California university campus climate full report by California University of Pennsylvania

Rankin & Associates, Consulting Assessment s 0LANNING s )NTErvENTIONS

California University of Pennsylvania

Campus Climate Project Final Report

October 2013

Rankin & Associates, Consulting O

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. i Sample Demographics ................................................................................................... iii Quantitative Findings ..................................................................................................... iv Qualitative Findings ....................................................................................................... ix Summary of Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement.......................................... xi Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 History of the Project ...................................................................................................... 1 Campus Climate: Academic and Professional Success .................................................. 2 Cal U Climate Project Structure and Process ................................................................. 5 Methodology ....................................................................................................................... 7 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................... 7 Research Design.............................................................................................................. 7 Results ............................................................................................................................... 10 Description of the Sample............................................................................................. 10 Sample characteristics ................................................................................................... 15 Campus Climate Assessment Findings ............................................................................. 37 Comfort with the Climate at California University of Pennsylvania ............................ 37 Perceptions of Level of Respect ................................................................................... 56 Perceptions of Campus Accessibility............................................................................ 59 Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Intimidating, Offensive or Hostile Conduct ... 61 Observations of Exclusionary, Intimidating, Offensive or Hostile Conduct ................ 74 Experiences of Sexual Assault ...................................................................................... 82 Faculty and Staff Perceptions of Climate ..................................................................... 87 Campus Climate and Work-Life Issues .................................................................... 95 Faculty and Staff Satisfaction with Cal U............................................................... 107 Perceptions of Employment Practices .................................................................... 115 Faculty Members’ Views on University Policies ................................................... 118 Faculty and Staff Who Have Seriously Considered Leaving Cal U ....................... 121 Students Perceptions of Campus Climate ................................................................... 123 Student Experiences of Unwanted Sexual Contact ................................................. 125 Students’ Academic Experiences ............................................................................ 127 Students’ Perceptions of Campus Climate.............................................................. 131 Students Who Have Seriously Considered Leaving ............................................... 137 Institutional Actions ........................................................................................................ 139 Next Steps ....................................................................................................................... 144 References ....................................................................................................................... 146

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Appendices ...................................................................................................................... 149 Appendix A - Analysis of the Comments (Q104-Q105).…………………150 Appendix B – Data Tables………………………………………………..154 Appendix C – Survey Instrument…………………………………………232

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Executive Summary California University of Pennsylvania (Cal U) is dedicated to fostering a caring university community that provides leadership for constructive participation in a diverse, multicultural world. The University has a long history of supporting initiatives that foster an inclusive living, learning, and working environment 1. A common recommendation from campus constituents, specifically the President’s Commission on the Status of Women, was the need for a comprehensive and regularized tool that would provide campus climate metrics for students, faculty, and staff across the system. To that end, the senior administration with the assistance of the President’s Commission on the Status of Women and the Office of Social Equity initiated this project. Following a national vetting, Rankin & Associates (R&A) was identified as a leader in conducting multiple identity studies in higher education and Cal U contracted with R&A to assist in facilitating a University-wide climate assessment. The campus-wide assessment is further evidence of Cal U’s commitment to ensuring that all members of the community live in an environment that nurtures a culture of inclusiveness and respect. The purpose of this project is to conduct a campus-wide assessment to gather data related to institutional climate, inclusion, and work-life issues in order to assess the learning, living, and working environment for students, faulty, and staff. President Jones has continued to reiterate that the findings should drive action and not just “sit on a shelf and gather dust” – that is, the campus will use the results to improve campus climate. As noted earlier, the project’s purpose was to examine campus climate through data collected from a population survey informed by community input. The development of the survey instrument was a collaborative year-long effort between R&A and the Campus Climate Working Group (CSWG). The CSWG was comprised of staff, faculty, and students representing various constituent groups across campus. R&A also reviewed

More information is available at: http://www.calu.edu/faculty-staff/administration/socialequity/index.htm

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

surveys and reports produced at Cal U that included any information regarding climate (NSSE, Faculty Survey, etc.). Informed by previous work of R&A that included a bank of over 200 questions and the review of previous Cal U surveys and reports, the CSWG developed the final Cal U survey. The final Cal U survey contained 105 questions and was designed for respondents to provide information about their personal experiences with regard to climate issues and work-life experiences, their perceptions of the campus/location climate, and their perceptions of institutional actions at the campus/location. All members of Cal U community (e.g., students, faculty, and staff) were invited to participate in the survey. Individual campuses/locations also had the opportunity to add additional campus/location-specific questions. The final survey instrument was administered at Cal U between February 4, 2013 and April 7, 2013. This report provides an overview of the results of the campus-wide survey. The report only offers the results from Cal U and does not include comparisons to other institutions. Qualitative comments offered by participants are provided throughout the narrative. These comments are in response to specific quantitative questions and are offered to provide “voice” to the data. Appendix A contains the commentary offered by respondents for the last two open-ended questions that were not linked to any particular quantitative question. A summary of the findings is presented in bullet form below.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Sample Demographics 2,137 Cal U individuals completed surveys for a response rate of 22% 2. More detailed information on the response rates of various sub-groups is offered in Table 1 of the narrative. The sample included: x

Position: 1,652 Students (77%), 299 Staff (14%), 186 Faculty (9%).

Racial Identity3: 316 People of Color respondents (15%); 1,544 White respondents (72%) 4.

Citizenship status: 2,090 U.S. citizens (98%), 30 Non-U.S. Citizens (1%).

Disability Status: 329 respondents (15%) who self-identified as having disabilities or conditions that affect major life activities.

Sexual Identity: 1,731 (83%) heterosexual people, and 137 (7%) people who identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, or queer; 12 respondents (1%) were questioning their sexuality, and 177 people (8%) identified as asexual.

Gender Identity: 1,319 women (62%); 789 men (37%); and 6 transgender 5 (0.3%).

Faith/Spiritual Affiliation: 1,408 respondents (66%) were affiliated with Christian denomination; 484 respondents (23%) reported having no spiritual/religious affiliations.

While the initial response rate was reported at 24%, after cleaning the data and removing duplicate or incomplete surveys, the final response rate was 22%. 3 While recognizing the vastly different experiences of people of various racial identities (e.g., Chicano(a) versus African American or Latino(a) versus Asian American) and those experiences within these identity categories (e.g., Hmong versus Chinese), we collapsed these categories for many of the analyses due to the small numbers in the individual categories. 4 Respondents were given the opportunity to mark multiple boxes regarding their racial identity. For the purposes of this report, “White” denotes respondents who marked the European and/or European American/White response choices. “People of Color” includes respondents who marked any of the following response choices: African, African American/Black, Alaskan Native, Asian, Asian American, Caribbean/West Indian, Indian subcontinent, Latino(a)/Hispanic, Latin American, Middle Eastern, Native American Indian, Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native, and Southeast Asian. Respondents who marked White and any of the People of Color responses were recoded as People of Color. 5 Transgender was defined for this project as an umbrella term referring to those whose gender identity (a person’s inner sense of being man, woman, both, or neither. One’s internal identity may or may not be expressed outwardly, and may or may not correspond to one’s physical characteristics) or gender expression (the manner in which a person outwardly represents gender, regardless of the physical characteristics that might typically define the individual as male or female) is different from that traditionally associated with their sex assigned at birth (refers to the assigning (naming) of the biological sex of a baby at birth).

iii

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Quantitative Findings 6,7 Experiences with Campus Climate at Cal U 8 x

Fifteen percent of respondents believed 9 they had personally experienced exclusionary (e.g., stigmatized, shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive, and/or hostile conduct (hereafter referred to as harassment) 10 within the past year. Respondents most often indicated the harassment was based on their gender, position at Cal U, age, and educational level.

Of the 15% of respondents (n = 328) who had experienced harassment: o 27% of respondents who experienced such behavior said the conduct was based on their gender (n = 88). Others said they experienced such conduct based on their position at Cal U (25%, n = 83), age (23%, n = 76), educational level (14%, n = 46), political views (11%, n = 35), etc. o The manners in which respondents experienced harassment included: 49% felt intimidated and bullied, 43% felt deliberately ignored or excluded, and 35% felt isolated or left out. o In response to experiencing the harassing conduct, 48% of respondents were angry, 38% told a friend, 35% told a family member, 30% felt embarrassed, and 29% did nothing. o When reviewing these results in terms of race, 13% of White Respondents (n = 207) and 18% of Respondents of Color (n = 58) believed they had experienced this conduct.

Of those respondents who believed they had experienced this conduct, 28% of People of Color respondents (n = 16) said it was based on their race, and 7% of White respondents (n = 15) thought the conduct was based on race.

The quantitative statistics reflect the n’s and percentages of participants who responded to each question. The percentages may not add to100 and the n’s may not add to the total N for the question because respondents in some instances could mark more than one response. There are also sub-questions within sections where participants only chose those response choices that were salient for them. 7 Chi-square tests were conducted to compare percentages among the groups discussed in the findings. Only significant differences are reported (p <.001). 8 Listings in the narrative are those responses with the greatest percentages. For a complete listing of the results, the reader is directed to the tables in the narrative and Appendix B. 9 The modifier “believe(d)” is used throughout the report to indicate the respondents’ perceived experiences. This modifier is not meant in any way to diminish those experiences. 10 Under the United States Code Title 18 Subsection 1514(c)1, harassment is defined as "a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such a person and serves no legitimate purpose" (http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/vii.html). In higher education institutions, legal issues discussions define harassment as any conduct that has unreasonably interfered with one’s ability to work or learn on campus. The questions used in this survey to uncover participants’ personal and observed experiences with harassment were designed using these definitions.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

o When reviewing the data by gender, similar percentages of men (15%, n = 114) and women (16%, n = 204) experienced this conduct.

31% of women respondents (n = 64) who believed they experienced harassment and 19% of men respondents (n = 22) who believed they had experienced this conduct said it was based on their gender.

o With regard to position status at Cal U, greater percentages of Staff respondents (28%, n = 83) and Faculty respondents (29%, n = 53) believed they had been harassed than did Undergraduate (12%, n = 159) and Graduate Student respondents (12%, n = 33).

More than half of all Staff (52%, n = 43) who believed they were harassed said the conduct was based on their position status at Cal U.

o When examining the data by sexual identity, higher percentage of LGBQ respondents than heterosexual respondents believed they had experienced this conduct (22% versus 14%).

Of those who believed they had experienced this conduct, 43% of LGBQ respondents (n = 13) versus 1% of heterosexual respondents (n = 3) indicated that this conduct was based on sexual orientation.

o With regard to citizenship status, 15% of U.S. Citizens (n = 319) and 10% of Non-U.S. Citizens (n = 3) experienced exclusionary (e.g., stigmatized, shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) at Cal U.

Of the respondents who experienced this conduct, 1% of U.S. Citizens (n = 4) and 100% of Non-U.S. Citizens (n = 3) indicated it was based on country of origin.

o The manners in which respondents experienced harassment included: 49% felt intimidated and bullied, 43% felt deliberately ignored or excluded, and 35% felt isolated or left out. o In response to experiencing the harassing conduct, 48% of respondents were angry, 38% told a friend, 35% told a family member, 30% felt embarrassed, and 29% did nothing. x

77 respondents reported that they believed they had experienced sexual assault. o 5% of Undergraduate Students (n = 65), 0.4% of Graduate Students (n = 1), 2% of Faculty (n = 4), and 2% of Staff (n = 7) experienced sexual assault while at Cal U.

Of the 65 undergraduate students who indicated that they believed that they had experiences sexual assault, the students indicated that 60% of the incidents happened off campus (n = 39), and 40% occurred on campus (n = 26).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Perceptions of Campus Climate at Cal U x

81% of the survey respondents (n = 1,724) were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate at Cal U. 78% of respondents (n = 1,659) were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate for diversity in their department/work unit/academic unit/college/school/clinical setting. The figures in the narrative show slight disparities based on position, race, gender, disability, and sexual orientation.

With regard to classroom climate, 84% of Students (n = 1,389) and 94% of Faculty (n = 167) were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate in their classes.

22% of all respondents indicated that they observed conduct or communications directed towards a person or group of people that they believed created an exclusionary, intimidating, offensive and/or hostile (bullied, harassing) working or learning environment within the past year. The perceived harassment was most often based on sexual orientation, gender, position, and race.

Of the 22% of respondents (n = 458) who indicated that they had observed this conduct: o Most of the observed harassment was based on sexual orientation (21%, n = 98), gender (21%, n = 95), position (19%, n = 89), race (17%, n = 79), etc. o Respondents most often believed they had observed this conduct in the form of someone subjected to derogatory remarks (50%, n = 231), or someone being intimidated/bullied (36%, n = 163), deliberately ignored or excluded (32%, n = 148), or isolated or left out (27%, n = 125). o In response to experiencing this conduct, respondents most often felt angry (39%, n = 180). 24% told a friend (n = 110), and 20% did nothing (n = 90). o 4% reported the incidents to campus employees/officials (n = 16), while 9% didn’t know who to go to (n = 41). Some did not report out of fear the complaint would not be taken seriously (7%, n = 32). 5% did report it but felt the complaint was not taken seriously (n = 22).

18% of all respondents (n = 392) reported that they had seriously considered leaving Cal U because of the climate. o When reviewing these results for Faculty and Staff, 39% of Staff respondents (n = 116) and 30% of Faculty respondents (n = 55) had seriously considered leaving Cal U.

By gender: 37% of men (n = 71) and 33% of women (n = 92) had seriously considered leaving Cal U. vi

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

By racial identity: 35% of White employees (n = 118) and 35% of People of Color employees (n = 16) had seriously considered leaving Cal U.

By disability status: 59% of employees with disabilities (n = 29) and 32% of employees without disabilities (n = 133) had seriously considered leaving the institution.

By sexual orientation: 29% of LGBQ employees (n = 4) and 34% of heterosexual respondents (n = 135) had seriously considering leaving.

o When examining this data for Students, 14% of all undergraduate students (n = 192) and 11% of all graduate students (n = 29) considered leaving due to the climate.

By gender: 13% of women (n = 135), 14% of men (n = 82), and 33% of transgender respondents (n = 2) had seriously considered leaving Cal U.

By racial identity: 19% of People of Color (n = 50) and 12 % of White students (n = 148) had seriously considered leaving the institution.

By socioeconomic status: 16% of Low Income students (n = 58) and 13% of Not Low Income students (n = 160) had seriously considered leaving Cal U.

By generation status: 15% of first-generation students (n = 51) and 13% of students who were not considered first-generation students (n = 169) had seriously considered leaving.

Perceptions of Work-Life Issues at Cal U - Faculty & Staff o 71% of Faculty and Staff were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their jobs/careers at Cal U (n = 339). o 60% of Faculty and Staff (n = 282) were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with the way their careers/jobs have progressed at Cal U. o More than one-third of all Faculty and Staff respondents felt that salary determinations were fair (36%, n = 174) and clear (43%, n = 204). o More than half of the respondents thought Cal U understood the value of a diverse faculty (67%, n = 318) and staff (64%, n = 308). o More than one-quarter of employee respondents (30%, n = 144) felt they had to work harder than their colleagues do in order to achieve the same recognition. o 29% of Faculty and Staff believed there were many unwritten rules concerning how one is expected to interact with colleagues in their work units (n = 136). o Few Faculty and Staff respondents found it difficult to balance childcare (9%, n = 43) or eldercare (10%, n = 46) with their work responsibilities. o Likewise, few respondents felt their colleagues did not balance their child care responsibilities (11%, n = 50) or eldercare responsibilities (4%, n = 19) with their professional responsibilities. vii

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

o 67% of Faculty and Staff had supervisors/colleagues/co-workers who gave them job/career advice guidance when they need it (n = 323). o 63% had support from supervisors/colleagues/co-workers regarding their job/career advancement (n = 302). o 49% (n = 232) of all Faculty and Staff thought that Cal U treated salaried and hourly staff within their respective job classifications equitably. x

31% of Faculty and Staff respondents believed they had observed unfair or unjust employment practices. Respondents reported that these practices were most often based on position, gender, age, race, etc. at Cal U. o 31% of Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 147) believed that they had observed unfair or unjust hiring at Cal U. o 17% of all Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 80) believed that they had observed unfair or unjust employment-related disciplinary actions at Cal U (up to and including dismissal). o 31% of all Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 149) believed that they had observed unfair or unjust promotion practices.

