Remember the limitations of online research

With the easy availability of free (or very low-cost) online research tools, many school districts are relying heavily on this approach to collect the opinions of those who matter to the district’s success. Oftentimes, too heavily.

Make no mistake: We believe that any research is better than no research. It’s just important to know the limitations.

Specifically, online research opportunities offered to the entire patron population typically draw a much higher percentage of current district parents and others with a vested interest in the subject matter (staff members, for example) than would a more randomly selected approach such as a telephone survey. When this happens, the results tend to slant much more passionately than would be the case if the more “generically interested” were included in appropriate numbers.

Generally speaking, we recommend online research in three cases.

1. When the subject matter pertains to a specific audience that can be specifically invited to participate. In other words, if you want to know what parents think about a potential change in the bell schedule, online is a great way to do so (assuming you have access to e-mail addresses).

1. When you want to provide all interested parties an opportunity to comment. We typically recommend online as a supplement to telephone research, because it provides an outlet for those who aren’t contacted to speak up, and gives the school district the chance to say “Everyone can have their voices heard.”

1. When you simply don’t have the budget to do anything more comprehensive. As noted above, any research is better than no research. Just make certain to ask respondents if they are current parents or not, so that you can separate the data into those groups.

Code words in patron comment mask critical issue

We’ve worked with a number of school districts that have undergone a gradual ethnic and socioeconomic transformation in their student population that has left long-term patrons pining for the past. They often express this longing not openly, but rather by using code words which allow them to hide behind the desire for “equality” in education, facilities and the like.

Here’s a prime example, taken from an actual patron research project we conducted:

“There should be equal education for all. Sometimes special interest groups or certain schools seem to receive more attention.”

What is this patron’s exact concern? That’s hard to say, because he or she didn’t want to provide more detail beyond this statement.

It could be very innocent, meaning that this individual’s children might attend the oldest school in the district, and there’s a bit of jealousy at everything the new facilities have to offer. It could be that the individual’s child falls in the middle of the pack, in terms of performance, and therefore doesn’t receive any special treatment. (This is an issue we hear about all the time from patrons. The “typical” students get nothing, while those who are gifted or those who have IEPs get all the attention.) It could also mean that this patron is trying to dance around his or her concerns about the district’s changing ethnic portfolio, by talking about “special interest groups.”

Again, we can’t tell exactly what the issue is. We only know that this patron feels slighted, and our experience suggests that he or she is not alone in those feelings.

So, what’s a school district to do? We’ve always counseled that there will be certain individuals who you will never satisfy; this person might be one of them, and no amount of effort will make a difference. Yet, this patron could also be someone who is among the “recently annoyed,” that group of people that is salvageable through steady attention to communicating efforts by the district to provide equivalent (notice we didn’t say “equal”) facilities, programs and education.

Even if this patron isn’t moved by this line of communication, doing so will go a long way toward reinforcing the district’s commitment to these principals for the patron group as a whole.

How online research can help complete the strategic story

Online research falls somewhere between tightly constructed quantitative research – where precise audience counts are employed to make certain the results are truly representative – and qualitative research (like focus groups) where the objective is to “hear the voice of the target audience,” rather than to generate statistics.

In fact, the term we use to describe online is “quasi-quantitative.” It’s quantitative in the sense that you usually generate a meaningful number of responses, but it’s “quasi,” because you have limited control over whether or not those who respond constitute an accurate balance of people from the target audience in terms of age, where they live, and so on.

Recognizing its limitations, we’ve found multiple ideal uses for online. Perhaps the most compelling is when online is used to research the opinions of school district staff at the same time true quantitative research is taking place with patrons.

Over the last 18 months, we’ve recommended adding this tool to the data gathering process for one very good reason: Patrons consider school district employees to be a high value source of information about what’s going on.

Knowing what your staff members are thinking, and comparing their opinions to the ones held by patrons on the same issues, provides critical management information that either says that the staff is on board with what’s being considered, or there is work to be done to strengthen their understanding and build greater support.

But the numerical results themselves are only half the story. The other half comes in looking at the percentage of employees who choose to participate. We’ve seen as low as 35% and as high as 65%. As you can imagine, districts with only 35% participation generally have more significant satisfaction and support issues to deal with than districts where staff members are only too happy to take part and share their thoughts.

This approach has proven to be an ideal application of a research tool that has its raving fans and its ardent detractors. If you have had an experience with online research that has been a success, we’d like to hear your story!

Election results show challenge in making up ground in the current economy

Patron Insight had six school districts with ballot measures on April 6, and the final results went according to how patrons expressed themselves in the research that had been conducted prior to the filing of election paperwork. Three won, and three lost.

The three districts that lost all were facing an uphill climb, according to the research results. In other words, all of them had to gain meaningful numbers of new supporters between the time the research was taken and Election Day to win. It didn’t happen and, in fact, all three of them saw their level of “yes” voters decrease from the initial research results which, again, weren’t encouraging to begin with.

Two of the three that did win also saw drops in support, but were blessed to have some cushion to sustain a drop that was within the 5% error factor for the research. The one that won and that did go up went from 58% support in the research to 60% at the polls. Such a jump is barely noticeable (and not statistically important) but, in this case it was critical. Thanks to Missouri’s 4/7 requirement for passage, a 2% slide the other way would have led to a very unhappy “watch party.”

Clearly, patron behavior in the ballot box suggests that there is little room – if any – for growth in support these days, no matter how solid your proposal, how critical the need, or how strategic your campaign.

Budget planning leads to discovery for Auburn-Washburn

With school districts wrapping up this year’s budget planning trauma, many that we are working with are pondering whether or not to ask their patrons to approve some form of revenue enhancement at the local level.

In a previous post, we observed that we are seeing some willingness among patrons in certain districts to consider a tax increase. But, not everybody is on board.

Specifically, we just published results from Auburn-Washburn (Kansas) USD 437 that showed an interesting pattern of response to the questions about revenue enhancement and/or cost reduction ideas.

Those patrons seemed to separate the options into three tiers, in terms of popularity. Tier one included a modest increase in class sizes and sharing some support staff between buildings – in other words, fairly painless. Tier two included such things as “Pay to Participate” fees and instituting transportation fees – suggesting that patrons think those who get more should pay for those privileges. At the bottom of the list were those items that were more systemically painful, if you will, such as class and textbook fee increases, and a tax increase.

Make no mistake – patrons adore this school district. But, they were clear in their desire to move slowly on cuts and revenue enhancement steps, if possible.

I’m guessing that’s a Board of Education that’s glad they asked, so that plans could be made accordingly.

Operating levy seen as possible budget option.

Actually, yes. Your patrons might surprise you with their willingness to support an operating levy increase.

Patron Insight recently completed research with the patrons of the Kearney (Mo.) R-I School District, in which we asked them to rank order 11 different options for cutting the budget and/or increasing revenue.

Number one on the list was to start a “pay to play” system for extracurricular activities, followed by “reduce non-instructional staff,” and “eliminate any renovation of school facilities.” A strong fourth? “Increase my taxes,” which was six places higher on the idea list than “increase class sizes.”

It was an eye-opener to the district, and may be to you. Send an e-mail with the subject line “Kearney Report” if you’d like to find out more.