View
54
Download
2
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Fashion Institute of Technology. Campus Climate Assessment Results of Report. April 22-23, 2013. Climate In Higher Education. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
Fashion Institute of Technology
Campus Climate Assessment
Results of Report
April 22-23, 2013
1
Climate In Higher Education
Climate (Living, Working, Learning)
Creation and
Distribution of
Knowledge
Community Members
Barcelo, 2004; Bauer, 1998, Kuh & Whitt, 1998; Hurtado, 1998, 2005; Ingle, 2005; Milhem, 2005; Peterson, 1990; Rankin, 1994, 1998, 2003, 2005; Rankin & Reason, 2008; Smith, 2009; Tierney, 1990; Worthington, 2008 3
Assessing Campus Climate
Rankin & Reason, 2008
What is it?
• Campus Climate is a construct
Definition?
• Current attitudes, behaviors, and standards and practices of employees and students of an institution
How is it measured?
• Personal Experiences• Perceptions• Institutional Efforts
4
Campus Climate & Students
How students experience their
campus environment influences both learning and
developmental outcomes.1
Discriminatory environments have a negative effect on student learning.2
Research supports the pedagogical value of
a diverse student body and faculty on enhancing learning
outcomes.3
1 Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991, 20052 Cabrera, Nora, Terenzini, Pascarella, & Hagedron, 1999; Feagin, Vera & Imani, 1996; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991. 3 Hale, 2004; Harper & Quaye , 2004; Harper, & Hurtado, 2009; Hurtado, 2003. 5
Campus Climate & Faculty/Staff
The personal and professional
development of employees including
faculty members, administrators, and staff members are impacted by campus climate.1
Faculty members who judge their campus
climate more positively are more
likely to feel personally supported and perceive their work unit as more
supportive.2
Research underscores the relationships between (1) workplace discrimination
and negative job/career attitudes and (2)
workplace encounters with prejudice and lower health/well-being..3
1Settles, Cortina, Malley, and Stewart, 20062Sears, 20023Silverschanz, Cortina, Konik, & Magley, 2007; Costello, 2012 6
Projected Outcomes
FIT will add to their knowledge base with regard to how constituent groups currently feel about their particular campus climate and how the community responds to them (e.g., pedagogy, curricular issues, professional development, inter-group/intra-group relations, respect issues).
FIT will use the results of the assessment to inform current/on-going work.
7
Examine the Research• Review work
already completed
Preparation• Readiness of
each campus
Assessment• Examine the
climate
Follow-up• Building on
the successes and addressing the challenges
Setting the Context for Beginning the Work
8
Overview of the Project
• Assessment Tool Development and Implementation
Phase I
• Data Analysis
Phase II
• Final Report and Presentation
Phase III
10
Instrument/Sample
Final instrument • 103 questions and additional space for
respondents to provide commentary• On-line or paper & pencil options
Sample = Population• All students and employees of FIT’s
community received an invitation to participate from Dr. Brown and members of the CSGW forwarded subsequent invitations.
12
Survey Limitations
Self-selection bias Response rates Social desirability
Caution in generalizing results
for constituent groups with
significantly lower response rates
13
Method Limitation
Data were not reported for groups of fewer than 5
individuals where identity could be compromised.
Instead, small groups were combined to eliminate possibility
of identifying individuals.
14
Results
Response Rates
17
Who are the respondents?
