; 2 = highly agree) |
3.06 (2.07) |
2.7 (1.89) |
8. I think that
it would be easier it the survey were on paper (1 = highly disagree; 2 =
highly agree) |
4.22 (2.37) |
3.4 (2.23) |
9. I think
that it would be easier if the organization records were in a booklet (1 =
highly disagree; 2 = highly agree) |
4.28 (2.22) |
3.8 (2.17) |
11. I enjoyed
participating in this experiment (1 = highly disagree; 2 = highly agree) |
5.72 (1.90) |
5.00 (1.95) |
Navigational Data
There were four aspects
of the navigational data that were explored. Graphical representations provided
an overview of the order in which participants answered the questionnaire
items. Bar charts of the navigational data, sectioned into 5 time intervals,
were created to illustrate the percentage of accesses made to each
questionnaire item within each interval. Another analysis looked at when,
during the five time intervals, participants were accessing primarily
questionnaire items or accessing organizational records. The final analysis
shows how often participants traversed within and between the organizational
records and the questionnaire items.
Using a parallel
coordinate chart (Inselberg, 1985; Manaster, 2000), a graphical representation
of the participants’ navigation through the questionnaire was constructed. Each
vertical axis represents a single access (a click of the mouse) to a
questionnaire item. The first vertical axis on the left-hand side represents
the first access, at time point 1 (T1), to a questionnaire item made by a
participant and the right-most vertical axis represents the last access to a
questionnaire item. The height of the vertical axes represents the
questionnaire items from 1 (on the bottom) to 41 (at the top). Each
participant’s navigation pattern is represented by a trace drawn across all the
vertical axes.
Figure 5 shows
the parallel coordinate chart for the item-based group and figure 6 shows the parallel
coordinate chart for the form-based group. Although both groups essentially
answered question items in the linear sequence presented, the item-based group
was more rigid while the form-based group had more accesses to questions out of
sequential order.
|
Q U E S T I O N I
T E M S |
41 .. .. à .. .. à .. .. à .. 1 |
|
|
||
|
|
Figure 5.
Parallel coordinate chart for the item-based group. |
||||
|
Q U E S T I O N I T E M S |
41 .. .. à .. .. à .. .. à .. 1 |
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 6.
Parallel coordinate chart for the form-based group. |
|||
For each
participant, accesses to questionnaire items were listed in temporal order and segmented
into 5 intervals. Figures 7,8,9,10, and 11 depict accesses to questionnaire
items within each interval. The length of each bar represents the percentage of
accesses to a questionnaire item within the interval (number of mouse clicks to each question item divided by the
total number of mouse clicks for all questions within an interval for the
group). These figures provide detailed views of item-based and form-based
questionnaire navigational patterns. As was seen in the parallel coordinate
graphs, the participants tended to answer questions in the same sequence in
which they were presented. The Interval 2 and 3 graphs show that during those
intervals, the form-based group were answering questions items that came later
in sequential order (up to question 38) compared to the item-based group (up to
question 22).
|
Figure 7. Interval 1: Percentage of
accesses to question items for form-based and item-based groups. |
|
Figure 8. Interval
2: Percentage of accesses to question items for form-based and item-based
groups. |
|
Figure 9.
Interval 3: Percentage of accesses to question items for form-based and
item-based groups. |
|
Figure 10. Interval
4: Percentage of accesses to question items for form-based and item-based
groups. |
|
Figure 11.
Interval 5: Percentage of accesses to question items for form-based and
item-based groups.. |
Navigation between the
questionnaire and organizational records
For each
participant, their list of accesses to both questionnaire items and
organizational records pages were sectioned, in temporal order, into 5
intervals. Within each interval, the percentage of accesses to questionnaire
items and organizational records was calculated (the number of question items
accessed in the interval divided by the total number of accesses in that
interval). Table 3 lists the mean percentage of accesses that were made to the
questionnaire items as opposed to the organizational records. An analysis of
variance was performed on the data for the five intervals and questionnaire
type (item-based and form-based). This analysis yielded an interaction between
intervals and questionnaire type, F (4,144) = 68.74, p<.001. This
interaction is shown in Figure 12.
These results
confirm that when beginning the questionnaire, the majority of accesses made by
participants are within the organizational records. In the later intervals, the
majority of accesses are made to the questionnaire items. The form-based group
made the switch between primarily accessing organizational records to primarily
accessing questionnaire items earlier than the item-based group.
Consecutive
access points were combined in pairs to better understand how participants were
navigating organizational records and questionnaire items. A traversal pair is
a traversal from 1) an organizational record to another organizational record,
2) an organizational record to a questionnaire item, 3) a questionnaire item to
an organizational record, or 4) a questionnaire item to another questionnaire
item. For each participant, the percentage of each traversal pair was calculated.