Perceptions of Academic Experiences - Students o 86% of Students (n = 1,379) felt they were performing up to their full academic potential. o 78% (n = 1,246) of Students reported they performed academically as well as they had anticipated. o 92% of all Students intended to graduate from Cal U (n = 1,466). o 19% were considering transferring to another college or university due to academic reasons (n = 299). o The majority of Students were satisfied with their academic experience at Cal U (82%, n = 1249). o 79% of Students felt valued by faculty in the classroom (n = 1,279), and 67% felt valued by other students in the classroom (n = 1,083). o 74% of Students had faculty they perceived as role models (n = 1,206), and 59% had staff they perceived as role models (n = 952).

viii

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Institutional Actions Faculty and Staff respondents were asked to offer how several initiatives influence (if currently available at CAL U) or could influence (if not currently available at CAL U) the climate at CAL U. A summary of their responses follow. o 42% (n = 186) of all Faculty and Staff thought providing flexibility for promotion for faculty, providing flexibility for computing the probationary period for tenure (38%, n = 168), and providing recognition and rewards for including diversity issues in courses across the curriculum (42%, n = 185) would positively influence the campus climate. o 67% of employees (n = 298) thought providing, promoting, and improving access to counseling to those who experienced harassment positively affected the climate at Cal U positively influenced the climate. o Faculty and Staff respondents offered that they thought that diversity training for staff (54%, n = 240) and faculty (49%, n = 217) positively affected the climate. o Faculty and Staff respondents offered that mentorship for new faculty (64%, n = 286) and staff (72%, n = 322) positively influenced the climate. o 46% (n = 202) of Faculty and Staff respondents felt diversity and equity training to search and tenure committees positively affected the climate. o 76% of Faculty and Staff respondents thought providing a clear and fair process to resolve conflicts positively affected the climate (n = 336). o Faculty and Staff respondents offered that increasing funding to support efforts to change campus climate (54%, n = 241), increasing the diversity of the faculty and staff (53%, n = 234), increasing the diversity of the administration (53%, n = 234), and increasing the diversity of the student body (56%, n =249) positively influenced the climate. Qualitative Findings Out of the 2,137 surveys received from the Cal U of PA climate assessment, 1,227 respondents contributed remarks to the open-ended questions throughout the survey. No respondents answered all open-ended questions. The follow-up questions that allowed respondents to provide more detail about their answers to a survey question are included in the body of the full report. Appendix A of the full report summarizes the comments submitted for the two last survey questions (Questions 104 and 105), and provides examples of those remarks echoed by several respondents. A brief synopsis follows. ix

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Approximately one-quarter of all respondents (n = 556) commented on how their experiences on campus differ from their experiences in the surrounding community. Many individuals indicated their experiences were similar on and off campus. Others, however, noted that they felt safer and more welcome on campus. One respondent suggested, “Racism, sexism, and homophobia, in my eyes, continue to be an issue within the Mon Valley and other various communities surrounding the campus. While at Cal U, I feel as though these various issues minimize greatly.” Some individuals commented on the rural nature of the surrounding community and how it affected Cal U constituents. One of the open-ended items allowed respondents to elaborate on any of their survey responses, further describe their experiences, or offer additional thoughts about climate issues. Three hundred sixty-one (361) respondents offered a wide range of comments. A few individuals applauded Cal U for promoting diversity and inclusion and gave examples of the positive steps they have seen. Others cautioned against attention to diversity/inclusion, as it would only serve to cement existing divisions. Many respondents also commented on a general “lack of cooperation and team spirit. The focus on what's best for me first is destructive.” People attributed the negative atmosphere to poor leadership and the “attitude of fear in the staff on campus. People are afraid of losing their jobs and so they plot against each other.” Several respondents noted that Cal U’s employee base and student body was almost exclusively White, and that most of the leadership across the University and departmentally was largely men. For instance, one person commented, “Becoming more open to hire minorities and women. Most of the searches at Cal U yield white males. Most of the people at Cal U are white. This campus is not diverse and it is not welcoming to diverse people.” Individuals referenced the “ol’ boys club” at Cal U. Throughout the last two qualitative questions, many people offered suggestions to improve the Cal U climate. Many respondents called for better communication and more x

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

transparency from the administration. Several respondents believed the University ought to improve the recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty, staff, and students with regard to race/ethnicity and gender. Others suggested workshops and training based on issues of equity and inclusion for faculty, staff, and students. Several people suggested Cal U could “improve the climate by doing checks and balances to see who is actually working and who are just collecting a pay check.” In addition, many respondents commented on the survey and process itself. Some applauded the University’s participation in the study and wanted to make certain that the results of the survey were made public and used to improve Cal U. Several respondents thought the survey was a “great idea” and “all the questions that were asked were very greatly detailed and helped a lot with all the information.” Other respondents thought the questionnaire was “too long” and “repetitive, “ and wondered if the “void of leadership” would use any of the results to enact positive changes on campus.

Summary of Strengths and Opportunities for Improvement A number of strengths/successes emerged from the quantitative data analysis. These findings should be noted and credited. First, more than two-thirds of all employee respondents were highly satisfied or satisfied with their jobs/careers at Cal U (71%, n = 339), and more than half (60%, n = 282) were highly satisfied or satisfied with the way their careers/jobs have progressed. Second, the majority of respondents reported high levels of comfort with the climate at Cal U. In particular, 81% (n = 1,724) of all respondents reported that they were very comfortable and comfortable with the overall climate at Cal U. Additionally, 78% (n = 1,659) of respondents were very comfortable or comfortable with the climate in their departments or work units. Eighty-four percent of students (n = 1,389) were very comfortable or comfortable with the climate in the classes, as were 94% of faculty members (n = 167). xi

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Third, students felt and thought very positively about their academic experiences at Cal U. A majority of Cal U students felt they were performing at their full academic potential (86%, n = 1,379); were satisfied with their academic experience at Cal U (82%, n = 1,249); were satisfied with the extent of their intellectual development since enrolling at Cal U (82%, n = 1,302); and, performed academically as well as they had anticipated they would (78%, n = 1,246). The majority of students felt their academic experience has had a positive influence on their intellectual growth and interest in ideas (85%, n = 1,350) and that their interest in ideas and intellectual matters has increased since coming to Cal U (81%, n = 1,297). Ninety-two percent of students (n = 1,466) intended to graduate from Cal U.

Fourth, the majority of employees expressed positive attitudes about work-life issues. For example, more than half of the respondents found Cal U demonstrated that it values a diverse faculty (67%, n = 318) and staff (64%, n = 308). More than half of all employees reported that they had supervisors/colleagues/co-workers (67%, n = 323) at Cal U who gave them career advice or guidance when they needed it, and 63% had support from supervisors/colleagues/co-workers regarding their job/career advancement (n = 302). Sixty-one percent had the equipment and supplies they needed to adequately perform their work (n = 290). Although the perceptions and experiences of various constituent groups were investigated in this narrative, the following summary expounds on opportunities for improvement where repeated themes emerged for specific groups. These groups typically reported less satisfaction and comfort with the overall campus climate, their department/work unit climate, and their classroom climate as well as greater instances with experiences and observations of harassment at Cal U than their majority counterparts. These groups include People of Color, Staff members, women, and LGBQ respondents. Four potential opportunities for improvement were revealed in the assessment. The first opportunity for improvement relates to issues and concerns based on race. Respondents xii

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

of Color (18%, n = 58) experienced exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive, and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) more often than White respondents (13%, n = 207). Of those respondents who believed they had experienced the conduct, 28% of People of Color (n = 16) said it was based on their race, compared with 7% of White respondents (n = 15). Employees of Color (45%) were less likely to agree that their workplace climate was welcoming based on race than White employees (66%). 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 at Cal U. Race was cited as a top basis for all types of discriminatory employment practices. Employees of Color were less satisfied with their jobs/careers at Cal U; how their jobs/careers have progressed; and their compensation than their White employee counterparts. Faculty of Color (33%) were more likely than White Faculty (29%) to report they felt burdened by service responsibilities. Nineteen percent of Students of Color (n = 50) and 12% of White students (n = 148) had seriously considered leaving Cal U. Students of Color (68%) were also less likely to believe the classroom climate was welcoming based on race when compared with White students (77%). There were also differences in attitudes related to work-life issues at Cal U by race. People of Color were less likely to agree that Cal U demonstrates that it values a diverse faculty and staff. Furthermore, People of Color were more likely to report there are many unwritten rules concerning how one is expected to interact with colleagues in their work unit; find their colleagues/co-workers expect them to represent â&#x20AC;&#x153;the point of viewâ&#x20AC;? of their identity; be reluctant to bring up issues that concern them for fear that it will affect their performance evaluation or tenure/merit/promotion decision; be reluctant to take leave that they are entitled to for fear that it may affect their job/career; and, find they had to work harder than they believe their colleagues/co-workers do in order to achieve the same recognition. People of Color were also more likely than White People to report that

xiii

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

their colleagues/co-workers treated them with less respect than other faculty and staff, and that they constantly felt under scrutiny by their colleagues due to their identities. The second opportunity for improvement is the differential treatment of Cal U members based on position. Greater percentages of Staff respondents (28%, n = 83) and Faculty respondents (29%, n = 53) believed they had been harassed than did Undergraduate (12%, n = 159) and Graduate Student respondents (12%, n = 33). More than half of all Staff (52%, n = 43) who believed they were harassed said the conduct was based on their position status at Cal U. Faculty members (32%) were more likely than Staff members (29%) to report they observed harassment. Position was indicated as the primary basis for experienced at Cal U, and the third basis for observed harassment. Staff members were least comfortable with the overall climate and the climate in their departments and work units at Cal U when compared with Faculty and Students. Staff members were also more likely than faculty to observe discriminatory hiring and discriminatory practices related to promotion. Cal U position was cited as the primary basis for all observed discriminatory employment-related disciplinary actions. Staff members were less satisfied than Faculty with their jobs/careers; how their jobs/careers have progressed; and their compensation. Thirty-nine percent of Staff respondents (n = 116) and 30% of Faculty respondents (n = 55) had seriously considered leaving Cal U because of the climate. The experiences shared by LGBQ respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; calls attention to the third opportunity for improvement at Cal U: LGBQ issues and concerns. LGBQ respondents (22%, n = 30) were more likely than heterosexual respondents (14%, n = 248) to believe that they had experienced harassment. Of those respondents who believed they had experienced this type of conduct, 43% of LGBQ respondents (n = 13) versus 1% of heterosexual respondents (n = 3) indicated that this conduct was based on sexual orientation. A higher percentage of LGBQ respondents (38%) believed they had observed offensive, hostile, exclusionary, or intimidating conduct during the last year than did heterosexual respondents (20%). Sexual orientation was the primary basis for all observed harassment. xiv

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

LGBQ Students and Faculty were slightly less comfortable in their classes in comparison to heterosexual Students and Faculty. LGBQ employees (14%) were less likely to agree that the workplace climate is welcoming based on sexual orientation than their heterosexual counterparts (56%). This theme also extended to students: LGBQ students (63%) were less likely to agree that the classroom climate is welcoming based on sexual orientation than their heterosexual counterparts (71%). LGBQ employees (46%) reported less satisfaction with their jobs at Cal U than their heterosexual counterparts (76%). LGBQ employees (55%) also reported less satisfaction with the way their careers have progressed at Cal U than heterosexual employees (64%). LGBQ students (68%) were also less satisfied with their academic experiences at Cal U than heterosexual students (79%). Additionally, 18% of LGBQ students (n = 22) and 13% of heterosexual students (n = 169) had seriously considered leaving Cal U. This theme did not extend to employees: 29% of LGBQ employees (n = 4) and 34% of heterosexual respondents (n = 135) had seriously considered leaving the institution. Finally, there were differences by sexual identity regarding attitudes about work-life issues. LGBQ respondents were less likely than heterosexual respondents to agree that Cal U demonstrates that it values a diverse faculty and staff. Furthermore, LGBQ employees were more likely to report there are many unwritten rules concerning how one is expected to interact with colleagues in their work unit; and, work harder than they believe their colleagues/coworkers do to achieve the same recognition. A fourth opportunity is the gender disparity experienced or perceived between women and men. Although women and men reported experiences with harassment at similar rates (16% versus 15%, respectively), 31% of women (n = 64) and 19% of men (n = 22) who experienced such conduct said it was based on gender identity. Women (23%, n = 301) were more likely than men (19%, n = 149) to report they observed harassment. Gender was cited among the top bases for both experienced harassment and observed xv

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

harassment. Further, of the 77 respondents who believed they had experienced sexual assault, 69 were women. Of these, 60 were undergraduate women students. Women (10%) were twice as likely as men (5%) to disagree that the workplace climate was welcoming based on gender identity. Women students (83%), however, were more likely to report the classroom climate was welcoming when compared with men students (78%). Women respondents were more likely than men to have observed all forms of discriminatory employment practices at Cal U. Furthermore, gender was cited among the top three bases for all forms of discriminatory employment practices. Women faculty (31%) were more likely than men faculty (25%) to report they felt burdened by service responsibilities beyond those of their colleagues. Women employees were less satisfied with their jobs but more satisfied with how their careers progressed when compared with men employees. Women employees were also less satisfied (47%) than men employees (53%) with their compensation as compared to Cal U colleagues with similar positions.

xvi

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Introduction History of the Project California University of Pennsylvania (Cal U) is dedicated to fostering a caring university community that provides leadership for constructive participation in a diverse, multicultural world. The University has a long history of supporting initiatives that foster an inclusive living, learning, and working environment 11. A common recommendation from campus constituents, specifically the President’s Commission on the Status of Women, was the need for a comprehensive and regularized tool that would provide campus climate metrics for students, faculty, and staff across the system. To that end, the senior administration with the assistance of the President’s Commission on the Status of Women and the Office of Social Equity initiated this project. It was apparent from a review of best practices regarding climate assessments that there was the need for external expertise in survey administration. The administration of a survey relating to a very sensitive subject like campus climate is likely to yield higher response rates and provide more credible findings if led by an independent, outside agency. Staff may feel particularly inhibited to respond honestly to a survey administered by their own institution for fear of retaliation. Following a national vetting, Rankin & Associates (R&A) was identified as a leader in conducting multiple identity studies in higher education and Cal U contracted with R&A to assist in facilitating a University-wide climate assessment. The campus-wide assessment is further evidence of Cal U’s commitment to ensuring that all members of the community live in an environment that nurtures a culture of inclusiveness and respect in every campus and location in the system. The primary purpose of the project was to conduct a campus-wide assessment to gather data related to institutional climate, inclusion, and work-life issues in order to assess the learning, living, and working environments Cal U.

More information is available at: http://www.calu.edu/faculty-staff/administration/socialequity/index.htm

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

The project’s purpose is to examine campus climate through data collected from a population survey informed by community input. The development of the survey instrument was a collaborative year-long effort between R&A and the Campus Climate Working Group (CSWG). The CSWG was comprised of staff, faculty, and students representing various constituent groups across campus. R&A also reviewed surveys and reports produced at Cal U that included any information regarding climate (NSSE, Faculty Survey, etc.). Informed by previous work of R&A that included a bank of over 200 questions and the review of previous Cal U surveys and reports, the CSWG developed the final Cal U survey. President Jones has continued to reiterate that the findings should drive action and not just “sit on a shelf and gather dust.” The campus will use the results to identify measurable actions based on study’s findings to improve the campus climate. Campus Climate: Academic and Professional Success Climate, for the purposes of this project is considered “the current attitudes, behaviors, and standards of faculty, staff, administrators and students concerning the level of respect for individual needs, abilities, and potential” (Rankin & Reason, 2008, p. 264). This includes the experience of individuals and groups on a campus—and the quality and extent of the interaction between those various groups and individuals. Diversity is one aspect of campus climate. As confirmed by the 2007 Work Team on Campus Climate (as part of the Cal U Regents’ Study Group on University Diversity), “diversity and inclusion efforts are not complete unless they also address climate [and] addressing campus climate is an important and necessary component in any comprehensive plan for diversity.” Nearly two decades ago, the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching and the American Council on Education (ACE) suggested that in order to build a vital community of learning, a college or university must provide a climate where …intellectual life is central and where faculty and students work together to strengthen teaching and learning, where freedom of expression is uncompromisingly protected and where civility is powerfully affirmed, where the dignity of all individuals is affirmed and

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

where equality of opportunity is vigorously pursued, and where the well-being of each member is sensitively supported (Boyer, 1990). During that same time period, the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) (1995) challenged higher education institutions “to affirm and enact a commitment to equality, fairness, and inclusion (p. xvi).” AAC&U proposed that colleges and universities commit to “the task of creating…inclusive educational environments in which all participants are equally welcome, equally valued, and equally heard (p. xxi).” The report suggested that, in order to provide a foundation for a vital community of learning, a primary duty of the academy must be to create a climate that cultivates diversity and celebrates difference. In the ensuing years, many campuses instituted initiatives to address the challenges presented in the reports. Milem, Chang, and Antonio (2005) proposed that, “Diversity must be carried out in intentional ways in order to accrue the educational benefits for students and the institution. Diversity is a process toward better learning rather than an outcome” (p. iv). The report further indicates that in order for “diversity initiatives to be successful they must engage the entire campus community” (p. v). In an exhaustive review of the literature on diversity in higher education, Smith (2009) offers that diversity like technology, is central to institutional effectiveness, excellence, and viability. She also maintains that building deep capacity for diversity requires the commitment of senior leadership and support of all members of the academic community. Ingle (2005) strongly supports the idea of a “thoughtful” process with regard to diversity initiatives in higher education. Campus environments are “complex social systems defined by the relationships between the people, bureaucratic procedures, structural arrangements, institutional goals and values, traditions, and larger socio-historical environments” (Hurtado, et al. 1998, p. 296). As such, it is likely that members of community experience the campus climate differently based on their group membership and group status on campus (Rankin & Reason, 2005). Smith (2009) provokes readers to critically examine their positions and 3

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

responsibilities regarding underserved populations in higher education. A guiding question she poses is “Are special-purpose groups and locations perceived as ‘problems’ or are they valued as contributing to the diversity of the institution and its educational missions” (p. 225)? Individual perceptions of discrimination or a negative campus climate for intergroup relations influence student educational outcomes. Hurtado and Ponjuan (2005) note that when stereotypes “pervade the learning environment for minority students...student academic performance can be undermined” (p. 236). The literature also suggests students of color who perceive their campus environment as hostile have higher rates of attrition, and have problems with student adjustment (Guiffrida, Gouveia, Wall, & Seward, 2008; Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005). Johnson, et al, (2007) indicates that perceptions of the campus racial climate continue to strongly influence the sense of belonging in minority college students. Several other empirical studies reinforce the importance of the perception of non-discriminatory environments to positive learning and developmental outcomes (Aguirre & Messineo, 1997; Flowers & Pascarella, 1999; Whitt, Edison, Pascarella, Terenzini, & Nora, 2001; Pascarella & Terenzini, 2005). Finally, research supports the pedagogical value of a diverse student body and faculty on enhancing learning outcomes (Hale, 2004; Harper, & Hurtado, 2007; Harper & Quaye, 2004). Students in colleges or universities with more inclusive campus environments feel more equipped to participate in an increasingly multicultural society (Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, & Gurin, 2002). When the campus climate is healthy, and students have the opportunity to interact with diverse peers, positive learning occurs and democratic skills develop (Hurtado & Ponjuan, 2005). Racial and ethnic diversity in the campus environment coupled with the institution’s efforts to foster opportunities for quality interactions and learning from each other promote “active thinking and personal development” (Gurin at el., 2002, p. 338). The personal and professional development of employees including faculty, administrators, and staff are also impacted by the complex nature of the campus climate. 4

