University of Wisconsin-Superior
Campus Climate Assessment
Results of Report
October 14, 2011
Climate In Higher Education
Community
Members
Creation
and
Distribution
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; Smith, 1999; Tierney, 1990; Worthington, 2008
Assessing Campus Climate
• Campus Climate is a construct
What is it?
• Current attitudes, behaviors, and standards
and practices of employees and students of an
institution
Definition?
• Personal Experiences
• Perceptions
How is it
measured? • Institutional Efforts
Rankin & Reason, 2008
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, 1991.
Hale, 2004; Harper & Quaye , 2004; Harper, & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, 2003.
Campus Climate & Faculty/Staff
The personal and
professional development
of employees including
faculty members,
administrators, and staff
members are impacted by
campus climate.1
1Settles,
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
Cortina, Malley, and Stewart (2006)
2002
3Silverschanz, Cortina, Konik, & Magley, 2007; Waldo, 1999
2Sears,
Research underscores the
relationships between (1)
workplace discrimination
and negative job and
career attitudes and (2)
workplace encounters
with prejudice and lower
health and well-being..3
Project Objectives
Provide UW-Superior with
information, analysis, and
recommendations as they relate
to campus climate.
This information will be used in conjunction with
other data to provide UW-Superior with an inclusive
view of campus.
University of Wisconsin
System Mission
The mission of the system is to develop human resources, to discover and
disseminate knowledge, to extend knowledge and its application beyond the
boundaries of its campuses and to serve and stimulate society by developing
in students heightened intellectual, cultural and humane sensitivities,
scientific, professional and technological expertise and a sense of purpose.
Inherent in this broad mission are methods of instruction, research, extended
training and public service designed to educate people and improve the
human condition. Basic to every purpose of the system is the search for truth.
Core Mission of the
University Cluster
…“Serve the needs of women, minority,
disadvantaged, disabled, and nontraditional
students and seek racial and ethnic
diversification of the student body and the
professional faculty and staff.”
UW-Superior Mission Statement
The University of Wisconsin-Superior fosters
intellectual growth and career preparation within a
liberal arts tradition that emphasizes individual
attention and embodies respect for diverse cultures
and multiple voices.
We value intellectual growth, honesty, individual
attention, professionalism, and respect for others
and the diversity of peoples and cultures.
Process to Date
Participating Institutions
Tier I
Spring 2008
Tier II
Fall 2009
UW Colleges
UW-Eau Claire
UW-La Crosse
UW-Parkside
UW-Milwaukee
UW-River Falls
UW-Oshkosh
UW-Whitewater
UW-Stevens Point
Process to Date
Participating Institutions
Tier III
Spring 2011
UW-Green Bay
UW-Platteville
UW-Madison
(CALS/DSL)
UW-Stout
UW-Superior
UW Extension
Overview of the Project
Phase I
• Fact-Finding Groups
Phase II
• Assessment Tool Development and Implementation
Phase III
• Data Analysis
Phase IV
• Final Report and Presentation
Survey Instrument
Final instrument


88 questions and additional space for respondents to provide commentary
On-line or paper & pencil options
Sample = Population

All students and employees of UW-Superior’s community received an
invitation to participate from the Chancellor.
Results include information regarding:




Respondents’ personal experiences at UW-Superior
Respondents’ perceptions of climate at UW-Superior
Respondents’ perceptions of institutional actions
Respondents’ input into recommendations for change
Survey Assessment Limitations
Self-selection bias
Response rates
Social desirability
Caution in generalizing results for
constituent groups with significantly lower
response rates
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.
Results
Response Rates
Who are the respondents?
 869 people responded to the call to
participate (23% overall response rate).
 775 respondents contributed remarks to one
or more of the open-ended questions.