2,046 people responded to the call to participate (16.5% overall response rate)
1058 different respondents contributed remarks to one or more of the open-ended questions
18
Response Rates by Position
15%
•Students ( n = 1497)
49%
•Staff (n = 312)
14%
•Faculty (n = 238)
19
Student Response Rates
16%
• Undergraduate Student - Day
17%
• Undergraduate Student – Evening/Weekend
4%
• Non-Degree Student
15%
• Graduate Student
86%
• Certificate Student
20
Faculty Response Rates
42%
• Tenure/Tenure-Track Faculty
57%
• Non-Classroom Faculty
7%
• Adjunct
21
Staff Response Rates
46%
• Staff
29%
• Classroom Assistants
>100%
• Administrators
22
Results
Additional Demographic Characteristics
23
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)(Duplicated Total)
18
111
0
203
8555
147
642
13
239
6844 34
11 12
African (n = 18)African American/Black (n = 111)Alaskan Native (n = 0)Asian (n = 203)Asian American (n = 85)Caribbean/West Indian (n - 55)European (n = 147)European American/White (n = 642)Indian subcontinent (n = 13)Latino(a)/Hispanic (n = 239)Latin American (n = 68)Middle Eastern (n = 44)Native American Indian (n = 34)Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native (n = 11)Southeast Asian (n =12)
24
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)(Unduplicated Total)
967918
People of ColorWhite People
25
Respondents by Gender Identity and Position Status (n)
4 respondents identified as transgender, but given the small “n” are not included in subsequent gender analyses26
Respondents by Sexual Identity and Position Status (n)
27
Respondents with Conditions that Substantially Affect Major Life Activities
n %
No disability 1711 83.5ADD/ADHD 91 4.4Asperger’s/ High Functioning Autism 2 0.1Chronic Illness 26 1.3Emotional/Psychological 85 4.2Hearing 13 0.6Learning disabled 33 1.6Medical/health 45 2.2Physical/mobility ambulatory 9 0.4Physical/mobility non-ambulatory 3 0.1Visual 17 0.8Other 15 0.7
28
Respondents by Spiritual Affiliation
957
144195 158
243 265
Christian
Other than Christian
Agnostic
Atheist
Spiritual, no affiliation
No affiliation
31
Students by Class Standing (n)
34
Students’ Family Income by Dependency Status (n)
35
Students’ Primary Methods for Paying for FIT
36
n %
Family contribution 761 51.1Loans (private and federal) 705 47.4Pell grant 378 25.4Personal contribution/job 333 22.4Credit card 281 18.9Academic scholarship 198 13.3Need based grant 165 11.1Other 82 5.5Employer sponsored support 11 0.7Tuition remission through FIT employee 11 0.7
Manners in Which Students Experienced Financial Hardship
n %
Difficulty purchasing my books/equipment/supplies 622 79.2Difficulty affording tuition 534 68.0Difficulty in affording transportation costs 411 52.4Difficulty in affording housing 388 49.4Difficulty affording fees 385 49.0Difficulty participating in co-curricular events or activities (alternative spring breaks, class trips, etc.) 240 30.6Difficulty traveling home during college breaks 224 28.5Difficulty in affording health insurance 169 21.5Difficulty affording FIT meal plan/food 144 18.3Other 48 6.1
37
Students’ Residence
Residencen %
On campus residence halls 518 34.8
Off campus Commuter 966 64.9
Living independently or with roommates in apartment/house
480 49.7
Living with family member/guardian 412 42.7
Missing 74 7.7
39
Time Students Expect to Spend at FIT to Complete Degrees (n)
40
Findings
42
“Comfortable”/ “Very Comfortable” with:
Classroom Climate for Faculty (78%)
Classroom Climate for Students (82%)
Department/Work Unit Climate (77%)
Overall Campus Climate (81%)
43
Comfort With Overall Climate and Department/Work Unit
No differences in comfort for overall campus climate and department/work unit by race, gender, sexual
identity, or religious/spiritual status
• When examining disability status, people with disabilities were less comfortable than people without disabilities
• When examining the data by position, administrators were more comfortable than faculty and staff
44
More than 80% of all students were comfortable with their classroom climate
There were no differences in
comfort by sexual identity or low-income status
When examining differences by racial identity, Students of
Color were less comfortable than White students
When examining differences by
gender identity, women students
were less comfortable than
men students
Comfort with Class Climate for Students
45
More than 85% of all faculty members were comfortable with their classroom climate
There were no differences in comfort by gender or
race
When examining differences by sexual
identity, LGBQ faculty were less comfortable than
heterosexual faculty
46
Least Comfortable with Classroom Climate for Faculty
Employees’ Overall Satisfaction
• “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their jobs/careers68%
• “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with the way their jobs/careers have progressed
57%
• “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their opportunities for job/career development
48% 47
Employee Overall Satisfaction
By Tenure status: Non-Tenured/Non-Tenure Track Faculty less satisfied than Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty
By Overall Position:
Staff and Non-Tenured/Non-Tenure Track Faculty less satisfied than Administrators
48
Challenges and Opportunities
55
Experiences with Harassment
• 304 respondents indicated that they had personally experienced exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) at FIT.
