Kennesaw State University
Campus Culture and Climate Assessment
Report Results
September 30, 2014
1
Climate In Higher Education
Community
Members
Create and
Distribute
of
Knowledge
Climate
(Living,
Working,
Learning)
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
2
Assessing Campus Climate
• Campus Climate is a construct
What is it?
Definition?
• Current attitudes, behaviors, and
standards and practices of employees
and students of an institution
How is it
measured?
• Personal Experiences
• Perceptions
• Institutional Efforts
Rankin & Reason, 2008
3
Campus Climate & Students
How students
experience their
campus environment
influences both
learning and
developmental
outcomes.1
1
2
3
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
Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991, 2005
Cabrera, Nora, Terenzini, Pascarella, & Hagedron, 1999; Feagin, Vera & Imani, 1996; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005.
Hale, 2004; Harper & Quaye , 2004; Harper, & Hurtado, 2009; Hurtado, 2003.
4
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, 2006
2002
3Costello, 2012; Silverschanz, Cortina, Konik, & Magley, 2007;
2Sears,
5
Project Overview
Phase I
• Focus Groups
Phase II
• Assessment Tool Development and Implementation
Phase III
• Data Analysis
Phase IV
• Final Report and Presentation
9
Survey Limitations
Selfselection
bias
Response
rates
Social
desirability
Caution in
generalizing results
for constituent
groups with low
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?
5,128 people responded to the call to
participate
17% overall response rate
Student Response Rates
•
Undergraduate
(n
=
3,360)
15%
•
Graduate
(n
=
213)
11%
3%
• Continuing Education (n = 55)
19
Employee Response Rates
52%
28%
• Staff (n = 815)
• Faculty (n = 685)
20
Results
Additional Demographic
Characteristics
21
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (%)
(Duplicated Total)
63%
White
20%
Black/African/African American
7%
Latino(a)/Chicano(a)/Hispanic
Asian/Asian American
4%
American Indian/Alaskan Native
3%
Other
2%
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
1%
Middle Eastern
1%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
22
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (%)
(Unduplicated Total)
23
Undergrad
Students
Grad
Students
Contin
Ed
Respondents by Gender Identity and
Position Status (%)
Women
77%
Men
23%
Women
64%
Men
34%
Women
63%
Men
35%
Staff
Genderqueer
1%
Women
66%
Faculty
Men
32%
Women
60%
Men
38%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Note: Responses with n’s less than 5 are not presented in the figure
25
Respondents by Sexual Identity and
Position Status (n)
Note: Responses with n’s less than 5 are not presented in the figure
26
20% of Respondents Identify as Having a
Condition that Substantially Affect Major Life
Activities
Disability
n
%
Mental Health/Psychological Condition
326
6.4
Mental Learning Disability
292
5.7
Chronic Diagnosis or Medical Condition
189
3.7
Physical/Mobility condition that affects walking
97
1.9
Visually Impaired or Complete Loss of Vision
95
1.9
Physical/Mobility condition that does not affect walking
63
1.2
Hearing Impaired or Complete Loss of Hearing
53
1.0
Acquired/Traumatic Brain Injury
40
0.8
Speech/Communication Condition
39
0.8
Learning Disability
24
0.5
Other
35
0.7
27
Respondents by
Religious/Spiritual Affiliation (%)
28
Citizenship Status
Citizenship
n
%
U.S. Citizen
4,766
92.9
266
5.2
69
1.3
Non-U.S. Citizen
Multiple Citizenships
30
Undergraduate Students by
Current Year (n)
First-Year
Second-Year
Third-Year
Fourth-Year
Fifth Year or More
639
838
680
648
521
38
Students’ Residence
Residence
n
%
Campus Housing
822
22.7
Non-Campus Housing
675
18.6
Independently in an apartment/house
1,048
28.9
Living with family member/guardian
1,057
29.1
18
0.5
Homeless
Note: Table includes student respondents (n = 3,628).