Student Response Rates (17%)
Non-Degree Seeking (10%, n=10)
Associate Degree (>100%, n=14)
Bachelor Degree (17%, n=504)
Master Degree (14%, n=46)
Doctoral Degree (n=2)
Professional Degree (n=5)
Faculty Response Rates (84%)
Instructional Academic Staff (>100%, n=28)
Instructor (n=11)
Assistant Professor (66%, n=27)
Associate Professor (77%, n=17)
Professor (54%, n=23)
Staff Response Rates (55%)
Limited Term Employee (n=5)
Classified Staff (64%, n=80)
Non-Instructional/Other Academic Staff (48%, n=65)
Administrator (39%, n=13)
Other (n=18)
Student Response Rates by
Selected Demographics
By
Race
Students of
Color
42% (n=116)
White
Students
16% (n=456)
By
Gender
Women
20% (n=390)
Men
13% (n=183)
Results
Additional Demographic
Characteristics
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)
(Duplicated Total)
African
African American/Black
Alaskan Native
Asian
Asian American
Southeast Asian
Caribbean/West Indian
Caucasian/White
Indian subcontinent
Latino(a)/Hispanic
Middle Eastern
Native American Indian
Pacific Islander
Other
10
13
1
747
37
11
0
0
3
25
48
2
2
17
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)
(Unduplicated Total)
708
People of Color
White People
143
Respondents by Position Status
and Gender Identity (n)
Undergraduate Students
Graduate Students
Faculty
Academic Staff
Classified Staff
352
168
38
54
Female
54
53
15
50
28
25
Male
3 transgender respondents are not included in this review to protect anonymity
Respondents by Position Status and
Sexual Identity (n)
Students
Faculty
Academic Staff
Classified Staff
530
94
79
73
29
Heterosexual
8
3
LGBQ
2
Respondents by Ability/Disability (n)
Students
Employees
47
5
6
Mobility
Impairment
8
3
Sensory
Impairment
10
7
8
12
1
Learning Disability
Mental Health
Disorder
Chronic Health
Disorder
Respondents by
Spiritual Affiliation and Campus
n
%
Christian
479
55.0
Other than Christian
203
23.0
No affiliation
187
22.0
Citizenship Status by Position
Students
Employees
n
%
n
%
U.S. Citizen
514
88.8
253
96.6
U.S. Citizen – naturalized
10
1.7
5
1.9
Dual citizenship
3
0.5
0
0.0
Permanent resident (immigrant)
5
0.9
3
1.1
International (F-1, J-1, or H1-B, or other visa)
46
7.9
1
0.4
Students by Position Status
and Age (n)
Undergraduates
Graduate Students
162
125
118
61
33
15
2
19 and
under
14
3
20-21
22-25
26-32
8
33-42
17
9
43-51
12
3
52 and over
Students by Class Standing (n)
Non-degree student
Bachelor's degree student
Bachelor's degree transfer student
Associate's degree student
Master's degree student
272
Doctoral degree student
232
Professional degree student
46
10
14
2
6
Student Respondents’ College
Career (n)
106
110
121
First year
2nd yr
3rd yr
4th yr
5th yr or more
Master's degree
Doctoral degree
Professional degree
120
65
40
0
Students
2
Income by Student Position Status (n)
Undergraduate Dependent
Undergraduate Independent
Graduate students
152
77
76
53
40
17
34
20
8
8
7
12
0
0
1
Students’ Residence
Students’ Residence
n
%
197
33.2
Private residence hall
2
0.3
University housing apartment
2
0.3
Fraternity/sorority housing
0
0.0
Off-campus apartment/house
223
37.5
With partner/spouse/children
76
12.8
With parent(s)/family/relative(s)
78
13.1
Other
4
0.7
University housing residence hall
Findings
Overall Comfort Levels
Campus Climate
77%
Department/Work Unit Climate
75%
Classroom Climate
81%
Least Comfortable with Overall
Campus Climate and Class Climate
* No substantial differences for comfort with
department/work unit by select demographics.