Table 4 displays, for both form-based and item-based questionnaire types, the
mean percentage of each type of traversal pair. An analysis of variance was
performed on these data and a significant interaction between questionnaire
type and traversal pair was found (F(3, 108) = 5.71, p<.005). The item-based
group made more traversals within the organizational records than did the
form-based group. However, the form-based group had more traversals between
questionnaire items. These results are displayed graphically in Figure 13.
Table 3. Mean Percentage of Accesses to
Questionnaire Items (standard deviation) |
||
|
Form-based (N
= 18) |
Item-based (N
= 20) |
Interval 1 |
34.685 (11.41) |
29.05 (5.93) |
Interval 2 |
38.098 (13.32) |
26.28 (9.91) |
Interval 3 |
52.608 (17.25) |
30.97 (13.86) |
Interval 4 |
68.022 (15.55) |
72.24 (11.98) |
Interval 5 |
59.735 (15.77) |
59.97 (15.41) |
|
Figure 12. Mean
percentage of accesses to questionnaire items over five time intervals. |
Table 4. Mean
percentage of traversal types (standard deviation) |
||
|
Form-based
(n=18) |
Item-based
(n=20) |
Organizational
Record – Organizational Record |
25.77 (7.21) |
33.248 (10.16) |
Organizational Record – Questionnaire
Item |
23.95 (2.78) |
22.989 (3.48) |
Questionnaire
Item – Organizational Record |
23.92 (2.91) |
22.947 (3.47) |
Questionnaire
Item – Questionnaire Item |
26.36 (7.18) |
20.815 (5.42) |
|
Figure 13.
Mean percentage as a function of traversal type. |
Comments
Comments about
the CSAQ were collected during the post-questionnaire questionnaire. The most frequent
comment in the form-based group was that it was difficult to find the answers
to some of the questions. One participant stated that “the asked for
calculations and stats that the record did not provide. i had look through the record, remember the
numbers and then calculate” and another stated that “the survey was easy to
follow but all the information for the club was hard to find sometimes.” For
the item based group, several comments and suggestions were made concerning the
design on-line surveys. One participant said to “put the questions in on one
page, (not a page a question...).” Similarly, another participant stated that
designers should “put all the questions for each section on one page, so you
can see all of them at once. It is very
hard to hit previous question and next question to try to find one you answered
wrong.” The third participant gave more elaborate suggestions to “show several
questions at once when it is a long survey... give a progress report to the
user. I disliked not knowing how much of the survey I had completed at any
given time. it would have been easier
if the survey floated on top of the browser in a corner, so that I would not
have to go back and forth between two monitors. In this case, using frames or
two separate windows would have been better.”
There is a great
potential for the use of computerized self-administered business/organizational
questionnaires. Since various interface designs can bring about differences in the
ways that respondents navigate between the questionnaire and organizational
records, it is necessary to examine the effects of these designs. This study
looked at two interface designs, the form-based and the item-based. The
objective of this study was to observe differences in navigational patterns and
determine if the design had an effect on completion time, accuracy or
subjective satisfaction measures. What we found was that respondents had
similar accuracy scores, completion times, and subject satisfaction measures
regardless of the questionnaire interface design that they used. However, in
looking at the navigational data, the different interface designs did affect
the ways that respondents completed the questionnaire.
It was found
that respondents in the form-based group were more likely to answer questions
in a non-linear sequence. We believe that because this group had contextual
information, that is, they had the entire page of questions for each section
available to them, they were more likely to fill in questions as they located
them within the organizational records. The item-based group answered the
questions more linearly which may indicate that they knew exactly where to find
the answers or that they were searching the organizational records each time
they went to the next question.
One observation
regarding the percentage of time that was spent on organizational record
accesses versus questionnaire item accesses was that respondents in both groups
seemed to spend considerable time at the beginning learning where information
was located in the organizational records before they started to answer
question items. During the first and second time intervals, respondents were
mainly accessing organizational record pages. The form-based group began to
answer questions earlier than the item-based group, starting in the third time
interval. This supports the idea that respondents who have an overview of the
questions can proceed to use the organizational records efficiently by
answering questions as they find them during exploration of the records. By
contrast, respondents using the item-based interface tended not to begin to
answer questions until after the third interval. We speculate that since they
did not know what to look for, they needed to spend additional effort learning
the structure of the records. This is also reflected in the fact that the
item-based group had more organizational record-to-organizational record
traversals than did the form-based group. For the form-based group, they had less
repeated searching through the organizational records. The item-based group
needed to spend additional “familiarization time.”