40
Findings
45
“Comfortable”/ “Very Comfortable” with:
Overall Campus Climate (83%)
Department/Work Unit Climate (77%)
Classroom Climate (Undergraduate, 82%)
Classroom Climate (Graduate, 85%)
Classroom Climate (Faculty, 85%)
46
Challenges and Opportunities
52
Personal Experiences of Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive or Hostile Conduct
21%
• 1,050 respondents indicated
that they had personally
experienced exclusionary
(e.g., shunned, ignored),
intimidating, offensive
and/or hostile conduct at
KSU in the past year
53
Personal Experiences of Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive or Hostile Conduct
30%
• 326 of those respondents
said the conduct interfered
with their ability to work or
learn at KSU
70%
• 724 of those respondents
said the conduct did not
interfere with their ability to
work or learn at KSU
54
Forms of Experienced Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive or Hostile Conduct
n
%
Isolated or left out
472
45.0
Deliberately ignored or excluded
454
43.2
Intimidated/bullied
381
36.3
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 1,050).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
55
Personally Experienced Based on…(%)
Race (n=170)
Religious/Spiritual Views (n=158)
Ethnicity (n=176)
Age (n=193)
38
35
35
Gender/Gender Identity (n=163)
32
32
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 1,050).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
56
Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Intimidating,
Offensive or Hostile Conduct Due to Race (%)
Overall experienced conduct¹
Of those who experienced exclusionary conduct, said they experienced conduct as a result of
race²
Of those who experienced exclusionary conduct, said they experienced conduct as a result of
ethnicity3
68
20
29
75
46
35
White
56
26
20
People of Color
Multiracial
(n = 628)¹
(n = 303)¹
(n = 82)¹
(n = 185)²
(n = 206)²
(n = 38)²
(n = 220) 3
(n = 226) 3
(n = 46)3
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.
57
Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Intimidating,
Offensive or Hostile Conduct Due to Religious/Spiritual
Affiliation (%)
Overall experienced conduct¹
Of those who experienced exclusionary conduct, said they experienced conduct as a result
of their religious/spiritual affiliation²
73
62
44
41
19
Christian
24
Other
40
28
21
No Affiliation
20
Multiple
Spiritual
(n = 633)¹
(n = 47)¹
(n = 170)¹
(n = 22)¹
(n = 149)¹
(n = 258)²
(n = 29)²
(n = 75)²
(n = 16)²
(n = 60)²
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.
58
Location of Experienced Conduct
n
%
In a class/lab/clinical setting
319
30.4
While working at a KSU job
266
25.3
In a meeting with a group of people
253
24.1
In a public space at KSU
243
23.1
In a KSU administrative office
168
16.0
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 1,050).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
61
Source of Experienced Conduct by
Position Status (%)
62
What did you do?
Personal responses:




Was angry (49%)
Felt embarrassed (36%)
Told a friend (31%)
Ignored it (29%)
Reporting responses:




Didn’t report it for fear the complaint wouldn’t be taken seriously (14%)
Didn’t know to whom to go (10%)
Did report it but did not feel the complaint was taken seriously (9%)
Reported it to a KSU employee/official (9%)
63
Qualitative Themes
Experienced Exclusionary Conduct
Lack of Advocacy for Concerns
Climate of Fear
Public Displays of the Conduct
Racial Discrimination
LGBT Discrimination
Sexual Harassment Based on Gender Identity
64
Unwanted Sexual Contact
at Kennesaw State University
76 respondents (2%) experienced
unwanted sexual contact at KSU
65
Unwanted Sexual Contact
at KSU
Undergraduate
Student respondents
(2%, n = 59)
Respondents
With
Disabilities
(3%, n = 31)
Genderqueer
respondents
(23%, n = 5)
Women
respondents
(2%, n = 53)
LGBQ
respondents
(5%, n = 20)
66
Qualitative Themes
Why Unwanted Sexual Contact Went
Unreported
Fearful to Report Unwanted Contact
Lack of Staff Support
Felt Responsible
Felt Embarrassed
Off Campus Location
Did Not Perceive the Incident as Sexual Assault
67
Employees Who
Seriously Considered Leaving KSU
47% of Staff
respondents (n = 386)
49% of Faculty
respondents (n = 332)
68
Faculty & Staff Who
Seriously Considered Leaving KSU
By Racial
Identity
• 57% of Multiracial respondents
• 49% of People of Color respondents
• 47% of White respondents
By Sexual
Identity
• 53% of LGBQ respondents
• 48% of Heterosexual respondents
• 44% of Asexual/Other respondents
By Disability
Status
• 58% of respondents With Disability
• 46% of respondents Without Disability
69
Reasons Faculty and Staff
Respondents Considered Leaving KSU
Reason
n
%
Financial reasons
432
59.3
Limited opportunities for advancement
290
39.8