People of Color
LGBQ
Overall Satisfaction
70%
• Employees who were “highly satisfied” or
“satisfied” with their jobs at UW-Superior
59%
• Employees who were “highly satisfied” or
“satisfied” with the way their careers have
progressed at UW-Superior
85%
• Students who were “highly satisfied” or
“satisfied” with education at UW-Superior
Levels of Satisfaction by
Demographic Groups
Satisfaction
with Jobs
• Employees of Color and Men
least satisfied
• Women most satisfied
• People of Color and Classified
Satisfaction Staff least satisfied
with Career • LGBQ most satisfied
Progression
Student Satisfaction with Education at
UW-Superior (%)
* Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category.
** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.
Challenges and Opportunities
Experiences with Harassment
24%
210 respondents indicated that
they had personally experienced
exclusionary, intimidating,
offensive and/or hostile conduct
that interfered with their ability to
work or learn at UW-Superior
Form of Perceived Offensive, Hostile,
or Intimidating Conduct
n
%
Deliberately ignored or excluded
103
49.0
Intimidation/bullying
85
40.5
Target of derogatory remarks
36
17.1
Isolated or left out when working in groups
35
16.7
Derogatory written comments
28
13.3
Stares
27
12.9
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 210).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Personally Experienced Based on…(%)
University Status (n=69)
Age (n=46)
Gender (n=45)
Educational Level (n=36)
33
22
21
17
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to
University Status (by University Status) (%)
(n=90)¹
(n=42)¹
(n=32)¹
(n=43)¹
(n=16)²
(n=14)²
(n=16)²
(n=21)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.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Gender Identity (%)
1
2
(n=130)¹
(n=76)¹
(n=34)²
(n=9)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.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Racial Identity (%)
(n=40)¹
(n=164)¹
(n=19)²
(n=3)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.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Sexual Identity (%)
(n=17)¹
(n=186)¹
(n=7)²
(n=1)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.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Disability (%)
(n=151)¹
(n=47)¹
(n=2)²
(n=22)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.
Location of Perceived Harassment
n
%
While working at a campus job
72
34.0
In a campus office
61
29.0
In a class
54
26.0
In a meeting with a group of people
47
22.0
In a faculty office
30
14.0
In a University housing residence hall
28
13.0
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 210).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Source of Perceived Conduct by
Position Status (n)
What did you
1
do?
Personal responses:




Was angry (58%)
Told a friend (37%)
Felt embarrassed (36%)
Avoided the harasser (34%)
Reporting responses:





1
Made an official complaint to campus employee/official (28% )
Didn’t know who to go to (18%)
Did report it but my complaint was not taken seriously (17%)
Didn’t report it for fear of retaliation (15%)
Confronted the harasser at the time (15%)
Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 210).
Respondents could mark more than one response
Sexual Harassment/Sexual Assault
The survey defined sexual harassment as “A repeated course of conduct
whereby one person engages in verbal or physical behavior of a sexual
nature, that is unwelcome, serves no legitimate purpose, intimidates
another person, and has the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or
offensive work or classroom environment.”
The survey defined sexual assault as “Intentional physical contact, such
as sexual intercourse or touching, of a person’s intimate body parts by
someone who did not have permission to make such contact.”
Sexual Misconduct at UW-Superior
6%
Believed they had been
touched in a sexual
manner that made
them feel
uncomfortable or
fearful
12%
Were fearful of being
sexually harassed at
UW-Superior
Respondents Who Experienced
Sexual Assault
2%
20 respondents
were victims of
sexual assault
Respondents Who Believed They Were
Sexually Assaulted By Select Demographics (n)
Gender
Women (16)
Men (<5)
Race
Position
Sexual
Orientation
White
People (13)
Students (16)
Heterosexual
(14)
People of
Color (7)
Employees
(n<5)
Bisexual (6)
Respondents Who Believed They
Were Sexually Assaulted
Where did it occur?
Off-campus (n = 15)
Who were the offenders?
What did you do1?