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

In a study by Settles, Cortina, Malley, and Stewart (2006), sexual harassment and gender discrimination had a significant negative impact on the overall attitudes toward employment for women faculty in the academic sciences. Sears (2002) found that LGB faculty members who judge their campus climate more positively are more likely to feel personally supported and perceive their work unit as more supportive of personnel decisions (i.e., hiring and promoting LGB faculty members) than those who view their campus climate more negatively. Research that underscores the relationships between workplace discrimination and negative job and career attitudes, as well as workplace encounters with prejudice and lower health and well-being (i.e., anxiety and depression, lower life satisfaction and physical health) and greater occupation dysfunction (i.e., organizational withdrawal, and lower satisfaction with work, coworkers and supervisors; Silverschanz, Cortina, Konik, & Magley, 2007; Waldo, 1999) further substantiates the influence of campus climate on employee satisfaction and subsequent productivity. Based on the literature, campus climate influences studentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s academic success and employeeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s professional success and well-being. The literature also suggests that various social identity groups perceive the campus climate differently and their perceptions may adversely affect working and learning outcomes. Cal U Climate Project Structure and Process Because of the inherent complexity of the climate construct, it is crucial to examine the multiple dimensions of climate in higher education. The conceptual model used as the foundation for this assessment of campus climate was developed by Smith (1999) and modified by Rankin (2002). The model is presented through a power and privilege lens. The power and privilege perspective is grounded in critical theory and assumes that power differentials, both earned and unearned, are central to all human interactions (Brookfield, 2005). Unearned power and privilege are associated with membership in certain dominate social groups (Johnson, 2005). Because we all hold multiple social identities we have the opportunity and, we assert, the responsibility to address the oppression of underserved social groups within the power/privilege social hierarchies on our campuses. The model is instituted via a transformational process that capitalizes on 5

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

the inclusive power and privilege perspective. The model has been implemented by over one hundred campuses as a means of identifying successes and challenges with regard to climate issues. The final Cal U survey contained 105 questions and was designed for respondents to provide information about their personal experiences with regard to climate issues and work-life experiences, their perceptions of the campus/location climate, and their perceptions of institutional actions at the campus/location. All members of Cal U community (e.g., students, faculty, and staff) were invited to participate in the survey. Individual campuses/locations also had the opportunity to add additional campus/location-specific questions. The final survey instrument was administered at Cal U between February 4, 2013 and April 7, 2013.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Methodology Conceptual Framework This project defines diversity as the “variety created in any society (and within any individual) by the presence of different points of view and ways of making meaning, which generally flow from the influence of different cultural, ethnic, and religious heritages, from the differences in how we socialize women and men, and from the differences that emerge from class, age, sexual orientation, gender identity, ability and other socially constructed characteristics 12.” The inherent complexity of the topic of diversity requires the examination of the multiple dimensions of diversity in higher education. The conceptual model used as the foundation for this assessment of campus climate was developed by Smith (1999) and modified by Rankin (2002). Research Design Survey Instrument. The survey questions were constructed based on the work of Rankin (2003). The (CSWG) reviewed several drafts of the survey template and then further vetted the questions to be more contextually fitting for the Cal U population. The final campus-specific survey contained 105 questions 13, including open-ended questions for respondents to provide commentary. The survey was designed so that respondents could provide information about their personal campus experiences, their perceptions of the campus climate, and their perceptions of ’s institutional actions, including administrative policies and academic initiatives regarding diversity issues and concerns. The survey was available in both an on-line and pencil-and-paper formats. All survey responses were input into a secure site database, stripped of their IP addresses, and then tabulated for appropriate analysis.

Rankin & Associates (2001) adapted from AAC&U (1995). To insure reliability, evaluators must insure that instruments are properly worded (questions and response choices must be worded in such a way that they elicit consistent responses) and administered in a consistent manner. The instrument was revised numerous times, defined critical terms, and underwent "expert evaluation" of items (in addition to checks for internal consistency). 13

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Sampling Procedure. The project proposal, including the survey instrument, was reviewed and approved by the Cal U System Institutional Review Board on October 11, 2012. The proposal indicated that any analysis of the data would ensure participant confidentiality. The final web-based survey and paper-and-pencil surveys were distributed to the campus community from February 4, 2013 and April 7, 2013. Each survey included information describing the purpose of the study, explaining the survey instrument, and assuring the respondents of anonymity. The survey was distributed to the entire population of students and employees via an invitation to participate from President Jones. To encourage participation, members of the CSWG forwarded subsequent invitations to the Cal U community. The survey results were submitted directly to a secure server where any computer identification that might identify participants was deleted. Any comments provided by participants were also separated at submission so that comments are not attributed to any individual demographic characteristics. Limitations. Several limitations to the generalizability of the data existed. The first limitation occurred because respondents in this study were “self-selected.” Self-selection bias, therefore, was possible since participants had the choice of whether to participate. The bias lies in that an individual’s decision to participate may be correlated with traits that affect the study, which could make the sample non-representative. For example, people with strong opinions or substantial knowledge regarding climate issues on campus may have been more apt to participate in the study. The second limitation was the overall low response rate of less than 30%. Due to this low response rate, caution is recommended when generalizing the results to the entire Cal U community. Data Analysis. Survey data were analyzed to compare the responses (in raw numbers and percentages) of various groups via SPSS (version 20.0). Missing data analyses were conducted and were provided with the data to Cal U. Descriptive statistics were calculated by salient group memberships (e.g., by gender, race/ethnicity, campus/location position) to provide additional information regarding participant responses. Throughout 8

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

much of this report, including the narrative and data tables within the narrative, information was presented using valid percentages 14. Refer to the survey data tables in Appendix B for actual percentages 15 where missing or no response information can be found. The rationale for this discrepancy in reporting is to note the missing or “no response” data in the appendices for institutional information while removing such data within the report for subsequent cross tabulations. Several survey questions allowed respondents the opportunity to further describe their experiences on Cal U’s campus, to expand upon their survey responses, and to add any additional thoughts they wished. Comments were solicited to give voice to the data and to highlight areas of concern that might have been missed in the quantitative items of the survey. These open-ended comments were reviewed 16 using standard methods of thematic analysis. Rankin and Associates reviewers read all comments, and a list of common themes was generated based on their judgment. Most themes reflected the issues raised in the survey questions and revealed in the quantitative data; however, additional themes that arose in the comments were noted in the comments analysis. This methodology does not reflect a comprehensive qualitative study. Comments were not used to develop grounded hypotheses independent of the quantitative data.

Valid percentages derived using the total number of respondents to a particular item (i.e., missing data were excluded). 15 Actual percentages derived using the total number of survey respondents. 16 Any comments provided in languages other than English were translated and incorporated into the qualitative analysis.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Results This section of the report describes the sample, provides reliability measures (internal consistency) and validity measures (content and construct), and presents results as per the project design, examining respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; personal campus experiences, their perceptions of the campus climate, and their perceptions of â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s institutional actions, including administrative policies and academic initiatives regarding diversity issues and concerns on campus. Description of the Sample 17 2,137 Cal U individuals completed surveys for a response rate of 22%. The sample and population figures, chi-square analyses 18, and response rates are presented in Table 1. All analyzed demographic categories showed statistically significant differences between the sample and the population. Chi Square tests were run only on those categories that were response options in the survey and included in demographics provided by the institution. o Women were over-represented in the sample. o African Americans/Blacks and Pacific Islanders were over-represented in the sample. There were also eight categories that were represented in the sample that were not present in the population. All other categories were under-represented in the sample. o Graduate/Professional students as well as Temporary Part-Time Faculty were under-represented in the sample compared to the population. All other status groups were over-represented in the sample. o There was no statistically significant difference between the population and sample for the citizenship category.

All frequency tables are provided in Appendix B. For any notation regarding tables in the narrative, the reader is directed to the tables in Appendix B. 18 Chi Square tests were run only on those categories that were response options in the survey and included in demographics provided by the institution.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 1 Demographics of Population and Sample Population Characteristic

Subgroup

Gender a

Race/Ethnicity1,b

Response Rate

Man

4570

46.75

789

37.27

17.26

Woman

5206

53.25

1319

62.31

25.34

Transgender

N/A

0.28

Other

N/A

0.14

0.0

0.79

>100

663

7.75

170

7.90

25.64

Alaskan Native

0.20

0.05

5.88

Asian

0.81

0.46

14.49

Asian American

0.0

0.28

>100

Caribbean/West Indian

0.0

0.33

>100

European/European American/White

6658

77.85

1647

76.50

24.74

Indian Subcontinent

0.0

0.09

>100

Latino/Hispanic

220

2.57

1.86

18.18

Latin American

0.0

0.42

>100

Middle Eastern

0.0

1.02

>100

Native American

0.0

2.65

>100

Pacific Islander

0.08

0.23

71.43

Southeast Asian

0.0

0.09

>100

Two or more races

262

3.06

N/A

No Race Identified

656

7.67

N/A

Other

N/A

Undergraduate Student

6091

Graduate/Professional Student

African African American/Black

Position c

Sample

158

7.34

65.25

1386

64.86

22.75

1967

21.07

266

12.45

13.52

416

4.46

107

5.01

25.72

0.88

1.45

37.80

Temporary Part-Time Faculty

280

3.00

1.50

11.43

Temporary Full-Time Faculty

0.62

0.75

27.59

441

4.72

299

13.99

67.80

Tenured Faculty Tenure-Track Faculty

Staff

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 1 (cont.) Characteristic

Subgroup

Population N

Citizenship d

US Citizen

7893

97.99

2090

98.58

26.48

162

2.01

1.42

18.52

Non-US Citizen 1 a b c d

Sample n

Respondents were instructed to indicate all categories that apply. &2 (1, N = 2108) = 73.2, p = .0001 &2 (5, N = 1873) = 15.72, p = .0077 &2 (6, N = 2137) = 490.65, p = .0001 X2 (1, N = 2120) = 3.51, p = .061

Validity. Validity is the extent to which a measure truly reflects the phenomenon or concept under study. The validation process for the survey instrument included both the development of the survey questions and consultation with subject matter experts. The survey questions were constructed based on the work of Hurtado (1999) and Smith (1997) and were further informed by instruments used in other institutional/organizational studies. Several researchers working in the area of diversity, as well as higher education survey research methodology experts, reviewed the template used for the survey, as did the members of the CSWG. Content validity was ensured given that the items and response choices arose from literature reviews, previous surveys, and input from CSWG members. Construct validity – the extent to which scores on an instrument permit inferences about underlying traits, attitudes, and behaviors – should be evaluated by examining the correlations of measures being evaluated with variables known to be related to the construct. For this investigation, correlations ideally ought to exist between item responses and known instances of harassment, for example. However, no reliable data to that effect were available. As such, meticulous attention was given to the manner in which questions were asked and response choices given. Items were constructed to be non-biased, non-leading, and non-judgmental, and to preclude individuals from providing “socially acceptable” responses. Reliability - Internal Consistency of Responses. Correlations between the responses to questions about overall campus climate for various groups (question 81) and those that 12

Response Rate

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

rate overall campus climate on various scales (question 82) were low to low-moderate (Bartz, 1988) and statistically significant, indicating a positive relationship between answers regarding the acceptance of various populations and the climate for that population. The consistency of these results suggests that the survey data were internally reliable (Trochim, 2000). Pertinent correlation coefficients 19 are provided in Table 2. All correlations in Table 2 were significantly different from zero at the .01 level; that is, there is a relationship between all selected pairs of responses. For survey items asking for perception of degree of respect for the selected racial/ethnic/underrepresented groups, the response “don’t know” was treated as missing data. Therefore, responses of “don’t know” were not included in the correlation analysis. A strong relationship (between .5 and .7) existed between Respectful of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual individuals and Positive for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual People. Moderately strong relationships (between .4 and .5) existed between three pairs of variables – between Respectful of African Americans/Blacks and Positive for People of Color; between Respectful of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual individuals and Not Homophobic; and between Respectful of Females and Positive for Women. Four pairs showed a moderate relationship (between .3 and .4) – between both pairs for People of Color; between Respectful of Africans and Positive for People of Color; and between Respectful of Females and Not Sexist. All other pairs were either minimally correlated (below 0.3) or not statistically significant.

Pearson correlation coefficients indicate the degree to which two variables are related. A value of one signifies perfect correlation. Zero signifies no correlation.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 2 Pearson Correlations Between Ratings of Acceptance and Campus Climate for Selected Groups Climate Characteristics

Positive for People of Color

Not Racist

Africans

.3861

.2581

African Americans/ Blacks

.4101

.2861

People of Color

.3271

Respectful of:

Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual Individuals Females Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Persons 1

Positive for Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual People

Not Homophobic

.5221

.4531

Positive for Women

Not Sexist

.4441

.3401

Positive for NonNative English Speakers

Not Classist (SES)

Positive for People of Low Socioeconomic Status

.2051

.2091

p < 0.01

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Sample characteristics 20 Table 3 depicts the respondent population by primary position status. Sixty-five percent of all respondents were undergraduate students, and 12% were graduate students. Fourteen percent of all respondents were Staff, 9% were Faculty, and 2% were Postdoctoral Scholars. Respondents were required to answer the Primary Position question; however, they were not required to use the drop-down menu to specify their positions.

Table 3. Primary Position at Cal U Position

Undergraduate Student

1386

64.9

Graduate Student

266

12.4

Tenured faculty

107

5.0

Tenure-track faculty

1.5

Temporary Part Time faculty

1.5

Temporary Full Time faculty

0.7

Staff

299

14.0

Note: There are no missing data for the primary categories in this question; all respondents were required to select an answer.

All percentages presented in the “Sample Characteristics” section of the report are actual percentages.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

For the purposes of several analyses, primary status data were collapsed 21 into Students, Staff, and Faculty (Figure 1). Seventy-seven percent of the survey respondents were Students (n = 1,652), 14% were Staff (n = 299), and 9% were Faculty (n = 186). Ninety-two percent of respondents (n = 1,975) were full-time in their primary positions.

Students

1652

Staff Faculty

299 186

Figure 1. Respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Collapsed Position Status (n)

Students included all undergraduate and graduate students, and Staff included all staff sub-categories. Faculty included all sub-categories of Tenured faculty, Tenure-track faculty, Temporary Part-time faculty, and Temporary Full-time faculty.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Ninety-one percent of respondents (n = 1,938) spent the majority of their time at Cal U at Main Campus (Table 4). Eight percent (n = 171) spent the majority of their time in On-line Programs of Study. Table 4. Majority of Time at Cal U Location

1938

90.7

CCAC

0.4

South point

0.3

171

8.3

0.3

Main Campus

Exclusive On-line Programs of Study Missing

With regard to respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; work unit affiliations, Table 5 indicates that 31% of Staff respondents (n = 93) were affiliated with the Office of the Vice President for Academic Affairs, 25% of Staff respondents (n = 76) were primarily affiliated with the Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs, and 14% with the Office of the Vice President for Administration and Finance (n = 42).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 5. Staff Respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Primary Work Unit Affiliations Work Unit

Direct Reports

4.7

Vice President for Acdemic Affairs

31.1

Vice President for Administration and Finance

14.0

Vice President for Student Affairs

25.4

Vice President for University Technology

6.4

Vice President of Marketing and University Relations

4.3

Interim Vice President for University Advancement & Alumni Relations

4.3

Missing

9.7

Note: Table includes staff responses only (n = 299).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Seven percent of Faculty were affiliated with Mathematics, Computer Science & Information Systems (n = 13) or Early, Middle, and Special Education (n = 12) (Table 6). Five percent of Faculty respondents were affiliated with Biological and Environmental Sciences (n = 9), Exercise Science and Sport Studies (n = 10), Health Science (n = 10), or Social Work (n = 9). Table 6. Faculty Respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Primary Work Unit Affiliations Work Unit

Academic Development Services

3.8

Applied Engineering and Technology

3.2

Art and Design

2.2

Biological and Environmental Sciences

4.8

Business and Economics

0.5

Chemistry and Physics

2.2

Communication Disorders

0.5

Counselor Education and Services

2.7

Early, Middle and Special Education

6.5

Earth Science

2.7

Educational Administration and Leadership

1.1

English

2.7

Exercise Science and Sport Studies

5.4

Health Science

5.4

History and Political Science

2.7

Justice, Law and Society

3.2

Library Services

1.6

Mathematics, Computer Science & Information Systems

7.0

Modern Languages and Cultures

0.5

Music

2.7

Nursing

1.1

Philosophy

1.1

Professional Studies

1.1

Psychology

3.2

Secondary Ed & Administrative Leadership

3.2

Social Work

4.8

Student Services

1.1

Theater and Dance

2.2

Note: Table includes faculty responses only (n = 186).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

The majority of the sample were women (62%, n = 1,319; Figure 2) 22. Six transgender 23 individuals (0.3%) completed the survey. Three respondents marked “other” in terms of their gender identity and wrote comments such as “No identity,” “Decline to self-identify,” and “This is no concern of your and adds to the validity problem of this survey.”

Students 1040

Staff Faculty

599

114

177 102

Men

Women

Transgender

Figure 2. Respondents by Gender & Position Status (n)

Additionally, the sex of the majority of respondents was female (62%, n = 1,320), while 37% of respondents were male (n = 788), and 10 (0.5%) were intersex. 23 Self-identification as transgender does not preclude identification as male or female, nor do all those who might fit the definition self-identify as transgender. Here, those who chose to self-identify as transgender have been reported separately in order to reveal the presence of a relatively new campus identity that might otherwise have been overlooked.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

The majority of respondents were heterosexual 24 (81%, n = 1,731). Seven percent were LGBQ (lesbian, gay, bisexual, or queer, n = 137) (Figure 3). Less than one percent of respondents (n = 12) were questioning their sexual orientations, and 8% identified as asexual (n = 177).

Students

1332

Staff Faculty

240 159

123 5

LGBQ

Heterosexual

Figure 3. Respondents by Sexual Orientation & Position Status (n)

Respondents who answered “other” in response to the question about their sexual orientations and wrote “straight” or “heterosexual” in the adjoining text box were recoded as heterosexual. Additionally, this report uses the terms “LGBQ” and “sexual minorities” to denote individuals who self-identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, and those who wrote in “other” terms, such as “pan-sexual,” “homoflexible,” “fluid,” etc.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

About 33% of Faculty members were 50 to 59 years old, 27% were 40 to 59 years old, and 18% of Faculty members were 60 and over. Thirty-six percent of Staff were between the ages of 50 and 59, and 27% were between 40 and 49 years old (Figure 4).

Staff Faculty 74

44 29 21

8 0

25 or younger

26-30

31-39

40-49

50-59

60 and over

Figure 4. Employee Respondents by Age & Position Status (n)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Fifty-two percent of responding undergraduate students (n = 720) were 17 to 20 years old. Forty-six percent of responding graduate students (n = 120) were 21 to 25 years old (Figure 5).