15%
56
Form of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
n %
Deliberately ignored or excluded 150 49.3
Intimidated/bullied 120 39.5
Isolated or left out 113 37.2
Isolated or left out when work was required in groups 65 21.4
Target of derogatory verbal remarks 50 16.4
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 304). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
57
Personally Experienced Based on…(%)
18 1817 17
Physical Appearance (n=55)Ethnicity (n=54)Age (n=52)Race (n=52)
58
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to University Status (%)
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
(n=174)¹
(n=26)²
(n=35)¹
(n=12)²
(n=4)¹
(n=0)²
(n=48)¹
(n=22)²
(n=18)¹
(n=7)²
(n=25)¹
(n=10)²
59
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Gender Identity (%)
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
Men Women
20
131214
Overall experienced conduct¹Experienced conduct due to gender identity²
(n=81)¹
(n=10)²
(n=214)¹
(n=30)²
60
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Racial Identity (%)
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
(n=145)¹
(n=44)²
(n=122)¹
(n=5)²
61
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Sexual Identity (%)
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
(n=49)¹
(n=19)²
(n=203)¹
(n=6)²
62
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Disability Status (%)
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
No Disability Disability
12
29
17
1
12
Overall experienced conduct¹Experienced conduct due to learning disability²Experienced conduct due to medical condition³
(n=209)¹ (n=77)¹
63
Location of Perceived Harassment
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 304). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
n %
In a classroom setting 106 34.9
In a campus office 65 21.4
In a public space on campus 51 16.8
In a meeting with a group of people 50 16.4
64
Source of Perceived Conduct by Position Status (n)
65
What did you do?1
Personal responses: Was angry (42%) Felt embarrassed (36%) Did nothing (36%) Told a friend (35%)
Reporting responses: Didn’t report it for fear their complaints would not be taken seriously (12%) Didn’t know who to go to (10%) Did report it but didn’t feel the complaint was taken seriously (9%) Made complaints to campus officials (5%)
1 Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 304). Respondents could mark more than one response
66
Unwanted Sexual Contact at FIT
21 respondents experienced unwanted sexual contact at FIT
More than half of respondents said it happened off-campus
67
Employee Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT
20% (n = 112)
Non-Bargaining Staff (27%)
Administrators (24%)
Bargaining Staff/Classroom Assistants (21%)
Non-Tenured/Non-Tenured Track Faculty (18%)Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty (17%)
71
Employee Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT
• Women (19%)• Men (23%)
Gender Identity
• Employees of Color (28%)• White Employees (15%)
Racial Identity
• LGBQ (33%)• Heterosexual (17%)
SexualIdentity
72
Why employees considered leaving and why they stayed…
Employees who considered leaving did so because of age discrimination; new supervisors; an uncomfortable, stressful or hostile working environment; inequities in one’s work unit; lack of promotion opportunities or acknowledgment of contributions to the department; and, “culture of entitlement.”
Employees stayed because of the time they already put into the institution; difficulty in finding another job; the vacation offered; benefits; they liked their departments and the students with whom they work; and, they loved their profession.
74
Student Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT
14% (n = 201)
During First Year (70%)
During Second Year (36%)
During Third Year (14%)
During Fourth Year (6%)
75
Student Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT
• Women (13%)• Men (14%)Gender
• Students of Color (13%)• White Students (15%)Race
• LGBQ (16%)• Heterosexual (13%)
Sexual Orientation
76
Why students considered leaving…
Some respondents offered that they felt ostracized because of their identity(ies); they experienced unfriendly students who are exclusive or “cliquey,” staff who are not helpful, and, “little campus enthusiasm” since everyone seems to be doing their own thing.
Others also described a racist campus; “general social discomfort;” personal psychological and medical struggles; physical disability; difficult time adjusting; hostile climate; political views; unfriendly environment for international students; and, level of high difficulty in one’s major as reasons for wanting to leave.
77
Why students stayed…
Networking opportunities; The FIT education and reputation are strong; They were already enrolled and didn’t want to fall behind or
disappoint family members; FIT had the program that they wanted; The proximity to the center of NYC; Friends and good faculty members and courses; Once they became more involved in campus they felt more
comfortable.