Students (n = 9)
Friend (n = 5)
Told a friend (n = 14)
Told family member (n = 5)
Sought medical services (n = 5)
Contacted campus police/security (n = 5)
1Respondents
could mark more than one response
Respondents Who Seriously Considered
Leaving UW-Superior
48% (n = 413) of all Respondents
Undergraduate Students (40%)
Graduate Students (43%)
Faculty (65%)
Academic Staff (70%)
Classified Staff (63%)
Employee Respondents Who Seriously
Considered Leaving UW-Superior
Gender
Identity
• Women (66%)
• Men (65%)
Racial
Identity
• Employees of Color (61%)
• White Employees (66%)
Sexual
Identity
• LGBQ (62%)
• Heterosexual (66%)
Student Respondents Who Seriously
Considered Leaving UW-Superior
Gender
Identity
• Women (37%)
• Men (46%)
Racial
Identity
• Students of Color (43%)
• White Students (38%)
Sexual
Identity
• LGBQ (62%)
• Heterosexual (38%)
Perceptions
Respondents Who Observed or Were Personally Made
Aware of Conduct That Created an Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive and/or Hostile Working or Learning
Environment
Yes
%
n
27.0
232
Form of Observed Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive, or Hostile Conduct
n
%
Racial/ethnic profiling
67
28.9
Deliberately ignored or excluded
67
28.9
Derogatory remarks
67
28.9
Stares
66
28.4
Intimidation/bullying
55
23.7
Someone receiving a low performance evaluation
37
15.9
Someone isolated or left out because of their identity
37
15.9
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 232).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Observed Harassment Based on…(%)
Ethnicity (n=62)
Gender (n=53)
Race (n=53)
Sexual Orientation (n=52)
Country of Origin (n=51)
27
23
23
22
22
Source of Observed Exclusionary, Intimidating,
Offensive, or Hostile Conduct (%)
Source
•
•
•
•
Students (38%)
Faculty (23%)
Colleagues (17%)
Staff (13%)
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 232).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Location of Observed Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive, or Hostile Conduct
In a class
24%
n = 56
Public space on campus
22%
n = 52
While working at a campus job
20%
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 232).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
n = 46
Perceived Discrimination
Employees Only
Hiring Practices
(27%, n = 72)
Employment Practices Up to and Including Dismissal
(18%, n = 47)
Employment Practices Related to Promotion (27%, n = 73)
Perceived Discrimination
Race was the primary basis for
discriminatory hiring.
Gender was the primary basis
for discriminatory employmentrelated disciplinary actions and
practices related to promotion.
Work-Life Issues
The majority of employee respondents expressed
positive attitudes about work-life issues.
Welcoming Workplace Climate
 More than half of all employees thought the workplace
climate was welcoming of “difference” based on all
characteristics listed in survey except mental health
status, learning disability, and political views.
 Respondents of Color and LGBQ Respondents were
least likely to believe the workplace climate was
welcoming for employees based on gender identity,
racial identity, and sexual identity.
Students’ Access to College is Being
Compromised by…
• Concerns about financial debt upon
56% graduation
• Tuition increases were not met by
56% corresponding increase in financial aid
43%
• Lack of financial aid
Institutional Actions
Inclusive Curriculum
More than half of all students and faculty felt the
curriculum included materials, perspectives, and/or
experiences of people based on 12 of 16
demographics characteristics except mental health
status, learning disability, physical disability, and
veterans/active military status.
Campus Initiatives That Would Positively
Affect the Climate
Employees
 More than half recommended:
 training mentors and leaders within departments to model
positive climate behavior
 offering diversity training/programs as community
outreach
 offering immersion experiences for faculty/staff/students
to work with underrepresented/underserved populations.
Campus Initiatives That Would Positively
Affect the Climate
Employees
 More than half recommended:
 providing on-campus child care services
 providing gender neutral/family friendly facilities
 providing, improving, and promoting access to quality
services for those individuals who experience sexual
abuse
 providing mentors for minority faculty/students/staff new
to campus
 providing a clear protocol for responding to hate/hostile
incidents at the campus level and departmental level
Summary
Strengths and Successes
Challenges and Opportunities
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)
Overall Strengths & Successes
77%
comfortable with the
overall climate, 75%
with dept/work unit
climate, and 81% with
climate in their
classes.