720

Undergraduate Students Graduate Students 497

120 64 59

0 17-20

21-25

26-30

31-39

16 31

11 11

40-49

50-59

60 and over

Figure 5. Student Respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Age (n)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

With regard to race and ethnicity, 74% of the respondents (n = 1,590) identified as European American/White. Nine percent identified as African/African American/Black (n = 187). One percent were Asian/Asian American (n = 16), 2% were Hispanic/Latino (n = 40), 3% were European (n = 57) or Native American Indian (n = 57) (Figure 6). Seven percent of the respondents marked the response category “other” (n = 158) and wrote comments such as “American,” “Canadian,” “Central Asia/Tajikistan,” “Don’t Know,” “Ginger,” “Mulatto,” “Russian,” “Scottish, Jewish,” “Why does this matter,” etc.

African American/African/Black Native American Indian/Alaskan Native Asian/Asian American Latin American Hispanic/Latino Middle Eastern Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native Indian subcontinent Caribbean/West Indian Southeast Asian European European American/White 187 Other

1590

158 58

40 22

Figure 6. Respondents’ Racial/Ethnic Identity (n), inclusive of multi-racial and/or multi-ethnic.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Respondents were given the opportunity to mark multiple boxes regarding their racial identity25, allowing them to identify as bi-racial or multi-racial. Given this opportunity, many respondents chose only White (72%, n = 1,544) as their identity (Figure 7). For the purposes of some analyses, the categories White and People of Color 26 (15%, n = 316) were created.

White People of Color

1544

316

Figure 7. Respondents’ Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)

While recognizing the vastly different experiences of people of various racial identities (e.g., Chicano(a) versus African American or Latino(a) versus Asian American) and those experiences within these identity categories (e.g., Hmong versus Chinese), we collapsed these categories for many of the analyses due to the small numbers in the individual categories. 26 For the purposes of this report, “White” denotes respondents who marked the European and/or European American/White response choices. “People of Color” includes respondents who marked any of the following response choices: African, African American/Black, Alaskan Native, Asian, Asian American, Caribbean/West Indian, Indian subcontinent, Latino(a)/Hispanic, Latin American, Middle Eastern, Native American Indian, Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native, and Southeast Asian. Respondents who marked White and any of the People of Color responses were recoded as People of Color.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

The survey item 27 that queried respondents about their spiritual and religious affiliations offered 42 response choices and the option to “mark all that apply.” For the purposes of analyses in this report, respondents who chose any Christian religious/spiritual affiliation were recoded to “Christian” (66%, n = 1408). Fifty-five respondents (3%) chose Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations. 28 Twenty-three percent of respondents (n = 484) reported no affiliation 29, and 3% reported multiple affiliations 30 (n = 61) (Figure 8). People marked “other” and wrote in comments such as “Humanist,” Jedi,” “I believe in God,” “Pantheist,” “Pastafarianism,” “Post Tribal Shaman, Wizard,” “Very Mixed Views,” etc.

1408 Christian Other R eligious Affiliatio ns No Affiliat ion Multiple Affiliations

484

Figure 8. Respondents’ Religious/Spiritual Affiliations (n)

Readers are referred to Appendix B for a complete listing of respondents’ religious/spiritual affiliations. Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations include Baha’i, Buddhist, Confucianist, Druid, Hindu, Jewish, Muslim, Native American Traditional Practitioner, Pagan, Rastafarian, Scientologist, Shinto, Sikh, Taoist, Unitarian Universalist, and Wiccan. 29 No affiliation includes agnostic; atheist; no affiliation; and spiritual, but no affiliation. 30 Multiple affiliations include anyone who selected more than one spirituality/religious affiliation. 28

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Few students had children. While 38% of employee respondents (n = 184) were caring for children under the age of 18 years, 26% were not responsible for any dependent family members (n = 125) (Figure 9). Three percent of students (n = 46) and 16% of employees (n = 78) were responsible for senior or other family members.

987

Students Employees

354 125

202 184 87

168 69

72 4

Figure 9. Respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Dependent Care Status by Position (n)

Ninety-four percent of all respondents (n = 1,999) had never been in the military. Three percent of respondents (n = 68) were veterans, 27 people were reservists (1%), and 11 were active military members (0.5%).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Fifteen percent of respondents (n = 329) 31 had disabilities that substantially affected learning, working, or living activities. Four percent of respondents had ADD/ADHD (n = 81), and 3% had emotional/psychological conditions (n = 70) or medical/health conditions (n = 58; Table 7).

Table 7. Respondents’ Disability Status Disability

No disability

1808

84.6

ADD/ADHD

3.8

Asperger’s/High functioning Autism

0.4

Emotional/Psychological

3.3

Hearing

1.1

Learning disabled

1.5

Medical/Health

2.7

Physical/Mobility ambulatory

1.0

Physical/Mobility non-ambulatory

0.7

Visual

0.8

Other

0.6

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses.

Some respondents indicated they had multiple disabilities or conditions that substantially affected major life activities. The unduplicated total number of respondents with documented disabilities = 329 (15%). The duplicated total (n = 339; 16%) is reflected in Table 5 in this report and in Appendix B.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 8 indicates that approximately 98% of participants who completed this survey were U.S. Citizens 32(n = 2,090), 1% were Non-U.S. Citizens 33 (n = 30), and <1% were Undocumented Residents 34 (n = 1). Twenty-three Non-U.S. Citizens were students, and 7 were faculty or staff. Table 8. Respondents’ Citizenship Status Citizenship

2058

96.3

US Citizen –naturalized

1.2

Dual citizenship

0.3

Permanent Resident (immigrant)

0.7

Permanent Resident (refugee)

0.0

A visa holder (F-1, J-1, H1-B, A, L, or G visas)

0.7

Undocumented resident

0.0

Missing

0.8

US citizen

Fourteen percent of Non-U.S. Citizens (n = 4) have lived in the United States for less than one year. Forty-eight percent of Non-U.S. Citizens (n = 14) have lived in the United States for one to five years. Ninety-seven percent of respondents (n = 2,080) said only English was spoken in their homes. Two percent indicated a language other than English was spoken in the home (n = 43). Respondents indicated the languages other than English spoken at their homes were Afrikaans, American Sign Language, Arabic, Bosnian, Creole, Dutch, Farsi, French, German, Hmong, Italian, Japanese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Russian, Serbo-Croatian, Spanish, Thai, Uzbek, etc. 32

The survey allowed respondents to mark multiple response choices with regard to citizenship status. With the SWT’s approval, citizenship was recoded for some analyses to include three categories: U.S. Citizens, Non-U.S. Citizens, and Undocumented Residents. U.S. Citizens included U.S. citizens and dual citizenship. 33 Non-U.S. Citizens included Internationals, Permanent Residents (immigrant and refugee), and other legally documented status. 34 Undocumented Residents included those individuals who marked the undocumented resident response choice.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

About 16% of Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 75) indicated that the highest level of education they completed was a bachelor’s degrees. Five percent had finished associate’s degrees (n = 22), 34% master’s degrees (n = 164), and 31% doctoral or other professional degrees (n = 149). Table 9 illustrates the level of education completed by students’ parents or legal guardians. Seventeen percent of all Student respondents (n = 352) were first-generation students 35. Table 9. Students’ Parents’/Guardians’ Highest Level of Education Parent /Legal Guardian 1

Parent/Legal Guardian 2

Level of Education

No high school

2.8

3.0

Completed high school/GED

507

30.7

487

29.5

Some college

241

14.6

234

14.2

Business/Technical certificate/degree

152

9.2

167

10.1

Associate’s degree

153

9.3

146

8.8

Bachelor’s degree

288

17.4

293

17.7

Some graduate work

2.3

1.6

Master’s degree

159

9.6

120

7.3

Doctoral degree

1.5

0.6

Professional degree (MD, MFA, JD)

0.9

0.7

Unknown

0.6

2.4

Not applicable

0.8

1.8

Note: Table reports student responses only (n = 1,652).

Of 1,652 student respondents, 19% were first-year students (n = 312), 21% were secondyear/sophomore students (n = 354), 20% were third-year students/juniors (n = 336), 23% were fourth-year students/seniors (n = 387), and 16% were graduate students (n = 260).

First Generation students included those students where both parents/guardians completed no high school, some high school, high school, or some college.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Ten percent of undergraduate respondents identified their academic majors 36 as Business Administration (n = 136), and 7% were studying Psychology (n = 96), Athletic Training/Sport Management (n = 95), Biology (n = 93), or Criminal Justice/Justice Studies (n = 92). Six percent were in Secondary Education/Secondary Ed. Certification (n = 83). Thirteen percent of graduate student respondents indicated they were pursuing degrees 37 in Social Work/Community & Agency Counseling (n = 35), and 9% were studying Business Administration (n = 25). Six percent of graduate/professional student respondents were studying Social Science/Legal Studies (n = 17), School Counseling/PCER (n = 17), Performance Enhancement and Injury Prevention/Rehabilitation Science (n = 16), or Athletic Training/Exercise Science & Health Promotion (n = 15). Forty-five percent of all students (n = 748) were not employed. Twenty-nine percent were employed on or off campus on average one to 20 hours per week (n = 482). Twenty-one percent of all students were employed 21 to 40 hours per week (n = 344), and 3% worked more than 40 hours per week (n = 55).

36 37

See Appendix B, Table B16 for a comprehensive listing of undergraduate respondents’ academic majors. See Appendix B, Table B17 for a comprehensive listing of graduate student respondents’ academic programs.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Seventy-seven percent of students said they used loans to pay for college (n = 1,263; Table 10). One-third paid for college with family contributions (34%, n = 564) and Pell grants (31%, n = 516). Table 10. How Students Pay for College Methods of Payment

Academics scholarship

302

18.3

Athletics scholarship

2.8

Credit card

113

6.8

Family contribution

564

34.1

Loans

1263

76.5

Need-based institutional grant

221

13.4

Pell grant

516

31.2

Personal contribution/job

373

22.6

Tuition remission through CAL U employee

2.2

Other

127

7.7

Note: Table reports student responses only (n = 1,652).

Thirty-one percent of student respondents were currently the sole providers for their living/educational expenses (i.e., independent; n = 506) and 69% had families who were assisting with their living/educational expenses (i.e., dependent; n = 1,140). Three percent of student respondents reported that they or their families had annual incomes of less than $30,000 (n = 43, Figure 10). Thirty-three percent reported annual incomes between $30,000 and $59,999 (n = 547), 34% between $60,000 and $99,999 (n = 563), and 10% between $100,000 and $129,999 (n = 165) annually. Four percent of student respondents said that they or their families have annual incomes between $130,000 and $199,999 (n = 69), and 4% had annual incomes over $200,000 (n = 57). These figures are displayed by student status in Figure 10. Information is provided for those students who indicated that they were financially independent

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

(i.e., the sole providers of their living and educational expenses) and those who indicated that they were financially dependent on others.

Graduate students, not sole provider 349

332

Graduate students, sole provider

176 128

121 65 10

101

57 19

49 16

39 5

19 13

6 13 6

Figure 10. Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Income by Dependency Status (n)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Of the students completing the survey, 28% lived in campus housing (Table 11). Seventy-two percent lived off campus. Of those students who lived off campus, 147 respondents were Global online students. Table 11. Students’ Residence Students’ Residence

On-campus residence halls

460

27.8

Off campus - Vulcan Village

193

11.7

Off campus - Within walking distance to campus

349

21.1

Off Campus Commuter

493

29.8

Off campus – Global online

147

8.9

Missing

0.6

Note: Table includes student responses only (n = 1,652).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Thirty-six percent of student respondents did not participate in any student clubs and organizations at Cal U (n = 600) (Table 12). Twenty-three percent were involved with Academic/Professional Organizations (n = 380), and 14% were in Honor Societies (n = 234).

Table 12. Students Participation in Clubs Organizations at the University Clubs/Organizations

I do not participate in any student organizations

600

36.3

Student Leadership Groups

203

12.3

Academic/Professional Organizations

380

23.0

Special Interest Organizations

152

9.2

Campus Community Groups

136

8.2

Political Groups

1.8

Religious Organizations

115

7.0

Service Organizations

5.1

Social Fraternities or Sororities

183

11.1

Publications and Media Organizations

1.9

Intramurals/Clubs Sports

179

10.8

Music/Performance Organizations

140

8.5

NCAA Varsity Athletics

3.9

Honor Societies

234

14.2

Residence Hall Organizations

3.0

Other

133

8.1

Note: Table includes only student respondents (n = 1,652). Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 13 indicates that most student respondents spent at least some time each week on experiential learning activities. Twenty-five percent of students spent an average of one to five hours per week (n = 418), 19% spent 6 to 10 hours (n = 19%), 10% spent 11 to 20 hours (n = 167), and 6% spent more than 20 hours per week on experiential learning activities (n = 102). Twenty-six percent spent no time on experiential learning activities (n = 428). Table 13. Average Number of Hours Per Week on Experiential Learning Activities Average Hours per Week

None

428

25.9

1-5 hours

418

25.3

6-10 hours

308

18.6

11-20 hours

167

10.1

More than 20 hours

102

6.2

Missing

229

13.9

Note: Table includes student responses only (n = 1,652).

Fifty percent of student respondents estimated it would take four years to complete their degrees at Cal U (n = 823), while 11% thought it would take them three years to finish (n = 182). Thirteen percent thought they would spend 5 years at Cal U to complete their degrees (n = 213), and 4% thought it would take them 6 or more years to complete their degrees at Cal U (n = 70).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Campus Climate Assessment Findings 38 The following section 39 reviews the major findings of this study. The review explores the climate at Cal U through an examination of respondents’ personal experiences, their general perceptions of campus climate, and their perceptions of institutional actions regarding climate on campus, including administrative policies and academic initiatives. Each of these issues was examined in relation to the relevant identity and status of the respondents. Comfort with the Climate at California University of Pennsylvania The questionnaire posed questions regarding respondents’ level of comfort with a variety of aspects of Cal U’s campuses. Table 14 illustrates that 81% of the survey respondents (n = 1,724) were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate at Cal U while 7% (n = 149) indicated that they were “uncomfortable” or “very uncomfortable.” Twelve percent of respondents (n = 260) indicated that they were “Neither Comfortable nor Uncomfortable” with the overall campus climate. Seventy-eight percent of respondents (n = 1,659) were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate for diversity in their departments/work units while 6% (n = 135) indicated that they were “uncomfortable” or “very uncomfortable.” Tm percent of respondents (n = 222) indicated that they were “Neither Comfortable nor Uncomfortable” with the climate in their department/work unit. Table 14. Respondents’ Comfort With the Climate Comfort with Climate at Cal U

Comfort with Climate in Department/ Work Unit

Level of Comfort

Very Comfortable

601

28.2

790

37.2

Comfortable

1123

52.6

869

40.9

Neither Comfortable nor Uncomfortable

260

12.2

222

10.4

Uncomfortable

120

5.6

2.3

Very Uncomfortable

1.4

4.0

Frequency tables for all survey items are provided in Appendix B. Several pertinent tables and graphs are included in the body of the narrative to illustrate salient points. 39 The percentages presented in this section of the report are valid percentages (i.e., percentages are derived from the total number of respondents who answered an individual item).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Figures 11 and 12 illustrate that Staff were least comfortable with the overall climate and the climate in their departments and work units at Cal U.

Undergraduates (n = 1384) Graduate Students (n = 266) Faculty (n = 186) Staff (n = 297) 56 49 49

35 29

27 21 12 12 10

13 15 3 2

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

4 1 2 1 Very Uncomfortable

Figure 11. Comfort with Overall Climate by Position (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Undergradautes (n = 1379) Graduate Students (n = 265) Faculty (n = 185) Staff (n = 297) 46

43 37

38 27 10 10

13 11 3 4

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

1 3

7 8

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 12. Comfort with Climate in Department/Work Unit by Position (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

With regard to classroom climate, 84% of Students (n = 1,389) and 90% of Faculty (n = 167) were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate in their classes (Table 15). Readers will note that 5% of Faculty indicated that this survey item was “not applicable” to them. Of the 177 Faculty who found the item “applicable” to them, 94% (n = 167) were “comfortable” or “very comfortable” with the climate in their classes. Table 15. Comfort With the Climate in Their Classes Undergraduate and Graduate Students’ Comfort with Climate in Classes*

Faculty Comfort with Climate in Classes**

Level of Comfort

Very Comfortable

514

31.2

52.7

Comfortable

875

53.1

37.1

Neither Comfortable nor Uncomfortable

173

10.5

3.8

Uncomfortable

3.4

0.5

Very Uncomfortable

0.9

1.1

Not Applicable 16 1.0 *Note: Undergraduate and Graduate student responses only (n = 1,649). **Note: Faculty responses only (n = 186).

4.8

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

When comparing the data by race 40, White respondents and Respondents of Color were similarly comfortable with the overall climate for diversity at Cal U and in their department/work unit (Figures 13 & 14).

White (n = 1542) People of Color (n = 316)

27 12

12 5

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 13. Comfort with Overall Climate by Race (%)

To review, ““White” denotes respondents who marked the European and/or European American/White response choices. “People of Color” includes respondents who marked any of the following response choices: African, African American/Black, Alaskan Native, Asian, Asian American, Caribbean/West Indian, Indian subcontinent, Latino(a)/Hispanic, Latin American, Middle Eastern, Native American Indian, Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native, and Southeast Asian. Respondents who marked White and any of the People of Color responses were recoded as People of Color.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

White (n = 1537) People of Color (n = 315)

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 14. Comfort with Climate in Department/Work Unit by Race (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Figure 15 (and all subsequent Figures that illustrate “comfort with classroom climate”) removed from the analyses any Student and Faculty respondents who indicated the survey item was “not applicable” to them. Although there were no differences by race for respondents who felt “very comfortable”, a slightly higher percentage of White respondents were “comfortable” with the climate in their classes than were Respondents of Color.

White (n = 1338) People of Color (n = 283)

13 3

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 15. Student and Faculty Comfort with Climate in Classes by Race (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

In terms of gender 41, men and women respondents were similarly comfortable with the overall climate and the climate in their departments/work units (Figure 16 & 17).

Men (n = 788) Women (n = 1318)

28 12

12 6

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 16. Comfort with Overall Climate by Gender (%)

Transgender respondents were too few to include in these analyses (n = 6).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Men (n = 788) Women (n = 1318)

52 54

28 28 12 12 6 5 Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

1 1 Very Uncomfortable

Figure 17. Comfort with Climate in Department/Work Unit/ Academic Unit/College/School/Clinical

Setting by Gender (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Again, there were no differences by gender regarding Student and Faculty respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; level of comfort with the climate in their classes (Figure 18).