78
Perceptions
79
Respondents who observed conduct or communications directed towards a person/group of people that created an exclusionary, intimidating, offensive working or learning
environment…
In the last year… % n
18.0 355
80
Observed Harassment Based on…(%)
1716
1514
Position (n=75)
Ethnicity (n=65)
Physical Appearance (n=63)
Race (n=59)
82
Hiring Practices
22% n=115
Employment-Related Disciplinary
Actions
13% n=66
Employment Practices Related to
Promotion
24% n=127
Perceived DiscriminationEmployees
87
Perceived Discrimination
Position and ethnicity were cited as the most common bases for all observed
discriminatory employment practices.
88
Work-Life Issues
The majority of employee respondents expressed positive attitudes about work-life issues.
89
Welcoming Workplace Climate
More than half of all employees thought the workplace climate was welcoming for all characteristics listed
Respondents of Color and LGBQ respondents were least likely to believe the workplace climate was welcoming for employees based on gender, race, and sexual identity.
95
Welcoming Classroom Climate
More than half of all student/faculty respondents felt that the classroom climate was welcoming for students based on “difference” across all dimensions
Students of Color less comfortable than White students→ RACE
Students who identified with other than Christian less likely than Christian students → RELIGIOUS/SPIRITUAL VIEWS
Students from low income less likely than not low income → SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS
96
Student Perceptions of Campus Climate
66% of students believed the campus climate encourages free and open discussion of difficult topics.
34% of all students felt faculty pre-judge their abilities based on their identities/backgrounds
69% of all students knew faculty who they perceive as role models.
Students thought that FIT faculty (64%), staff (52%), and administrators (50%) were genuinely concerned with their welfare.
Students felt valued by faculty (72%) and other students (62%) in the classroom.
97
Institutional Actions
98
Campus Initiatives That Would Positively Affect the Climate - Employees
The majority of employees thought the following would positively affect the climate:
Access to counseling for
people who have experienced harassment
Mentorship for new faculty and
staff
Clear and fair process to resolve
conflicts
99
Campus Initiatives That Would Positively Affect the Climate - Students
The majority of students thought the following would positively affect the climate:
Person to address student
complaints of classroom inequity
Opportunities for cross-cultural
dialogue among students, and
between faculty, staff, and students
More effective faculty
mentorship of students
101
Summary
Strengths and Successes
Opportunities for Improvement
102
Context Interpreting the Summary
Although colleges and universities attempt to foster
welcoming and inclusive environments, they are not
immune to negative societal attitudes and discriminatory
behaviors.
As a microcosm of the larger social environment,
college and university campuses reflect the
pervasive prejudices of society.
Classism, Racism, Sexism, Genderism, Heterosexism, etc.
(Eliason, 1996; Hall & Sandler, 1984; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hart & Fellabaum, 2008; Malaney, Williams, & Gellar, 1997; Rankin, 2003; Rankin & Reason, 2008; Rankin, Weber, Blumenfeld, & Frazer, 2010; Smith, 2009; Worthington, Navarro, Loewy & Hart, 2008) 103
Overall Strengths & Successes
Students thought very positively about their academic experiences at FIT.
68% of employee respondents were satisfied with their jobs/careers at FIT.
82% of students and 78% of faculty were comfortable with the classroom climate.
81%
comfortable with the overall climate, and 77% with dept/work
unit climate.
104
Overall Opportunities for Improvement
18% (n = 355) believed that they
had observed conduct on campus
that created an exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored),
intimidating, offensive and/or or hostile (harassing)
working or learning environment within
the past year.
15% (n = 304) had personally
experienced exclusionary (e.g.,
stigmatized, shunned, ignored)
intimidating, offensive, and/or hostile conduct
within the past year.
105
Next Steps
113
Process Forward Sharing the Report with the Community
Spring 2013
Full Report and Power
Point will be available on FIT website
Full Report hard copies will also be
available
114
Process Forward - Fall 2013Following FIT Strategic Plan Approval
Diversity Council will sponsor a series of forums facilitated by 1-2 committee members
Purpose: To develop 2-3 actions that can be accomplished in the next year.
115
Questions and Discussion
116
Recommended