The results that
were obtained from this study show that the interface design significantly
affects how respondents go about completing a CSAQ for an organization. The
questionnaire and organizational records that were used for this study were
straightforward and easy to follow. There were only 8 pages of organizational
records and 41 question items. We expect that as records and questionnaires get
larger and more complex, the navigational patterns found will affect accuracy
scores, completion times, and subjective satisfaction. Future research should
include questionnaires with skip patterns and larger sets of organizational records.
In this study,
we examined how respondents approached an organizational CSAQ when they had no
prior experience with either the questionnaire or the organizational records.
Future research should also investigate changes as respondents gain experience
of time with the records and/or the CSAQ.
References
Dillman, D. A.
(2000). Mail and internet surveys (2nd ed.), New York, N.Y.: John
Wiley & Sons.
Inselberg, A.
(1985). The plane with parallel coordinates. The Visual Computer, 1:69--91,
1985.
Norman, K.L.,
Friedman, Z., Norman, K.D., and Stevenson, R. (2000). Navigational issues in
the design of on-line self-administered questionnaires. Laboratory for
Automation Psychology technical report. LAP-TR-2000-1.
Manaster, C.
(2000), Data Loom website. http://www.concentric.net/~Manaster/software/dataloom/index.html
Acknowledgements
This work was
funded in part by a grant from the Statistical Research Division of the U.S.
Bureau of the Census (Contract #43YABC917123). We thank Kent Marquis, Beth
Nichols, Betty Murphy, and others at the Census for their guidance and
direction in this research. We would also like to thank Ben Shneiderman and
Catherine Plaisant from the Human-Computer Interaction Laboratory at the
University of Maryland for their input
Appendix A
Questions in Each of the Four Sections of
the Survey on Student Organizations
Information
1. What is the name of the organization?
(Name)
1. Who is the president of the organization?
(Name)
2. When was the organization first formed?
(Date)
3. Does the organization have a savings
account in a bank? (Yes/No)
4. When were elections held for the officers
of the organization? (date, month/day)
5. Did the organization request and get
funds from the Student Government? (Yes/No)
6. Did the organization participate in the
"First Look Fair" for student organizations? (Yes/No)
7. Has the organization ever been
disciplined or censured by the University? (Yes/No)
8. Does the organization use office space in
the student union? (Yes/No)
9. Does the organization have a Web site?
(Yes/No)
10. If “Yes” to question 10: URL is _______
Activities
11. How many members belong to the
organization? (Enter number)
12. How many events were sponsored during the
year? (Enter number)
13. How many members ran for offices in the
last election? (Enter number)
14. How many organizational meetings were
held last year? (Enter number)
15. What proportion of the events were fund
raisers (give an estimate)? (scale from 0-1)
16. What proportion of the members are active
in the organization (e.g., attend meetings and events, contribute finanacially,
etc.) (give an estimate)? (scale from 0-1)
17. How many committees does the organization
have? (Enter number)
18. How many officers does the organization
have? (Enter number)
19. How many meetings must a member attend to
remain on the active list? (Enter number)
20. How many bylaws pertain to the unique
activities of the organization? (Enter number)
Positions
21. From the activities and positions of the
statements please rate (scale from Academic/Scholarly to Sports/Entertainment)
22. How diverse would you say the
organization is from it membership list? (scale from Very Homogeneous to Very
Diverse)
23. Would you estimate that the membership of
the organization is: (Predominantly Male, Slightly more male, About equal male
and female, Slightly more female, Predominantly Female)
24. Is this organization involved in
community service projects?(Yes/No)
25. In your estimation, how important is this
organization to student life at the University of Maryland? (scale from Very
Little Importance to Very Great Importance)
26. In you opinion does this organization add
to the quality of life of students on campus? (Yes/No)
27. Would this organization be in anyway
offensive to other student groups or to parents and alumni? (Yes/No)
28. Does the organization seem open to change
or is it closed? (Open/Closed)
29. Are the organization's activities
consistent with the Bylaws?(Yes/No)
Finances
30. Do the minutes reflect participation of
the membership or just the opinions of the elected officers? (Participation by
members/Only elected officers)
31. What is the total yearly budget for the
organization?(Enter amount)
32. What is the average contribution by
members (give an estimate)? (Enter amount)
33. How much money was raised by fund raiser
events? (Enter amount)
34. How much money was spent on advertising
the organization? (Enter amount)
35. Did the organization spend more than it
collected through dues, contributions, and fund raisers? (Yes/No)
36. What was the total amount spent on
election campaigns by candidates for the presidency of the organization? (Enter
amount)
37. How much money was received by the
organization from General Student Fees? (Enter amount)
38. How much was spent on food and beverages
for events by the organization? (Enter amount)
39. What is the worth of office furniture, equipment,
computers, supplies, etc. owned by the organization? (Enter amount)
40. How much money did the organization have
at the end of the year? (Enter amount)
.