Men (n = 671) Women (n = 1137)

10 3

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 18. Student and Faculty Comfort with Climate in Classes by Gender (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

With respect to sexual orientation, LGBQ respondents were slightly less comfortable with the overall climate than were heterosexual respondents (Figures 19 & 20).

LGBQ (n = 137) Heterosexual (n = 1729)

28 20 12 6

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 19. Comfort with Overall Climate by Sexual Orientation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

With regard to sexual identity, 79% of heterosexual respondents and 79% LGBQ respondents reported being “very comfortable” or “comfortable” with the climate in their department or work units. Although a higher percentage of heterosexual respondents (38%) than LGBQ respondents (32%) felt “very comfortable” with the climate in their departments/work units, LGBQ respondents reporting being more “comfortable” than their heterosexual counterparts (47% versus 41%) (Figure 20).

LGBQ (n = 136) Heterosexual (n = 1726)

47 38

10 4

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 20. Comfort with Climate in Department/Work Unit by Sexual Orientation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

LGBQ Students and Faculty were slightly less comfortable in their classes in comparison to heterosexual Students and Faculty (Figure 21).

LGBQ (n = 132) Heterosexual (n = 1480)

35 26 17 10 4 Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 21. Student and Faculty Comfort with Climate in Classes by Sexual Orientation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

With respect to disability status, respondents who self-identified as not having disabilities generally were more comfortable with the climate on campus, in their departments/work units, and in their classes than were respondents with disabilities (Figures 22 - 24).

No Disability (n = 1806) Disability (n = 277)

24 12

16 5

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 22. Comfort with Overall Climate by Disability Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

No Disability (n = 1802) Disability (n = 276)

42 36

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 23. Comfort with Climate in in Department/Work Unit by Disability Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

No Disability (n = 1546) Disabilities (n = 241)

35 25 15 9 3 Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 24. Student and Faculty Comfort with Climate in Classes by Disability Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Slight differences existed among individuals from the various religious/spiritual affiliations regarding their comfort level with the overall climate at Cal U (Figure 25).

Christian (n = 1406) Other Religious Affiliation (n = 55) No Affiliation (n = 484) Multiple Affiliations (n = 61) 55 53

29 31 27

23 16 10

Very comfortable

Comfortable

7 Neutral

5 3

Uncomfortable

1 0 2

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 25. Comfort with Overall Climate by Religious/Spiritual Affiliation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

A slightly higher percentage of respondents with “other religious/spiritual affiliations” were “very comfortable” with the climates in their departments/work units, etc. and in their classes than were other respondents (Figures 26 & 27).

Christian (n = 1345) Other Religious Affiliation (n = 54) No Affiliation (n = 461) Multiple Affiliations (n = 58)

42 43

39 31

32 17 10

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

17 5 6 4 7 Uncomfortable

2 2 3 2 Very Uncomfortable

Figure 26. Comfort with Climate in Department/Work Unit by Religious/Spiritual Affiliation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Christian (n = 1184) Other Religious Affiliation (n = 47) No Affiliation (n = 437) 54

47 34

Multiple Affiliations (n = 57)

32 23

21 9

13 12

9 2

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

4 4

Uncomfortable

1 0 2 0 Very Uncomfortable

Figure 27. Student and Faculty Comfort with Climate in Classes by Religious/Spiritual Affiliation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Perceptions of Level of Respect Overall, the majority of respondents offered that the campus climate was “very respectful” or “moderately respectful” for people from various racial backgrounds (Table 16) 42. Respondents did offer that the climate was least respectful (“moderately disrespectful”/“very disrespectful”) of African American/Black people (6%, n = 120), African people (5%, n = 94), and Middle Eastern people (5%, n = 95). Table 16. Ratings of Overall Campus Climate for Various Races/Ethnicities

Very Respectful

Race/Ethnicity

Moderately Respectful

Neither Respectful nor Disrespectful

Moderately Disrespectful

Very Disrespectful

African

803

40.7

523

26.5

235

11.9

4.0

0.8

African American/Black

836

42.4

550

27.9

222

11.3

4.9

1.2

Alaskan Native

692

35.3

422

21.5

260

13.3

0.4

0.2

Asian

749

38.1

511

26.0

260

13.2

2.2

0.3

Asian American

772

39.3

505

25.7

261

13.3

1.6

0.3

Southeast Asian

716

36.5

484

24.7

255

13.0

1.5

0.2

Caribbean/West Indian

702

35.9

457

23.4

260

13.3

1.0

0.2

European American/White

938

47.6

523

26.6

223

11.3

1.9

0.5

Indian subcontinent

710

36.1

459

23.3

276

14.0

1.6

0.2

Latino(a)/Hispanic

760

38.7

522

26.6

261

13.3

1.9

0.4

Latin American

757

38.7

507

25.9

261

13.3

1.5

0.2

Middle Eastern

699

35.6

476

24.3

265

13.5

3.6

1.2

Native American Indian

712

36.4

467

23.9

262

13.4

1.0

0.1

Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Natives

703

36.1

462

23.7

252

12.9

0.6

0.1

Multiracial, multiethnic or multicultural persons

767

39.2

509

26.0

250

12.8

1.8

0.5

Readers are directed to Appendix B, Table B76 to review the “Don’t Know” responses for this survey item.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 17 indicates that more than half of all respondents thought that the overall campus climate was “very respectful”/ “moderately respectful” of all of the campus groups listed in the table 43. The respondents believed the climate was most respectful (“very respectful”) for females and males (43% and 49%, respectively), and for veterans/active military/reservists (47%). Respondents suggested that the campus was least respectful (“moderately disrespectful”/ “very disrespectful”) of LGBT people (9%), socioeconomically disadvantaged people (6%), and people affiliated with religions other than Christian (6%).

Readers are directed to Appendix B, Table B75 to review the “Don’t Know” responses for this survey item.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 17. Ratings of Overall Campus Climate for Various Campus Groups

Very Respectful

Group

Moderately Respectful

Neither Respectful nor Disrespectful

Moderately Disrespectful

Very Disrespectful

Affected by psychological health issues

640

31.9

590

29.4

305

15.2

3.2

0.6

Affected by physical health issues

736

36.8

613

30.6

268

13.4

3.3

0.5

Female

859

43.0

608

30.4

252

12.6

4.0

0.6

From religious affiliations other than Christian

660

33.1

589

29.5

338

17.0

4.8

0.9

From Christian affiliations

824

41.2

571

28.5

300

15.0

2.1

0.6

Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender

601

30.0

604

30.2

340

17.0

143

7.1

1.4

Immigrants

646

32.4

516

25.9

373

18.7

3.7

0.6

International students, staff, or faculty

731

36.6

592

29.7

303

15.2

3.3

0.5

Learning disabled

715

36.0

565

28.4

320

16.1

3.0

0.5

Male

983

49.2

520

26.0

254

12.7

1.1

0.4

Non-native English speakers

640

32.1

560

28.1

356

17.9

4.0

0.5

Parents/guardians

821

41.2

568

28.5

299

15.0

1.6

0.1

People of color

831

41.6

567

28.4

279

14.0

3.4

0.8

Providing care for other than a child

707

35.4

536

26.9

330

16.5

2.0

0.4

Physical disabled

755

38.1

574

28.9

274

13.8

3.7

0.5

Socioeconomically disadvantaged

688

34.5

527

26.5

340

17.1

104

5.2

1.1

Socioeconomically advantaged

793

39.9

534

26.9

324

16.3

1.0

0.4

Veterans/active military/reservists members

946

47.3

503

25.2

249

12.5

0.7

0.3

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Perceptions of Campus Accessibility With regard to campus accessibility for people with disabilities, Eberly Building (56%), Duda (59%), the elevators (57%), Health/Wellness Center (51%), Mandarino Library (56%), restrooms (50%), walkways and pedestrian paths (57%), Cal U Website (61%), D2L (54%), and VIP (55%) were considered “fully accessible.” Substantial percentages of respondents did not know how accessible most aspects of campus were (Table 18). Table 18.Campus Accessibility

Fully Accessible Area

Accessible with Assistance or Intervention n

Not Accessible n

Don’t Know n

Physical Accessibility Athletic Facilities

926

45.5

471

23.2

1.6

603

29.7

Azorsky Hall

722

36.0

396

19.8

4.4

799

39.9

Coover

535

26.8

239

12.0

118

5.9

1106

55.4

Eberly Building

1130

56.4

313

15.6

1.4

534

26.6

Dixon

972

48.6

354

17.7

2.1

631

31.6

Duda

1172

58.8

248

12.4

0.8

556

27.9

Frich

686

34.3

328

16.4

3.4

917

45.9

Gallagher

671

33.6

326

16.3

4.3

915

45.8

Hamer

840

42.1

311

15.6

1.4

819

41.0

Helsel

617

31.1

240

12.1

1.2

1103

55.6

Herron Hall (Fitness Center)

955

48.0

305

15.3

1.4

703

35.3

Keystone

919

45.9

406

20.3

2.5

626

31.3

Morgan

789

39.5

345

17.3

3.6

790

39.6

New Science

712

35.9

265

13.3

3.7

935

47.1

Noss Hall

958

48.0

327

16.4

1.8

674

33.8

Old Main

612

30.8

356

17.9

4.8

922

46.4

South Hall

582

29.3

273

13.7

4.1

1049

52.8

Steele

880

44.3

265

13.4

0.9

822

41.4

Vulcan

642

32.3

264

13.3

2.5

1033

52.0

Watkins

612

30.8

284

14.3

3.9

1012

51.0

Classrooms, labs

802

40.5

462

23.3

2.1

674

34.0

Residence Halls

959

48.2

283

14.2

0.8

731

36.8

Vulcan village

638

32.1

309

15.6

123

6.2

916

46.1

Buildings

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 18 (cont.) Fully Accessible Area

Accessible with Assistance or Intervention

Not Accessible

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know

Computer labs

867

43.7

385

19.4

1.6

699

35.3

Dining facilities

974

49.1

384

19.4

1.6

594

30.0

Elevators

1157

56.6

291

14.7

0.9

521

26.2

Health/Wellness Center

1015

51.0

277

13.9

0.6

687

34.5

Mandarino Library

1119

56.2

323

16.2

1.0

528

26.5

On-campus transportation

714

35.8

428

21.5

3.7

777

39.0

Parking

950

47.7

379

19.0

3.8

588

29.5

Restrooms

1002

50.3

414

20.8

1.9

538

27.0

Studios/ Performing Arts spaces

658

33.2

264

13.3

1.3

1034

52.2

Walkways and pedestrian paths

1119

56.6

365

18.5

1.9

455

23.0

Information in alternate formats

889

44.9

386

19.5

2.0

667

33.7

Instructors

935

47.2

393

19.9

2.1

609

30.8

Instructional materials

891

45.5

410

20.9

2.1

618

31.5

CAL U Website

1214

61.3

341

17.2

3.0

368

18.6

D2L

1066

53.8

383

19.3

4.3

447

22.6

VIP

1086

55.3

368

18.7

3.4

442

22.5

Course instruction/materials

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Intimidating, Offensive or Hostile Conduct Within the past year, 15% of respondents (n = 328) believed that they had personally experienced exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) that interfered with their ability to work or learn 44 at Cal U. Twenty-seven percent of respondents who experienced such behavior said the conduct was based on their gender (n = 88). Others said they experienced such conduct based on their position at Cal U (25%, n = 83), age (23%, n = 76), educational level (14%, n = 46), political views (11%, n = 35), etc. (Table 19).

Table 19. Bases of Experienced Harassment Bases of Harassment

My gender

26.8

My position (staff, faculty, student)

25.3

My age

23.2

My educational level

14.0

My political views

10.7

My race

10.4

My philosophical views

10.1

My discipline of study

9.8

My ethnicity

8.2

My participation in an organization/team

8.2

My religious/spiritual views

8.2

My physical characteristics

7.9

My medical condition

5.5

My sexual orientation

5.5

Under the United States Code Title 18 Subsection 1514(c)1, harassment is defined as "a course of conduct directed at a specific person that causes substantial emotional distress in such a person and serves no legitimate purpose" (http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/vii.html). In higher education institutions, legal issues discussions define harassment as any conduct that unreasonably interferes with one’s ability to work or learn on campus. The questions used in this survey to uncover participants’ personal and observed experiences with harassment were designed using these definitions.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 19 (cont.) Bases of harassment

My educational modality (on-line, classroom)

4.6

My socioeconomic status

4.3

My learning disability

2.7

My country of origin

2.1

My psychological disorder

2.1

My physical disability

2.1

My care giving status

1.8

My English language proficiency/accent

1.5

My gender expression

1.5

My developmental disorder

0.9

My military/veteran status

0.9

My immigrant status

0.3

Other

26.8

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

The following figures depict the responses by selected characteristics (e.g., race/ethnicity, gender, position, sexual orientation, religious/spiritual affiliation) of individuals who responded “yes” to the question, “Within the past year, have you personally experienced any exclusionary (e.g., stigmatized, shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) at Cal U?” When reviewing these results in terms of race, 13% of White Respondents (n = 207) and 18% of Respondents of Color (n = 58) experienced harassment (Figure 28). Of those respondents who believed they had experienced the conduct, 28% of People of Color respondents (n = 16) said it was based on their race, and 7% of White respondents (n = 15) thought the conduct was based on race.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Overall experienced conduct¹ Of those who experienced harassing conduct, said they experienced conduct due to race²

28 18

13 7 White (n=207)¹

People of Color

(n=15)²

(n=16)²

(n=58)¹

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.

Figure 28. Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Race (by Race) (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

When reviewing the data by gender 45 (Figure 29), similar percentages of men (15%, n = 114) and women (16%, n = 204) believed they had experienced offensive, hostile, or intimidating conduct. Thirty-one percent of women respondents (n = 64) and 19% of men respondents (n = 22) who believed they had experienced this conduct said it was based on their gender.

Overall experienced conduct¹ Of those who experienced harassing conduct, said they experienced conduct due to gender identity²

31 19

Men

Women

(n=114)¹

(n=204)¹

(n=22)²

(n=64)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.

Figure 29. Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Gender (by Gender) (%)

Transgender respondents were not included in these analyses because their numbers were too few to maintain confidentiality (n = 6).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

As depicted in Figure 30, greater percentages of Staff respondents (28%, n = 83) and Faculty respondents (29%, n = 53) believed they had been harassed than did Undergraduate (12%, n = 159) and Graduate Student respondents (12%, n = 33). More than half of all Staff (52%, n = 43) who believed they were harassed said the conduct was based on their position status at Cal U.

Overall experienced conduct¹ Of those who experienced harassing conduct, said they experienced conduct due to position status²

52 29 12

Undergraduates

(n=159)¹ (n=18)²

Graduate Students

Faculty

Staff

(n=33)¹

(n=53)¹

(n=83)¹

(n=6)²

(n=16)²

(n=43)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.

Figure 30. Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Position Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Figure 31 illustrates that a higher percentage of LGBQ respondents than heterosexual respondents believed they had experienced this conduct (22% versus 14%). Of those respondents who believed they had experienced this type of conduct, 43% of LGBQ respondents (n = 13) versus 1% of heterosexual respondents (n = 3) indicated that this conduct was based on sexual orientation.

Overall experienced conduct¹ Of those who experienced harassing conduct, said they experienced conduct due to sexual orientation²

43 22

14 1

LGBQ respondents

Heterosexual Respondents

(n=30)¹

(n=248)¹

(n=13)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.

Figure 31. Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Sexual Orientation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Twenty-two percent of respondents with Multiple Religious Affiliations (22%, n = 13) experienced harassing behavior in the past year (Figure 32). Forty percent of respondents from Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations (n = 10) attributed that harassment to their religious/spiritual affiliation.

(n=188)¹

(n=10)¹

(n=79)¹

(n=13)¹

(n=12)²

(n=4)²

(n=8)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.

Figure 32. Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Religious/Spiritual Affiliation by Religious/Spiritual Affiliation (%)

Additionally, 15% of U.S. Citizens (n = 319) and 10% of Non-U.S. Citizens (n = 3) experienced exclusionary (e.g., stigmatized, shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) at Cal U (Figure 33). Of the respondents who experienced such behavior 1% of U.S. Citizens (n = 4) and 100% of Non-U.S. Citizens (n = 3) indicated it was based on country of origin. Additionally, one U.S. Citizen (<1%) and none of the Non-U.S.Citizens indicated it was based on immigrant/citizen status.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

(n=319)¹

(n=3)¹

(n=4)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.

Figure33. Personal Experiences of Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Country of Origin by Citizenship Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 20 illustrates the manners in which the individuals experienced harassing conduct. Fortynine percent felt intimidated and bullied, 43% felt deliberately ignored or excluded, and 35% felt isolated or left out. Table 20. Form of Experienced Harassment Form

I felt intimidated/bullied

160

48.8

I felt I was deliberately ignored or excluded

141

43.0

I felt isolated or left out

114

34.8

I was the target of derogatory verbal remarks

19.8

I felt isolated or left out when work was required in groups

17.7

I observed others staring at me

15.5

I feared getting a poor grade because of a hostile classroom environment

14.3

I feared for my physical safety

12.8

I received a low performance evaluation

10.1

I received derogatory written comments

9.8

I was the victim of derogatory/unsolicited emails, text messages, Facebook posts, Twitter posts

6.4

I received derogatory phone calls

5.5

I received threats of physical violence

5.2

Someone assumed I was admitted/hired/promoted due to my identity

3.7

I was the target of racial/ethnic profiling

2.7

I was the target of stalking

2.7

I was the victim of a crime

2.1

I was the target of graffiti/vandalism

1.8

I was the target of physical violence

1.8

I feared for my family’s safety

1.5

Someone assumed I was not admitted/hired/promoted due to my identity

1.2

I was singled out as the “resident authority” due to my identity

0.3

Other

18.0

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they had experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Twenty-four percent of respondents who experienced harassment said it occurred in a classroom and 22% indicated that the situations occurred while working at a campus job (Table 21). Twenty percent said the incidents occurred in a meeting with a group of people, and 19% indicated the incidents happened in Cal U offices (Table 21). Many respondents who marked “other” described the specific office, meeting, building, campus location or event where the incidents occurred (e.g., “dorm room,” “during work-related travel,” “publically [sic] in hallway,” “via email,” “Tutoring Center in Noss,” “work area”). Table 21. Location of Experienced Harassment Location

In a classroom

23.8

While working at a campus job

22.3

In a meeting with a group of people

20.4

In a campus office

18.9

In a public space on campus

18.3

At a campus event

12.2

In a faculty office

11.0

In a meeting with one other person

10.4

Off campus

10.1

While walking on campus

9.1

In campus housing

8.5

On a social networking sites/Facebook/Twitter/cell phone/other form of technological communication

8.5

In a campus dining facility

6.4

In an on-line class

4.0

In athletic facilities

4.0

Vulcan village

3.4

In off-campus housing

3.0

Off campus CAL U sponsored event

0.9

Other

9.1

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they had experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Thirty-two percent of the respondents identified students, 29% identified faculty members, 17% identified administrators, and 13% identified staff members or co-workers as the sources of the conduct (Table 22). “Other” sources of harassment included, “protestor on campus,” Captain/teammate,” “group of students,” “President,” “Wellness Center,” Student Organization co-members, SAI,” etc. Respondents also identified sources of harassment by their names. Table 22. Source of Experienced Harassment Source

Student

105

32.0

Faculty member

29.3

Administrator

16.8

Co-worker

13.1

Staff member

12.5

Supervisor

10.4

Department head

10.1

Friend

7.6

Stranger

7.6

Don’t know source

4.0

Campus visitors

3.0

Teaching asst./Grad asst./Lab asst./Tutor

3.0

Social Networking site (e.g., Facebook, Twitter)

2.7

Borough police

2.1

Person that I supervise

2.1

Faculty advisor

1.8

Alumni

1.5

Off campus community member

1.5

Athletic coach/trainer

1.2

Public Safety/University Police

0.9

Board member

0.6

Campus media

0.6

Community assistant

0.0

Donor

0.0

Partner/spouse

0.0

Other

10.4

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they had experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Figure 34 reviews the source of perceived harassment by status. Students were the greatest sources of harassment for other students, and faculty respondents were harassed by other faculty. Additionally, staff respondents identified administrators as their greatest sources of harassment.

