Home > Publications . Search All . Browse All . Country . Browse PSC Pubs . PSC Report Series

PSC In The News

RSS Feed icon

H. Luke Shaefer and colleagues argue for a universal child allowance

Hindustan Times points out high value of H-1B visas for US innovation, welfare, and tech firm profits

Novak, Geronimus, Martinez-Cardoso: Threat of deportation harmful to immigrants' health

More News

Highlights

Heather Ann Thompson wins Pulitzer Prize for book on Attica uprising

Lam explores dimensions of the projected 4 billion increase in world population before 2100

ISR's Nick Prieur wins UMOR award for exceptional contribution to U-M's research mission

How effectively can these nations handle outside investments in health R&D?

More Highlights

Next Brown Bag

Mon, April 10, 2017, noon:
Elizabeth Bruch

Study Abroad Survey Instruments: A Comparison of Survey Types and Experiences

Archived Abstract of Former PSC Researcher

Durant, M., and Cassandra Dorius. 2007. "Study Abroad Survey Instruments: A Comparison of Survey Types and Experiences." Journal of Studies in International Education, 11(1): 33-53.

This study examines different survey instruments used to assess the experiences of U.S. study abroad participants. The intended audience is international and area study practitioners interested in assessing study abroad programs through postprogram interviews. An interview with the top 20 universities for number of students sent on study abroad reveals a broad picture of the type of survey instruments used across the United States to assess student experiences. Within this context and based on 19 years of data collection from study abroad participants with four data collection modes (a standard questionnaire with multiple choice and open-ended questions, a multiple choice bubble sheet response format, a scanned form, and a Web-based survey), one university's experience is analyzed in depth to expand on the benefits and drawbacks of specific survey types. Lessons learned about when each type might be appropriate for different institutional goals and situations are presented.

DOI:10.1177/1028315306286929 (Full Text)

Browse | Search : All Pubs | Next