Tension in department with supervisor/manager
255
35.0
Climate was unwelcoming
214
29.4
Interested in a position at another institution
151
20.7
70
Qualitative Themes
Why Considered leaving…
Low Salary/Lack of Pay Raise
Experienced or Observed Bullying
Limited Advancement Opportunities
Discrimination
71
32% (n = 1,086) of Undergraduate
Students Seriously Considered Leaving
KSU
By Gender
Identity
By Sexual
Identity
By Disability
Status
• 56% of Genderqueer Students
• 33% of Men Student respondents
• 31% of Women Student respondents
• 35% of LGBQ Student respondents
• 31% of Heterosexual Student respondents
• 30% of Student respondents With Disability
• 39% of Student respondents Without
Disability
72
Undergraduate Students Who
Seriously Considered Leaving KSU
By Generational
Status
• 34% of Not First-Generation Student
respondents
• 25% of First-Generation Student respondents
By Citizenship
Status
• 33% of U.S. Citizen Student respondents
• 21% of Non-U.S. Citizen Student
respondents
By
Socioeconomic
Status
• 34% of Not Low-Income Student respondents
• 29% of Low-Income Student respondents
73
Reasons Student Respondents
Considered Leaving KSU
Reason
n
%
Transfer/I never intended to graduate from
KSU
326
29.3
Climate was unwelcoming
233
21.0
Didn’t offer my major
214
19.2
Financial reasons
195
17.5
Personal reasons
190
17.1
Coursework was not challenging enough
132
11.9
74
Qualitative Themes
Why Considered leaving…
Desire to Transfer
Discrimination
75
Perceptions
76
Respondents who observed conduct or communications
directed towards a person/group of people that created an
exclusionary, intimidating, offensive and/or hostile working
or learning environment…
19% (n = 982)
77
Form of Observed Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive, or Hostile Conduct
n
%
Derogatory remarks
516
52.5
Person felt isolated or left out
385
39.2
Deliberately ignored or excluded
375
38.2
Intimidated/bullied
298
30.3
Racial/ethnic profiling
181
18.4
Assumption that someone was admitted/hired/promoted based
on his/her identity
163
16.6
Person singled out as the spokesperson for their identity group
156
15.9
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 982).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
78
Observed Exclusionary, Intimidating,
Offensive, or Hostile Conduct Based
on…(%)
23
22
Gender/Gender Identity (n=130)
19
Race (n=211)
18
17
Ethnicity (n=183)
Sexual Identity (n=181)
Religious/Spiritual Views (n=165)
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 982).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
79
Qualitative Themes
Observed Conduct
Overt and Covert Bullying
Lack of Response
LGBT: Religious Protesting & Transgender Issues
85
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust
Hiring Practices
19% (n = 129) of Faculty respondents
18% (n = 142) of Staff respondents
86
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust Hiring
Practices by Select Demographics
By Gender
Identity
• 19% of Women
• 16% of Men
By Racial
Identity
• 28% of People of Color
• 22% of Multiracial
• 15% of White
87
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust Hiring
Practices by Select Demographics
By
Disability
Status
• 24% With Disabilities
• 17% Without Disabilities
By Sexual
Identity
• 30% of LGBQ
• 22% of Asexual/Other
• 17% of Heterosexual
88
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust
Employment-Related Disciplinary Actions
(Up to and Including Dismissal)
10% (n = 69) of Faculty respondents
12% (n = 98) of Staff respondents
89
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust EmploymentRelated Disciplinary Actions
Practices by Select Demographics
By Gender
Identity
• 11% of Women
• 11% of Men
By Racial
Identity
• 14% of People of Color
• 17% of Multiracial
• 10% of White
90
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust EmploymentRelated Disciplinary Actions
Practices by Select Demographics
By
Disability
Status
• 16% With Disabilities
• 10% Without Disabilities
By Sexual
Identity
• 15% of LGBQ
• 19% of Asexual/Other
• 11% of Heterosexual
91
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust
Practices Related to Promotion
23% (n = 156) of Faculty respondents
28% (n = 223) of Staff respondents
92
Perceptions of Unfair/Unjust Practices
Related to Promotion by Select
Demographics
By
Disability
Status
By Racial
Identity
• 30% With Disabilities
• 24% Without Disabilities
• 30% of People of Color
• 33% of Multiracial
• 24% of White
93
Qualitative Themes
Basis for Discriminatory Employment
Practices
Personal Relationships
Outspoken Individuals
Department Specific Policies and Actions
Race/Ethnicity
Actions of Supervisor
94
Work-Life Issues
SUCCESSES & CHALLENGES
The majority of employee respondents expressed
positive attitudes about work-life issues.