Source = Student Source = Faculty Source = Administrator Source = Staff Source = Supervisor 52

32 22

16 8

Student Respondents

11 4 Staff Respondents

15 7

Faculty Respondents

Figure 34. Source of Conduct by Position Status (n)

In response to this conduct, 48% of respondents were angry, 38% told a friend, 35% told a family member, 30% felt embarrassed, and 29% did nothing (Table 23). While 11% of participants (n = 35) reported it to Cal U officials, 10% did not know who to go to (n = 34), and 13% didn’t report it for fear their complaints would not be taken seriously (n = 43). Ten percent did report the incident but felt the situation was not taken seriously (n = 31). “Other” responses included: “documented conversations for review later,” “employment in jeopardy,” going to file a lawsuit,” “I felt inferior and incompetent, “reported it to my boss,” “still evaluating options,” “there is nowhere to get help on campus,” “shit happens,” etc.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 23. Reactions to Experienced Harassment Reactions

I was angry

156

47.6

I told a friend

124

37.8

I told a family member

115

35.1

I felt embarrassed

29.9

I did nothing

29.0

I ignored it

27.4

I avoided the harasser

24.1

I was afraid

19.8

I sought support from a faculty member

17.1

I confronted the harasser at the time

13.4

I didn’t report it for fear that my complaint would not be taken seriously

13.1

I sought support from an administrator

12.2

I sought support from a staff person

11.9

I sought support from campus resource

11.0

I left the situation immediately

10.7

I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official

10.7

I didn’t know who to go to

10.4

I felt somehow responsible

10.1

I did report it but I did not feel the complaint was taken seriously

9.5

I confronted the harasser later

8.8

I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g. pastor, rabbi, priest)

5.2

I sought information on-line

4.02.7

I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services

3.0

I sought support from student staff (e.g. peer counselor)

2.7

It didn’t affect me at the time

1.8

I contacted a local law enforcement official

1.8

Other

11.9

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they had experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Asked if they would like to elaborate on their experiences of harassment, 107 individuals provided additional commentary. Many of those respondents detailed several incidents in which faculty members, administrators, roommates, or strangers harassed, bullied, or intimidated them. Several respondents identified the source of their harassment by name. Student respondents suggested that some faculty members lowered their grades based on their differing philosophical/political/religious viewpoints. Students also described instances where men classmates made derogatory comments about women classmates, and men students made sexually explicit comments or sexual advances towards women. Staff members commented that faculty often bullied them while trying to override Cal U policies and processes. A number of respondents shared similar thoughts to the following statement: “It’s safer to never say anything, learn to live with it. Reporting it just makes it worse because no one on campus will help. It just makes you a target.” Observations of Exclusionary, Intimidating, Offensive or Hostile Conduct Respondents’ observations of others being harassed also contributed to their perceptions of campus climate. Twenty-two percent of the participants (n = 458) observed conduct or communications directed towards a person or group of people at that they believed created an exclusionary, intimidating, offensive and/or hostile (bullied, harassing) working or learning environment within the past year. Most of the observed harassment was based on sexual orientation (21%, n = 98), gender (21%, n = 95), position (19%, n = 89), race (17%, n = 79), age (16%, n = 73), and religious/spiritual views (16%, n = 71). Figures 35 and 36 separate by demographic categories (i.e., race/ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, disability status, and position status) the responses of those individuals who observed harassment within the past year.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Higher percentages of respondents with Multiple Religious/Spiritual Affiliations (37%), Faculty (32%), and Staff (29%) than other respondents observed conduct or communications directed towards a person or group of people at that created an exclusionary, intimidating, offensive and/or or hostile (i.e., harassing) working or learning environment within the past year (Figure 35). There were no differences by race.

White People (n = 331) People of Color (n = 68) Christian (n = 268) Other Religious Affiliation (n = 13) No Religious Affilation (n = 112) Multiple Religious Affiliations (n = 22) Students (n = 316) Staff (n = 84) Faculty (n = 58)

29 23

Figure 35. Observed Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct by Race, Religious Affiliation, and Position Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

LGBQ respondents (38%), women (23%), and respondents with disabilities (29%) were more likely to have observed harassment than were other groups (Figure 36). Within identity, LGBQ respondents were more likely than heterosexual respondents, women respondents were more likely than men respondents; people with disabilities were more likely than those without disabilities; U.S. Citizens were more likely than Non-U.S. Citizens; and, respondents with No Military Service were more likely than those with Military Service to have observed harassment.

LGBQ (n = 52) Heterosexual (n = 344) Men (n = 149) Women (n = 301) No Disability (n = 358) Disability (n = 78) US Citizen (n = 450) Non-US Citizen (n = 3) No Military Service (n = 429) Military Service (n = 16)

38 20

29 19

Figure 36. Observed Exclusionary, Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct by Sexual Orientation, Gender, Citizenship, Disability Status, and Military Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 24 illustrates that respondents’ most often believed they had observed or were made aware of this conduct in the form of someone subjected to derogatory remarks (50%, n = 231), or someone being intimidated/bullied (36%, n = 163), deliberately ignored or excluded (32%, n = 148), or isolated or left out (27%, n = 125).

Table 24. Form of Observed Offensive, Hostile, Exclusionary, or Intimidating Conduct n

Derogatory remarks

231

50.4

Intimidated/bullied

163

35.6

Deliberately ignored or excluded

148

32.3

Isolated or left out

125

27.3

Isolated or left out when work was required in groups

18.1

Racial/ethnic profiling

17.5

Assumption that someone was admitted/hired/promoted based on his/her identity

16.6

Derogatory/unsolicited e-mails, text messages, Facebook posts, Twitter posts

12.2

Derogatory written comments

11.4

Threats of physical violence

10.7

Assumption that someone was not admitted/hired/promoted based on his/her identity

9.4

Receipt of a low performance evaluation

7.9

Stalking

7.4

Receipt of a poor grade

7.2

Graffiti/vandalism

5.0

Physical violence

4.8

Derogatory phone calls

4.4

Singled out as the “resident authority”

4.4

Victim of a crime

4.4

Other

5.2

Form

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they had observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Additionally, 28% of the respondents who observed harassment (n = 129) said it happened in a public space on campus (Table 25). Some respondents said the incidents occurred in a classroom (22%, n = 100), off campus (19%, n = 85), or at a campus event (16%, n = 75). Table 25. Location of Observed Conduct/Harassment Location

In a public space on campus

129

28.2

In a classroom

100

21.8

Off campus

18.6

At a campus event

16.4

While walking on campus

14.4

In a meeting with a group of people

12.2

In a campus office

11.1

While working at a campus job

11.1

In campus housing

9.8

In a faculty office

6.8

In a meeting with one other person

6.8

On a social networking sites/Facebook/Twitter/cell phone/other form of technological communication

6.6

In a campus dining facility

5.7

In off campus housing

5.5

Vulcan village

4.1

In athletic facilities

2.4

In an on-line class

1.5

Off campus Cal U sponsored event

1.5

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they had observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Sixty percent of respondents (n = 275) who observed harassment said the targets of the conduct were students. Other respondents identified friends (15%, n = 67), faculty members (13%, n = 61), and strangers (12%, n = 57). Respondents who observed offensive, hostile, or intimidating conduct directed at others said students were also the sources of the conduct (43%, n = 198). Respondents identified additional sources as faculty members (16%, n = 74), strangers (14%, n = 64), administrators (12%, n = 55), etc. Table 26 illustrates participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; reactions to this behavior. Respondents most often felt angry (39%, n = 180). Twenty-four percent told a friend (n = 110), and 20% did nothing (n = 90). Four percent reported the incidents to campus employees/officials (n = 16), while 9% didnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know who to go to (n = 41). Some did not report out of fear the complaint would not be taken seriously (7%, n = 32). Five percent did report it but felt the complaint was not taken seriously (n = 22).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 26. Reactions to Observing Offensive, Hostile, Exclusionary, or Intimidating Conduct Reactions

I was angry

180

39.3

I told a friend

110

24.0

I did nothing

19.7

I told a family member

18.6

I felt embarrassed

15.7

I confronted the harasser at the time

12.7

I ignored it

11.4

I was afraid

10.3

I left the situation immediately

9.8

I didn’t know who to go to

9.0

I confronted the harasser later

8.5

It didn’t affect me at the time

7.6

I didn’t report it for fear that my complaint would not be taken seriously

7.0

I sought support from a staff person

6.6

I sought support from a faculty member

6.6

I sought support from an administrator

6.3

I sought support from campus resource

5.2

I did report it but I did not feel the complaint was taken seriously

4.8

I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official

3.5

I contacted a local law enforcement official

2.2

I sought support from student staff (e.g. peer counselor)

2.2

I sought information on-line

2.2

I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g. pastor, rabbi, priest)

1.3

I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services

1.1

Other

7.9

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they had observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Seventy-eight respondents offered further comments on their observations of harassment at Cal U. A number of respondents felt that “Complaints are not taken seriously and there appears to be a culture of ‘ignore and brush off.’” Several respondents suggested thoughts similar to the following, “The campus has a bit of a clique problem, and each clique is definitely NOT trying to break their own stereotypes.” To that end, some student respondents shared their perceptions about how African American students associate mainly with other African American students. Some respondents felt uncomfortable when they witnessed behavior such as “groups of AfricanAmericans either intimidating a lone Caucasian male, Asian male, or sexually harassing a Caucasian female.” Another respondent shared, “the groups of black kids everywhere who holler at girls when they walk by & the girls too who talk so loud everyone can hear them & always have to travel in packs & be rude & obnoxious... they make me feel uncomfortable.” Additionally, several respondents wrote about cliques of women students (e.g., sororities, women’s rugby team) who mistreated others. More specifically, respondents heard groups of women students make derogatory remarks about age to a returning student and about race to African American students. Other respondents overheard women students discussing a peer “not gaining membership into a sorority based on other girls not liking her. The term fat was used.” A few respondents described sorority hazing as harassment: “Sigma Kappa sorority hazed it's new members in the spring of 2012.” With regard to religion/spirituality, a number of respondents lamented the Christian bias at Cal U. Several people shared comments such as the “academic calendar is arranged in such a way that finals week occurs during Hanukkah and then the university takes what is officially written as ‘Christmas Break.’” Some respondents considered, “Christian-based prayers at public events offensive.” Furthermore, several respondents referenced individuals who propagated hate speech at the fountain under the guise of religion/Christianity. They observed “2 unaffiliated religious men were demonstrating by the fountain and telling everyone they were going to hell. They argued with religious and non-religious students, LGBT students, etc.”

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Experiences of Sexual Assault Seventy-seven people (4%) believed they had experienced unwanted sexual assault 46 while at Cal U. Fifty-five percent of the assaults happened off campus (n = 42), and 45% occurred on campus (n = 24). Five percent of Undergraduate Students (n = 65), 0.4% of Graduate Students (n = 1), 2% of Faculty (n = 4), and 2% of Staff (n = 7) have experienced sexual assault while at Cal U. Figure 37 illustrates that slightly higher percentages of respondents with disabilities (7%, n = 20), NonU.S. Citizens (7%, n = 2), LGBQ respondents (5%, n = 7), women (5%, n = 69), and People of Color (5%, n = 14) experienced sexual assault at Cal U.

LGBQ (n = 7) Heterosexual (n = 65) Men (n = 7) Women (n = 69) Transgender (n = 0) No Disability (n = 56) Disability (n = 20) US Citizen (n = 74) Non-US Citizen (n = 2) People of Color (n = 14) White (n = 56)

5 4

3 1 0

Figure 37. Experienced Sexual Assault while at Cal U by Sexual Orientation, Gender, Citizenship, Disability Status, and Race/Ethnicity (%) 46

The survey defined sexual assault as “any sexual act directed against another person, forcibly, and/or with threat of force, and/or against that person’s will; or when the survivor is incapable of giving consent, (i.e., is unconscious, mentally incompetent, or intoxicated), including forcible rape, use of drugs to incapacitate, forcible sodomy, gang rape, sexual assault, sexual assault with an object, and forcible fondling.”

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Of the 77 respondents who answered affirmatively to this survey item, 53% indicated a student sexually assaulted them (n = 41; Table 27). Twenty-three percent said friends assaulted them (n = 18) and 16% indicated the perpetrators were strangers (n = 12). Table 27. Sexual Assault Perpetrators n

Student

53.2

Friend

23.4

Stranger

15.6

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know source

6.5

Campus visitors

3.9

Co-worker

3.9

Off campus community member

2.6

Department head

2.6

Faculty member

2.6

Supervisor

2.6

Administrator

1.3

Alumni

1.3

Athletic coach/trainer

1.3

Campus media

1.3

Staff member

1.3

Board member

0.0

Borough police

0.0

Community assistant

0.0

Counselor

0.0

Donor

0.0

Faculty advisor

0.0

Maintenance Staff

0.0

Partner/spouse

0.0

Person that I supervise

0.0

Public Safety/University Police

0.0

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they experienced sexual assault (n = 77). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Sixty-two percent of those respondents who were sexually assaulted told a friend (n = 48; Table 28). Forty-seven percent felt embarrassed (n = 36) and 40% were angry (n = 31). Thirty-three percent left the situation immediately (n = 25), and 30% felt somehow responsible (n = 23). Table28. Responses to Sexual Assault Responses

I told a friend

62.3

I felt embarrassed

46.8

I was angry

40.3

I left the situation immediately

32.5

I felt somehow responsible

29.9

I ignored it

27.3

I was afraid

27.3

I did nothing

22.1

I sought support from campus resource

10.4

I told a family member

10.4

It didn’t affect me at the time

7.8

I didn’t know who to go to

7.8

I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official

6.5

I sought support from an administrator

5.2

I sought information on-line

5.2

I sought support from a staff person

3.9

I contacted a local law enforcement official

2.6

I sought support from a faculty member

2.6

I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g. pastor, rabbi, priest)

1.3

I sought support from student staff (e.g. peer counselor)

1.3

I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services

0.0

Other

10.4

Note: Only answered by respondents who believed they experienced sexual assault (n = 77). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

The survey asked respondents, if they did not report the sexual assault to a campus official or staff member, why they did not. Sixty respondents commented. Several individuals indicated that “It was not that serious and I could take care of myself,” “It was just some guy touching my 84

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

butt,” or “I got away before anything happened to me.” Others “didn’t want to talk about it.” A few were protecting their friends. For instance, one respondent mentioned, “He is friend of mine from grade school and I didn't want to do anything to jeopardize our friendship. He is a good kid and he made a mistake.” Several respondents offered that they “felt responsible” for what happened, largely because they were intoxicated when the incidents occurred. The survey queried whether those respondents who reported the sexual assaults felt their complaints were responded to appropriately. Six people indicated their reports were handled appropriately, and five respondents said it was not handled appropriately. Respondents said they were discouraged from filing complaints by two senior administrators or that those same administrators “swept it under the rug and brushed it off.”