70% of employee
respondents were
satisfied with their
jobs at UW-Superior
and 59% with how
their careers have
progressed.
85% of students were
satisfied with their
education.
The majority of
employees expressed
positive attitudes and
experiences regarding
work-life issues.
Overall Challenges & Opportunities
27% (n = 232) had
observed or
personally been made
aware of harassment.
48% (n = 413) of all
respondents have
seriously considered
leaving UW-Superior.
24% (n = 210)
believed they had
personally
experienced
harassment.
12% (n = 100)
indicated there were
times when they were
fearful of being
sexually harassed at
UW-Superior.
Other Challenges & Opportunities
Racial Tension
• Respondents of Color (28%, n = 40) reported personally experiencing
harassment more often than their White counterparts (23%, n = 164).
• People of Color were also more likely to indicate racial profiling as the
basis when compared to their White counterparts (20% vs. 0%,
respectively).
• Of all respondents who observed harassment, 27% (n = 62) believed it was
based on ethnicity and 23% (n = 53) on race.
• People of Color were less comfortable than White respondents with the
overall climate, and the climate in their classes.
• While 82% (n = 369) of White students thought the classroom climate was
welcoming based on race, only 63% (n = 72) of Students of Color agreed.
• Employees of Color were also more likely than White employees to believe
they had observed discriminatory hiring practices, discriminatory
employment-related disciplinary actions, and discriminatory practices
related to promotion.
Challenges & Opportunities
Homophobia and Heterosexism
Gender Disparities
• LGBQ respondents were 17% more
likely than heterosexual respondents
to believe that they had experienced
harassment.
• 41% (n =7) of LGBQ respondents
versus one percent (n = 1) of
heterosexual respondents indicated
that this conduct was based on sexual
orientation.
• 43% (n = 18) of LGBQ respondents
believed they had observed
harassment compared with 26% (n =
204) of heterosexual respondents.
• 22% (n = 52) of all respondents
indicated sexual orientation as the
basis for observed harassment.
• 62% of LGBQ students versus 38% of
heterosexual students seriously
considered leaving UW-Superior.
• Gender was the most observed reason
for discriminatory employment.
• Between 22-26% of respondents
indicated gender was the basis for
discriminatory hiring, employmentrelated disciplinary actions, and
practices related to promotion.
• Gender was reported third (21%, n =
45) as the basis for personal
harassment.
• Over twice as many women (26%, n =
34) than men (12%, n = 9) believed
that the mistreatment was based on
their gender.
• Gender was the second most reported
basis for those who observed
harassment (23%, n = 53).
Challenges & Opportunities
Differential Treatment by
University Status
Disparities by Ability/Disability
• University status (33%, n = 69) was
cited as the primary basis for personal
harassment.
• 54% (n = 43) of classified staff
respondents reported personally
experiencing harassment, higher than
any other employee group.
• Of those classified staff, 49% (n = 21)
said it was based on their status at
UW-Superior.
• Classified staff reported observing
discriminatory hiring, employmentrelated disciplinary actions, and
practices related to promotion more
than any other employee group.
• Classified staff members were less
satisfied the way their careers have
progressed when compared with other
employee groups.
• 15% (n = 128) of respondents
indicated that they had a disability.
• Of these respondents, the majority
identified as having mental health
disorders and chronic health disorders.
• People who reported having a
disability were more likely to
experience harassment.
• 47% (n = 22) of those respondents
with disabilities who believed they
had experienced harassment said the
conduct was based on their
disabilities.
• Many students/faculty felt that their
courses did not include materials,
perspectives, and/or experiences for
those with mental health issues,
learning disabilities, and physical
disabilities.
Next Steps
Process Forward
Fall 2011
Share report results with community
 Community dialogue regarding the assessment
results
 CIETF (Chancellor’s Inclusive Excellence Task
Force)
 Community feedback on recommended
actions
 Full Report is available for community review
Questions and
Discussion