95
Qualitative Themes
Employee’s Work-Life Attitudes
Mixed Experiences with Supervisor Advice and Guidance
Flexible Work Schedules were Discouraged
Inconsistent Opportunities for Professional Development
Lack of Administrative Support
98
Student Perceptions of
Campus Climate
108
Student Perceptions of Campus Climate
Majority of students felt valued by faculty (84%) and other
students (77%) in the classroom
Majority of students reported that KSU faculty (77%), staff
(70%), and administrators (66%) were genuinely concerned
with their welfare
Majority of students had faculty (76%) and staff (55%) who
they perceived as role models
109
Student Perceptions of Campus Climate
45% of students felt faculty pre-judged their abilities
based on their identities/backgrounds
88% of students indicated that they had opportunities for
academic success that were similar to those of their
classmates
110
Institutional Actions
113
Campus Initiatives
FACULTY
More than half of Faculty thought the following
positively influenced the climate:
Providing
flexibility for
computing the
probationary
period for
tenure
Providing
recognition and
rewards for
including
diversity issues
in courses
across the
curriculum
Providing
diversity
training for
students and
faculty
Providing
mentorship for
new faculty
114
Campus Initiatives
FACULTY
More than half of Faculty thought the following
positively influenced the climate:
Providing
diversity and
equity training to
search committees
and to
appointment,
promotion, and
tenure committees
Providing career
span development
opportunities for
faculty at all ranks
Providing KSU’s
emphasis on
environmental/
sustainability
initiatives and
course offerings
115
Qualitative Themes
Institutional Actions - Faculty
Mixed Views On Importance of Diversity
Lack of Quality and Time for Diversity Training
Insufficient Mentoring
116
Campus Initiatives
STAFF
More than half of Staff thought the following
positively influenced the climate:
Providing
diversity
training for
staff and
faculty
Providing
access to
counseling for
people who
have
experienced
harassment
Providing
mentorship for
new staff
Providing a
clear and fair
process to
resolve
conflicts
117
Campus Initiatives
STAFF
More than half of Staff thought the following
positively influenced the climate:
Providing career
span development
opportunities for
staff
Promoting KSU’s
emphasis on
environmental/
sustainability
initiatives and
course offerings
118
Qualitative Themes
Institutional Actions - Staff
Lack of Awareness Of, and Disappointment With,
Diversity Training
Mentorship is Not Available for Staff
119
Campus Initiatives
Students
The majority of Students thought the following
positively affected the climate:
Providing
diversity
training for
faculty, staff &
students
Providing a
person to
address student
complaints of
classroom
inequity
Increasing
opportunities
for crosscultural
dialogue among
students
Increasing
opportunities
for crosscultural
dialogue
between
faculty, staff,
and students
120
Campus Initiatives
Students
The majority of Students thought the following
positively affected the climate:
Incorporating
issues of
diversity and
cross-cultural
competence
more effectively
into the
curriculum
Providing
effective faculty
mentorship of
students
Providing
effective
academic
advisement
121
Campus Initiatives
Students
The majority of Students thought the following
positively affected the climate:
Providing effective
career counseling
Promoting KSU’s
emphasis on
environmental/susta
inability initiatives
and course
offerings
122
Qualitative Themes
Institutional Actions - Students
Lack of Awareness of Programs
Ineffective Academic Advising
Mixed Views on Diversity Initiatives
123
Summary
Strengths and Successes
Opportunities for Improvement
124
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;
125
Worthington, Navarro, Loewy & Hart, 2008)
Overall Strengths & Successes
83% of respondents
were comfortable
with the overall
climate, and 77%
with dept/work unit
climate
The majority of
students thought
very positively about
their academic
experiences at KSU
82% of
Undergraduate and
85% of Graduate
Students; 85% of
Faculty were
comfortable with the
classroom climate
The majority of
employees expressed
positive attitudes
about work-life
issues at KSU
126
Overall Challenges and Opportunities for
Improvement
21% (n = 1,050)
had personally
experienced
exclusionary
conduct within the
last year
47% (n = 386) of
Staff; 49% (n =
332) of Faculty, and
36% (n = 1,856) of
Students seriously
considered leaving
KSU
19% (n = 982) had
observed
exclusionary
conduct within the
last year
2% (n = 76)
experienced
unwanted sexual
contact while at
KSU
127
Next Steps
128
Process Forward
Sharing the Report with the Community
Fall 2014
Full Power Point
available on KSU
website
www.kennesaw.edu/ccca
Full Report
available on KSU
website/hard
copy in Library
129
Fall 2014
Community Forums
Purpose
• To review the results and solicit
community input
• To offer “next steps” based on
climate report results that will
be used to inform actions
Fall 2014 Forums
Forums will be created to identify 2-3 specific actions that KSU could accomplish
in 2015
Forums will include the following groups:
Faculty Senate
Staff Senate
Student Government
Student Development
Administrators Senate
Disability Strategies and Resources
Gender and Work Life Issues
GLBTIQ Initiatives
Racial and Ethnic Dialogue
Sustainability
Veterans Affairs
Projected Calendar
Oct/Nov
2014
Sponsor series of
community
forums
December
2014
Jan 2015 –
Sept 2015
Facilitators meet
and discuss the
actions developed
in forums
Distribute actions
to the community
Develop 2-3
actions (CCCA
members) based
on the forums
Communicate
updates on the
progress of the
action plan
Questions and Discussion
Have questions or comments that were not answered here?
Email KSUDiverse@kennesaw.edu and we’ll be happy to address them.
134