Summary Eighty-one percent (n = 1724) of all respondents indicated that they were “very comfortable”/ “comfortable” with climate at Cal U while 7% (n = 149) were “very uncomfortable” / “uncomfortable.” Twelve percent of respondents (n = 260) indicated that they were “neither comfortable nor uncomfortable.” With regard to respondent’s level of comfort in their department/work unit at Cal U, 78% (n = 1659) of respondents indicated that they were “very comfortable”/ “comfortable” while 6% (n = 135) were “very uncomfortable” / “uncomfortable.” Ten percent (n = 222) of respondents indicated that they were “neither comfortable nor uncomfortable.” As noted earlier, 15% of all respondents believed they had personally experienced at least subtle forms of exclusionary, intimidating, offensive, and/or hostile conduct in the past year. The findings showed generally that members of historically underrepresented and underserved groups were slightly more likely to believe they had experienced various forms of harassment and discrimination than those in the majority. The harassment was most often based on respondents’ gender, position, age, and educational level. In addition, 77 respondents (4%) believed they had experienced sexual assault at Cal U.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

National statistics suggest that more than 80% of all respondents who experienced harassment, regardless of minority group status, were subject to derogatory remarks. In contrast, respondents in this study suggest that they experienced covert forms of harassment (e.g., feeling ignored and feeling excluded) as well as overt forms of harassment (e.g., derogatory comments and intimidation/bullying). Twenty-two percent of respondents observed conduct or communications directed towards a person or group of people at that they believe created an exclusionary, intimidating, offensive and/or hostile (bullied, harassing) working or learning environment. The observed harassment was most often based on sexual orientation, gender, position status, race, and age. Additionally, the analyses revealed that higher percentages of historically underrepresented and underserved groups observed harassing conduct than did other groups at Cal U.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Faculty and Staff Perceptions of Climate This section of the report details Faculty and Staff responses to survey items regarding their perceptions of the workplace climate at Cal U; their thoughts on work-life and various climate issues; and certain employment practices at (e.g., hiring, promotion, and disciplinary actions). The majority of all Faculty and Staff respondents “strongly agreed”/ “agreed” that the workplace climate was welcoming for employees based on all of the characteristics listed in Table 29. More than 60% felt the workplace was welcoming for people based on military/veteran status (68%), age (67%), ethnicity (66%), gender (65%), race (61%), level of education (61%), and English language proficiency/accent (61%).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 29. Workplace Climate is Welcoming Based on Demographic Characteristics

Group

Strongly Agree n %

Agree n

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Age

115

24.9

192

41.6

20.4

8.5

1.7

Caregiving status

20.9

173

37.6

116

25.2

5.7

1.7

Country of origin

106

23.2

167

36.5

121

26.5

3.9

1.1

English language proficiency/accent

105

23.0

171

37.5

119

26.1

5.0

1.1

Ethnicity

127

27.9

174

38.2

106

23.2

4.4

2.0

Gender

122

26.7

176

38.5

108

23.6

5.5

2.4

Gender expression

21.7

136

29.8

134

29.4

7.2

2.6

Immigrant status

101

22.2

141

31.1

134

29.5

5.3

0.9

Learning disability

105

23.1

153

33.7

117

25.8

4.2

1.5

Medical conditions

106

23.3

167

36.8

118

26.0

4.0

1.5

Level of education

103

22.4

177

38.6

108

23.5

7.8

3.1

Military/veteran status

140

30.8

171

37.6

100

22.0

1.8

0.9

Psychological disorder

18.0

124

27.6

138

30.7

4.9

1.6

Physical characteristics

21.9

153

33.8

135

29.9

4.4

2.0

Physical disability

108

23.9

151

33.4

121

26.8

4.9

2.4

Political views

20.8

136

29.8

138

30.3

7.7

3.7

Position

100

21.7

161

35.0

115

25.0

10.7

4.3

Race

122

27.1

154

34.1

118

26.2

6.2

2.9

Religious/spiritual views

101

22.2

148

32.6

143

31.5

5.9

2.0

Sexual orientation

21.1

147

32.4

141

31.1

6.8

3.1

Socioeconomic status

102

22.7

161

35.9

131

29.2

4.5

2.9

Note: Table includes Faculty and Staff responses only (n = 485). This survey item allowed for a “Don’t Know” response, available in Table B73.

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

When analyzed by demographic characteristics, the data reveal that 65% of women Faculty and Staff (n = 172), and 66% of men Faculty and Staff (n = 121) felt the workplace climate was welcoming based on gender 47 (Figure 38).

Agree* Neutral Disagree**

5 Men

Women

* Agree and strongly agree collapsed into one category. ** Disagree and strongly disagree collapsed into one category.

Figure 38. Faculty & Staff Perceptions of Welcoming Workplace Climate Based on Gender by Gender (%)

Transgender respondents were too few to include in these analyses (n = 1).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

In comparison with 66% of White Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 211), 45% of Faculty and Staff of Color (n = 19) felt the workplace climate was welcoming based on race (Figure 39).

Agree* Neutral Disagree** 66 45

33 25

8 White

People of Color

* Agree and strongly agree collapsed into one category. ** Disagree and strongly disagree collapsed into one category.

Figure 39. Faculty and Staff Perceptions of Welcoming Workplace Climate Based on Race by Race (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Fourteen percent of LGBQ Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 2) and 56% of heterosexual Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 214) believed the workplace climate was welcoming based on sexual orientation (Figure 40).

Agree* Neutral Disagree**

36 29 14

9 LGBQ

Heterosexual

* Agree and strongly agree collapsed into one category. ** Disagree and strongly disagree collapsed into one category.

Figure 40. Faculty and Staff Perceptions of Welcoming Workplace Climate Based on Sexual Orientation by Sexual Orientation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Faculty and Staff respondents from Christian religious affiliations (58%, n = 184) and with Other Affiliations (60%, n = 9) were most likely to feel the workplace climate was welcoming based on religious/spiritual affiliations. Twenty-five percent of Faculty and Staff respondents with Multiple Affiliations (n = 2) felt the workplace climate was welcoming based on religious/spiritual affiliations (Figure 41), making them the least likely group to agree that the workplace climate was welcoming.

Agree* Neutral Disagree**

48 38

7 Christian

Other Religious Affiliations

No Affiliation

Multiple Affiliations

* Agree and strongly agree collapsed into one category. ** Disagree and strongly disagree collapsed into one category.

Figure 41. Faculty and Staff Perceptions of Welcoming Workplace Climate Based on Religious/Spiritual Affiliation by Religious/Spiritual Affiliation (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Sixty-two percent of respondents who have been/are in the Military (n = 16) felt the workplace climate was welcoming based on military status (Figure 42).

Agree* Neutral Disagree** 69 62

12 2 Not In Military

Military

* Agree and strongly agree collapsed into one category. ** Disagree and strongly disagree collapsed into one category.

Figure 42. Faculty and Staff Perceptions of Welcoming Workplace Climate Based on Military Status by Military Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Fifty-three percent of U.S. Citizen Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 232) and 83% of Non-U.S. Citizen Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 5) felt the climate was workplace welcoming based on immigrant status (Figure 43). Likewise, 60% of U.S. Citizen respondents (n = 263) and 83% of Non-U.S. Citizen respondents (n = 5) felt the climate was workplace welcoming based on country of origin.

Agree* Neutral Disagree**

30 17

6 US Citizen

0 Non US Citizen

* Agree and strongly agree collapsed into one category. ** Disagree and strongly disagree collapsed into one category.

Figure 43. Faculty and Staff Perceptions of Welcoming Workplace Climate Based on Immigrant Status by Citizenship Status (%)

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Campus Climate and Work-Life Issues Several items addressed employees’ (Staff and Faculty48) experiences at Cal U, their perceptions of specific Cal U policies, their attitudes about the climate and work-life issues at Cal U, and faculty attitudes about tenure and advancement processes. Slightly more than one-third of all Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 485) felt that salary determinations were fair (36%, n = 174) and clear (43%, n = 204). More than half of the respondents thought Cal U understood the value of a diverse faculty (67%, n = 318) and staff (64%, n = 308). Table 30 illustrates responses to these questions by gender 49, race/ethnicity, position, disability status, religious/spiritual affiliation, and sexual orientation where the responses for these groups differed from one another.

For the items in Tables 30 through 33 and related narrative, the term “employee” includes all Staff and Faculty. Transgender respondents were not included in these analyses as their numbers were too few to assure confidentiality (n = 1). Additionally, analyses by citizenship were not conducted as Non-U.S. Citizens = 7. 49

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 30. Attitudes about Work-Related Issues by Position, Race/Ethnicity, Gender, Disability Status, Sexual Orientation, and Religious/Spiritual Status Strongly Agree Issues I believe salary determinations are fair Staff Faculty White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

I believe salary determinations are clear Staff Faculty White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

Agree n %

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

N/A n

57 15 42 44 7 25 31 47 10 1 50 38 3 11 0

11.9 5.1 23.1 13.2 15.2 13.3 11.2 11.4 15.4 7.1 12.6 11.7 20.0 13.6 0

117 66 66 82 11 56 59 105 12 5 97 86 3 16 4

24.5 22.4 22.4 24.6 23.9 29.8 21.3 25.5 18.5 35.7 24.5 26.5 20.0 19.8 40.0

99 63 63 67 8 37 58 87 12 3 80 66 1 23 3

20.8 21.4 21.4 20.1 17.4 19.7 20.9 21.1 18.5 21.4 20.2 20.3 6.7 28.4 30.0

100 74 74 70 7 25 74 87 13 3 85 68 4 17 0

21.0 25.1 25.1 21.0 15.2 13.3 26.7 21.1 20.0 21.4 21.5 20.9 26.7 21.0 0

91 68 68 61 12 39 48 74 17 1 72 59 4 10 2

19.1 23.1 23.1 18.3 26.1 20.7 17.3 18.0 26.2 7.1 18.2 18.2 26.7 12.3 20.0

62 20 42 49 6 25 36 54 5 1 57 41 4 11 1

13.0 6.8 23.0 14.7 13.3 13.3 13.0 13.2 10.4 7.1 14.4 12.7 26.7 13.6 1.0

142 80 62 97 13 64 75 128 10 6 116 102 4 23 2

29.8 27.3 33.9 29.0 28.9 34.0 27.2 31.2 20.8 42.9 29.4 31.5 26.7 28.4 20.0

101 72 29 69 8 37 61 90 8 2 84 71 0 19 3

21.2 24.6 15.8 20.7 17.8 19.7 22.1 22.0 16.7 14.3 21.3 21.9 0.0 23.5 30.0

89 62 27 64 8 33 55 74 12 2 76 59 4 16 2

18.7 21.1 14.8 19.2 17.8 17.6 19.9 18.0 25.0 14.3 19.2 18.2 26.7 19.8 20.0

73 52 21 49 9 26 43 56 12 2 54 46 3 9 1

15.3 17.7 11.5 14.7 20.0 13.8 15.6 13.7 25.0 14.3 13.7 14.2 20.0 11.1 10.0

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 30 (cont.)

Strongly Agree n

I think that Cal U understands the value a diverse faculty Staff Faculty White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

I think that Cal U understands the value a diverse staff Staff Faculty White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

Agree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Disagree

N/A n

101 55 46 73 9 44 55 85 14 0 90 68 5 16 2

21.1 18.6 25.1 21.8 19.6 23.4 19.8 20.6 29.2 0.0 22.7 20.9 33.3 19.8 20.0

217 137 80 159 11 87 126 199 14 6 187 159 7 26 6

45.4 46.4 43.7 47.5 23.9 46.3 45.3 48.3 29.2 42.9 47.1 48.8 46.7 32.1 60.0

89 57 32 57 12 32 53 70 12 4 67 52 3 23 1

18.6 19.3 17.5 17.0 26.1 17.0 19.1 17.0 25.0 28.6 16.9 16.0 20.0 28.4 10.0

26 10 16 18 4 12 13 21 3 2 21 17 0 5 1

5.4 3.4 8.7 5.4 8.7 6.4 4.7 5.1 6.2 14.3 5.3 5.2 0.0 6.2 10.0

26 17 9 15 9 5 20 21 3 2 22 16 0 7 0

5.4 5.8 4.9 4.5 19.6 2.7 7.2 5.1 6.2 14.3 5.5 4.9 0.0 8.6 0.0

98 54 44 70 10 41 55 81 15 0 87 67 5 16 1

20.5 18.4 23.9 20.9 21.7 21.7 19.9 19.7 31.2 0.0 21.9 20.6 33.3 19.8 10.0

210 138 72 152 10 77 129 192 14 5 182 156 6 26 6

43.9 46.9 39.1 45.4 21.7 40.7 46.6 46.6 29.2 35.7 45.8 47.9 40.0 32.1 60.0

100 56 44 66 12 45 51 83 10 5 75 60 4 24 1

20.9 19.0 23.9 19.7 26.1 23.8 18.4 20.1 20.8 35.7 18.9 18.4 26.7 29.6 10.0

31 17 14 22 5 10 20 26 3 2 24 18 0 7 1

6.5 5.8 7.6 6.6 10.9 5.3 7.2 6.3 6.2 14.3 6.0 5.5 0.0 8.6 10.0

37 29 8 24 9 15 21 28 6 2 28 24 0 8 1

7.7 9.9 4.3 7.2 19.6 7.9 7.6 6.8 12.5 14.3 7.1 7.4 0.0 9.9 10.0

Note: Table includes Faculty and Staff responses only (n = 485).

Thirty-one percent of Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 148) were reluctant to bring up issues that concern them for fear it would affect their performance evaluations or tenure/merit/promotion decisions (Table 31). Twenty-two percent believed their colleagues expected them to represent the “point of view” of their identities (n = 102). Seventeen percent were reluctant to take leave that they were entitled to for fear that it may affect their jobs/careers (n = 82). More than one-quarter of employee respondents (30%, n = 144) 97

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

felt they had to work harder than their colleagues do in order to achieve the same recognition, and 29% believed there were many unwritten rules concerning how one is expected to interact with colleagues in their work units (n = 136).

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 31 illustrates responses to these questions by gender, race/ethnicity, disability status, sexual orientation, and religious/spiritual affiliation where the responses for these groups differed from one another. Table 31. Attitudes about Work-Related Issues by Race/Ethnicity, Gender, Disability Status, Sexual Orientation, and Religious/Spiritual Status Neither Strongly Agree nor Strongly Disagree Disagree Agree Disagree Agree n % n % n % n % n % Issues I am reluctant to bring up issues that concern me for fear that it will affect my performance evaluation or tenure/merit/promotion decision White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

My colleagues/co-workers expect me to represent “the point of view” of my identity White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

66 44 10 23 37 49 10 2 43 35 0 14 2

13.7 13.1 21.7 12.2 13.3 11.8 20.8 14.3 10.8 10.7 0.0 17.3 20.0

82 57 7 38 43 64 14 3 70 56 4 10 2

17.0 16.9 15.2 20.1 15.4 15.5 29.2 21.4 17.5 17.1 26.7 12.3 20.0

63 42 5 21 39 54 6 2 54 39 1 14 3

13.1 12.5 10.9 11.1 14.0 13.0 12.5 14.3 13.5 11.9 6.7 17.3 30.0

114 81 7 43 69 106 6 1 96 78 4 22 1

23.7 24.0 15.2 22.8 24.7 25.6 12.5 7.1 24.1 23.8 26.7 27.2 10.0

135 99 14 56 78 122 11 4 119 106 4 17 2

28.1 29.4 30.4 29.6 28.0 29.5 22.9 28.6 29.8 32.3 26.7 21.0 20.0

32 21 6 15 17 26 6 1 29 23 0 8 0

6.8 6.3 13.0 8.1 6.2 6.4 12.8 7.1 7.4 7.1 0.0 9.8 0.0

70 47 10 30 40 64 5 2 58 48 1 16 0

14.8 14.2 21.7 16.1 14.5 15.6 10.6 14.3 14.8 14.9 6.7 19.8 0.0

175 116 13 63 105 150 17 5 143 110 8 28 5

36.9 35.0 28.3 33.9 38.0 36.7 36.2 35.7 36.4 34.1 53.3 34.6 50.0

74 56 7 29 44 66 6 3 61 50 3 13 4

15.6 16.9 15.2 15.6 15.9 16.1 12.8 21.4 15.5 15.5 20.0 16.0 40.0

75 58 7 35 39 61 10 3 61 57 3 11 0

15.8 17.5 15.2 18.8 14.1 14.9 21.3 21.4 15.5 17.6 20.0 13.6 0.0

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013 Table 31 (cont.)

Strongly Agree

Issues

I am reluctant to take leave that I am entitled to for fear that it may affect my job/career White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

I have to work harder than I believe my colleagues/coworkers do to achieve the same recognition White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

There are many unwritten rules concerning how one is expected to interact with colleagues in my work unit White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual Christian Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations No Religious Affiliation Multiple Religious Affiliations

Agree n %

Neither Agree nor Disagree n

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n

30 19 5 13 13 19 8 2 20 19 0 5 2

6.3 5.7 10.9 6.9 4.7 4.6 16.7 15.4 5.0 5.8 0.0 6.2 20.0

52 33 5 15 35 44 7 0 44 27 1 10 3

10.9 9.8 10.9 7.9 12.6 10.7 14.6 0.0 11.1 8.3 6.7 12.5 30.0

48 32 3 19 27 37 6 1 38 35 0 5 2

10.0 9.5 6.5 10.1 9.7 9.0 12.5 7.7 9.6 10.7 0.0 6.2 20.0

112 79 8 43 68 101 8 3 93 73 6 22 3

23.4 23.5 17.4 22.8 24.5 24.5 16.7 23.1 23.4 22.3 40.0 27.5 30.0

213 155 24 90 120 192 16 6 183 156 7 33 0

44.6 46.1 52.2 47.6 43.3 46.6 33.3 46.2 46.1 47.7 46.7 41.2 0.0

60 34 12 19 35 44 11 4 46 35 0 9 4

12.6 10.1 26.1 10.1 12.6 10.7 23.9 28.6 11.6 10.7 0.0 11.4 40.0

84 57 8 31 51 71 8 4 66 51 2 1 1

17.6 17.0 17.4 16.5 18.4 17.2 17.4 28.6 16.7 15.6 13.3 10.0 10.0

71 52 5 26 44 60 9 0 63 53 1 2 2

14.9 15.5 10.9 13.8 15.9 14.5 19.6 0.0 15.9 16.2 6.7 20.0 20.0

104 78 7 48 55 97 6 1 91 70 6 2 2

21.8 23.3 15.2 25.5 19.9 23.5 13.0 7.1 23.0 21.4 40.0 20.0 20.0

152 109 14 62 88 137 10 5 127 113 6 1 1

31.9 32.5 30.4 33.0 31.8 33.2 21.7 35.7 32.1 34.6 40.0 10.0 10.0

46 30 8 17 25 32 11 2 34 27 0 6 3

9.6 9.0 17.8 9.1 9.0 7.8 22.9 14.3 8.6 8.3 0.0 7.5 30.0

90 64 6 32 55 74 12 4 69 58 2 18 2

18.9 19.1 13.3 17.1 19.8 18.0 25.0 28.4 17.4 17.8 13.3 22.5 20.0

91 60 7 38 51 77 8 4 74 59 3 16 4

19.1 17.9 15.6 20.3 18.3 18.7 16.7 28.6 18.7 18.1 20.0 20.0 40.0

102 75 10 46 55 98 3 2 92 74 6 17 0

21.4 22.4 22.2 24.6 19.8 23.8 6.2 14.3 23.2 22.7 40.0 21.2 0.0

139 102 13 52 85 124 12 2 119 102 4 21 1

29.1 30.4 28.9 27.8 30.6 30.1 25.0 14.3 30.1 31.3 26.7 26.2 10.0

Note: Table includes graduate students, staff, and faculty responses only (n = 485).

100

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Seventeen percent of all Faculty and Staff suggested that their colleagues/co-workers treated them with less respect than other faculty and staff (n = 81). Figure 44 illustrates that 31% of Faculty and Staff with Disabilities (n = 15), 30% of Faculty and Staff from Multiple Religious Affiliations (n = 3), and 27% of Faculty and Staff of Color (n = 12) felt that their colleagues/coworkers treated them with less respect than other faculty and staff.

LGBQ (n = 2) Heterosexual (n = 59) Men (n = 25) Women (n = 49) No Disability (n = 60) Disability (n = 15) Christian (n = 50)

Other Religious Affiliation (n = 1)

No Religious Affiliation (n = 14) Multiple Religious Affiliations (n = 3) People of Color (n = 12) White (n = 50)

18 15

Figure 44. Faculty/Staff Who Strongly Agreed/Agreed That Co-workers Treated Them with Less Respect Than Other Faculty/Staff (%)

101

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Seven percent of all Faculty and Staff constantly felt under scrutiny by their colleagues due to their identities. There were no differences in responses by sexual orientation or gender. Seventeen percent of all Faculty and Staff with Disabilities (n = 8), 20% of Faculty and Staff from Multiple Religious Affiliations (n = 2), and 16% of Faculty and Staff of Color (n = 7) constantly felt under scrutiny by their colleagues due to their identities (Figure 45).

LGBQ (n = 1) Heterosexual (n = 26) Men (n = 14) Women (n = 20) No Disability (n = 24) Disability (n = 8) Christian (n = 22) Other Religious Affiliation (n = 1) No Religious Affiliation (n = 7) Multiple Religious Affiliations (n = 2) People of Color (n = 7)

White (n = 20)

Figure45. Faculty/Staff Who Strongly Agreed/Agreed That They Constantly Feel Under Scrutiny by Their Colleagues Due to Their Identities (%)

Several Staff and Faculty (n = 82) provided additional information about their work-life experiences. A number of respondents commented that they had difficulty responding to these items because although most of their colleagues were respectful of them, some were not. Likewise, several people thought the University understood the value of diversity, but did little to foster it. One person elaborated, “There has been an attempt to increase diversity here, but there is also a tremendous lack of respect for differences.” Some people felt departments/units at Cal U 102

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

embraced diversity/inclusion efforts with different levels of enthusiasm. One respondent stated, “The University has policies in place to appreciate diversity, my department is reluctant to fully embrace them.” Furthermore, one individual captured the sentiments of many in writing, Too many are set in their old ways rather than thinking outside of the box and being innovative. The culture is reactionary rather than proactive. There are too many silos and it's going to take years of follow up to break the walls down. We have good intention and some great leaders who see this but so much to fix that this gets put on the back burner. A number of respondents described a gender bias in favor of men in terms of promotion, salary, and tenure. One such respondent wrote, “Men seemed to be hired at higher salaries that comparably credentialed women. Married persons also seemed to have some financial preference over single persons.” Others noticed, “Women have to fight twice has hard, and only get half the respect,” and “Women faculty are taken less seriously and their work is devalued.” Regarding salary determinations, promotion, and tenure, several respondents believed there existed “A bias built on who you know that impacts promotions and tenure.” A number of people commented on the impact of unions on salary. Many respondents expressed thoughts similar to “do not believe that salary determinations are fair because of the union structure.” A number of items queried Staff and Faculty about their opinions regarding work-life issues at Cal U. Fifteen percent of Faculty and Staff felt they often had to forgo professional activities because of personal responsibilities (n = 72), and 14% found that personal responsibilities have slowed down their job/career progression (n = 67; Table 32). Forty-nine percent found Cal U supportive of their taking leave (n = 233), and 27% have had to miss out on important things in their personal lives because of professional responsibilities (n = 128). Few Faculty and Staff believed that faculty (8%, n = 39) and staff (13%, n = 63) who do not have children were burdened with work responsibilities (e.g., stay late, off-hour work, work weekends) beyond those who do have children. Similarly, few respondents felt that faculty (7%, n = 31) and staff (9%, n = 44) who have children were considered by Cal U to be less committed to their jobs/careers.

103

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Few Faculty and Staff respondents found it difficult to balance childcare (9%, n = 43) or eldercare (10%, n = 46) with their work responsibilities. Likewise, few respondents felt their colleagues did not balance their child care responsibilities (11%, n = 50) or eldercare responsibilities (4%, n = 19) with their professional responsibilities (Table 32).

104

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 32. Attitudes about Work-Life Issues Strongly Agree Issues

Agree n %

Neither Agree nor Disagree n

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n

I often have to forgo professional activities because of personal responsibilities

2.7

12.4

19.3

172

36.1

121

25.4

I find that personal responsibilities and commitments have slowed down my job/career progression

4.0

10.1

18.1

175

36.8

136

28.6

I find that Cal U is supportive of taking leave.

16.8

153

32.1

134

28.2

9.5

4.6

I have to miss out on important things in my personal life because of professional responsibilities

7.6

19.3

18.3

159

33.4

19.7

I feel that staff who have children are considered by Cal U to be less committed to their jobs/careers

3.2

6.1

123

25.9

151

31.8

121

25.5

I feel that staff who do not have children are often burdened with work responsibilities (e.g., stay late, off-hour work, work weekends) beyond those who do have children

5.9

7.4

115

24.2

149

31.4

115

24.2

I feel that faculty who have children are considered by Cal U to be less committed to the jobs/careers.

2.1

4.4

114

23.9

117

24.5

110

23.1

I feel that faculty who do not have children are often burdened with work responsibilities (e.g., stay late, off-hour work, work weekends) beyond those who do have children

3.4

4.8

113

23.7

111

23.3

20.4

I find it difficult to balance childcare with my work responsibilities

2.1

7.0

16.0

18.4

13.7

I find it difficult to balance eldercare with my work responsibilities

2.3

7.4

16.2

12.7

11.4

I feel that my colleagues do not balance their child care responsibilities with their professional responsibilities

2.3

8.2

147

30.9

123

25.8

101

21.2

I feel that my colleagues do not balance their eldercare responsibilities with their 5 1.1 14 3.0 151 31.9 96 20.3 98 20.7 professional responsibilities Note: Table includes post-docs, trainees, graduate students, staff, and faculty responses only (n = 485). These items allowed for a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Not Applicableâ&#x20AC;? response choice, which is available in Table B50.

105

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Sixty-seven percent of Faculty and Staff had supervisors/colleagues/co-workers who give them job/career advice guidance when they needed it (n = 323), and 63% had support from supervisors/colleagues/co-workers regarding their job/career advancement (n = 302; Table 33). Sixty-one percent had the equipment and supplies they needed to adequately perform their work (n = 290). Slightly less than half of all Faculty and Staff thought that Cal U treated salaried and hourly staff within their respective job classifications equitably (49%, n = 232).

Table 33. Perceptions of Support and Resources Available at Cal U Strongly Agree Resources

Agree n %

Neither Agree nor Disagree n

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n

I have supervisors/colleagues/coworkers who give me job/career advice guidance when I need it.

119

24.8

204

42.5

15.0

6.5

8.3

I have support from supervisors/colleagues/co-workers regarding my job/career advancement.

103

21.5

199

41.5

15.6

9.0

10.0

I have the equipment and supplies I need to adequately perform my work.

18.3

203

42.6

9.5

16. 8

12.8

I believe that Cal U treats salaried and hourly staff within my 12. respective job classification 65 13.7 167 35.1 91 19.1 57 0 58 12.2 equitably. Note: Table includes post-docs, trainees, graduate students, staff, and faculty responses only (n = 485). These survey items allowed for “Don’t Know” and “Not Applicable” responses, which are available in Table B51.

More than 65 respondents elaborated on their responses to the previous survey items. Several people indicated their computers/computer accessories were very out-of-date and/or malfunctioning and suggested they were “stuck” with this equipment due to “tight budgets.” One person commented, “Our programs are woefully underfunded and under-supported when it comes to computational resources and lab/field equipment.” Some respondents even suggested they or their departments did not have enough printers to complete their work efficiently. One person had to send email attachments to the department administrative assistant to print, and another wrote, “Too many people use the same printers and it's just not an efficient way to do 106

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

things. Jobs get 'held up' because someone else is monopolizing the printer, etc., or things print on the incorrect paper, etc.” Many of the people who commented also noted the lack of administrative assistants in their departments, and recognized the inordinate amount of work that remaining assistants were required to perform. One person described an administrative assistant who “is attempting to run an office that services more than 800 students and 35+ faculty members. She's doing it alone, and she's doing it admirably well. But she must take work home in order to get it done…. These types of things create a stressful and uncomfortable work climate.” Respondents’ perceptions of support from supervisors and colleagues were varied. Some people felt support from neither supervisors nor co-workers (“I need to protect myself from my supervisors and co-workers, it is a far-cry from being supported by them”). Others described support from supervisors, and hostile attitudes from co-workers (“Advancements are supported by supervisor but not other co-workers”). Some respondents looked outside their departments for support (“The support is from colleagues outside of my department. There seems to be a competitive attitude with faculty within my department rather than a collegial attitude”). Faculty and Staff Satisfaction with Cal U Forty-six percent of Faculty and Staff respondents were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their compensation as compared to that of their colleagues with similar levels of experience (n = 221; Table 34). Eighty percent were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their access to health benefits (n = 384), and 55% were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their access to partner benefits (n = 261). Seventy-one percent were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their jobs/careers at Cal U (n = 339), and more than half of Faculty and Staff (60%, n = 282) were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with the way their careers/jobs have progressed at Cal U. Sixty-eight percent of respondents (n = 323) were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with the size and quality of their work space as compared to their departmental colleagues’/co-workers work space, and 46% were

107

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

“highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their access to research support as compared to colleagues’/co-workers’ access to research support 50 (n = 218). Table 34. Faculty and Staff Satisfaction

Resources

Highly Satisfied n %

Satisfied n %

Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied n %

Dissatisfied n %

Highly Dissatisfied n %

Your compensation as compared to that of other CAL U colleagues/co-workers with a similar level of experience

11.3

167

35.1

16.0

17.6

12.8

Your access to health benefits

128

26.7

256

53.4

9.2

2.7

1.7

Your job/career at CAL U

107

22.5

232

48.7

14.5

8.2

5.0

The way your job/career has progressed at CAL U

19.0

192

40.5

16.9

13.5

8.4

The size and quality of your work space as compared to your departmental colleagues’/coworkers’ work space

116

24.4

207

43.6

11.2

11.8

6.3

Your access to research support as compared to your colleagues’/coworkers’ access to research support

11.8

162

34.0

17.9

7.4

5.3

86 18.1 175 36.9 57 12.0 16 3.4 9 Your access to partner benefits Note: Table includes post-docs, trainees, graduate students, staff, and faculty responses only (n = 485). These survey items allowed for “Don’t Know” and “Not Applicable” responses, which are available in Table B52.

1.9

Removing the 22% of respondents (n = 108) who marked “Not Applicable” for the item “Your access to research support as compared to your colleagues’/co-workers’ access to research support,” 59% of all Faculty and Staff respondents who found the item applicable to them were “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their access to research support as compared to colleagues’/co-workers’ access to research support (n = 218).

108

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

When examining the results of the job/career satisfaction item by various demographic categories, the reader will note that LGBQ Faculty (46%) and Staff and Faculty/Staff of Color (62%) were less satisfied with their jobs at Cal U than were other employee groups 51 (Figure 46).

Satisfied* Dissatisfied**

74 62 46 27

Women

Men

People of Color

White

LGBQ

Heterosexual

Figure 46.Faculty/Staff Satisfaction with Their Jobs by Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation (%) *Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category. ** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.

All “Not Applicable” responses were not included in the analyses in Figures 46 - 51.

109

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Sixty-nine percent of Staff and 77% of Faculty were satisfied with their jobs (Figure 47). Faculty/Staff with disabilities were least satisfied with their jobs/careers at Cal U (46%).

Satisfied* Dissatisfied**

46 31 15

Staff

9 Faculty

9 No Disability

Disability

Figure 47. Faculty/Staff Satisfaction with Their Jobs by Position and Disability Status (%) * Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category. ** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.

110

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

People of Color (48%) and LGBQ respondents (55%) were less satisfied with the way their careers have progressed at Cal U than were other employee groups (Figure 48).

Satisfied* Dissatisfied**

64 55

48 36

33 19

Women

Men

People of Color

White

LGBQ

Heterosexual

Figure 48. Faculty/Staff Satisfaction with the Way Their Careers Have Progressed by Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation (%) * Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category. ** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.

111

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Figure 49 indicates that Faculty members were more satisfied than Staff members with the way their careers have progressed at Cal U (69% compared to 55%), and respondents with disabilities were much less satisfied than employees without disabilities (42% compared to 64%).

Satisfied* Dissatisfied**

55 42 24 15

Staff

Faculty

No Disability

Disability

Figure 49. Faculty/Staff Satisfaction with the Way Their Careers Have Progressed by Position and Disability Status (%) * Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category. ** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.

112

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Lower percentages of women, People of Color, and heterosexual Faculty and Staff were satisfied with their compensation as compared to Cal U colleagues with similar positions (Figure 50).

Satisfied* Dissatisfied**

64 53

36 29

28 18

Women

Men

People of Color

White

LGBQ

Heterosexual

Figure 50. Faculty/Staff Satisfaction with Their Compensation by Gender, Race, and Sexual Orientation (%) * Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category. ** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.

113

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

While 59% of Faculty members were satisfied with their compensation in comparison to Cal U colleagues in similar positions, much lower percentages of Staff (41%) were satisfied with their compensation in comparison to that of colleagues with similar positions (Figure 51). Likewise, only 29% of respondents with disabilities (compared to 52% of respondents without disabilities) were satisfied with their compensation in comparison to that of colleagues with similar positions.

Satisfied* Dissatisfied**

59 52

41 33 22

Staff

Faculty

No Disability

Disability

Figure 51. Faculty/Staff Satisfaction with Their Compensation by Position and Disability Status (%) * Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category. ** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.

The survey asked faculty and staff why they were satisfied or dissatisfied with their jobs and career progression; 101 respondents provided their insights. Some respondents worried about the confidentiality of their responses, a few of whom declined to further comment.

114

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Some respondents attributed their lack of career progression to lack of funding (e.g., “There has been no funding for professional development, conferences or to try new ideas in my department in many years.”). Many of those respondents commented that they had been denied promotions for which they were qualified, some of whom believed, “It is ‘who’ you know and not ‘what’ you know when it comes to promotions or having positions created for certain individuals.” A few individuals felt personally sabotaged by supervisors, department leaders, or administrators. One such person lamented, “My career progressed beautifully until I opened my mouth.” Several respondents commented on their long-stagnant salaries; one such person had “not received a merit raise in 10 years and have not had any opportunities for advancement.” Another was “very dissatisfied with the fact that my wages have been frozen for 3 years. So, basically, I make less year to year because everything goes up except my pay.” A number of people commented on the differences in salary increases between non-union and union workers. One respondent offered, “The compensation of co-workers in unions when it comes to raises is far greater than that of employees who are non-union. Managers have not had a raise in 5 years for doing their jobs just as well if not better than those represented by unions who get regular raises.” Perceptions of Employment Practices Regarding respondents’ perceptions of unfair and unjust employment practices, 31% of all Staff and Faculty (n = 147) [33% of Staff respondents (n = 97) and 28% of Faculty respondents (n = 50)] perceived unfair or unjust hiring practices at Cal U (e.g., hiring supervisor bias, search committee bias, limited recruiting pool, lack of effort in diversifying recruiting pool) (Table 35). Thirty-three percent of women (n = 91), 27% of men (n = 51) believed they had observed unfair or unjust hiring practices. Likewise, 30% of White faculty and staff (n = 101) and 36% of People of Color employees (n = 16) perceived unfair or unjust hiring at Cal U. Thirty-six percent of LGBQ respondents (n = 5) and 30% of heterosexual respondents (n = 118) perceived discriminatory hiring practices. Of those who perceived unfair or unjust hiring, 29% said it was based on position (n = 42), 17% on gender (n = 25), 16% on race (n = 24), 12% on age (n = 18), and 12% on ethnicity (n = 17).

115

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

More than 50 respondents elaborated on the unfair or unjust hiring they perceived at Cal U. While a few of those respondents provided details about promotions and positions they were denied, most described perceived nepotism and favoritism in hiring: There seems to be a culture of people being selected for positions based on who they know rather than merit, education and experience. Committees have gone through the interview process and selected an applicant they deem right for a position but then another person was ultimately given the position, not because they were more qualified but because of relationships and ‘who they knew.’ Seventeen percent of Faculty and Staff respondents (n = 80) perceived unfair, unjust, or discriminatory employment-related disciplinary actions, up to and including dismissal at Cal U. Of those individuals, 21% said they believed the discrimination was based on position (n = 17), 19% on gender (n = 15), 18% on age (n = 14), and 16% on philosophical views (n = 13). Seventeen percent of women (n = 47) and 15% of men (n = 29) perceived unjust or unfair practices. Twenty-nine percent of LGBQ respondents (n = 4) and 15% of heterosexual respondents (n = 60) perceived discriminatory disciplinary actions. Twenty-four percent of People of Color (n = 11) and 17% of White employees (n = 55) witnessed such actions. Additionally, 16% of Staff respondents (n = 46) and 19% of Faculty respondents (n = 34) had perceived unfair or unjust disciplinary actions. Twenty-three people commented about unjust or unfair instances of dismissal or termination. A few respondents indicated they saw discrimination based on gender (against men and women) and on sexual orientation (against LGBQ individuals). Several respondents said they witnessed colleagues who were mistreated, and shared similar sentiments to the following: “forced out, either fired, harassed to the point of leaving, or take early retirement, because of how hostile their work environment became because they were not part of the white ‘boy's’ network, whose performance evaluations were wildly untruthful and unjust.” Most of the people who commented, however, wrote about the previous Cal U president. One representative comment was, “Let's not mince words here. Angelo Armenti fired all those who opposed him in one way or another. I don't see that happening now but I do still see that new administrative positions are created and persons anointed to the positions based on their ties to current administration and NOT on their administrative abilities.” Others agreed, “Some of the 116

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

people who were fired under Dr. Armenti's administration were fired unfairly, and we lost some really hard working people because of that.” Thirty-one percent of Faculty and Staff (n = 149) perceived unfair or unjust practices related to promotion/tenure/reappointment/reclassification at Cal U. Several respondents believed it was based on position (36%, n = 53), gender (17%, n = 25), age (10%, n = 15), philosophical views (10%, n = 15), race (9%, n = 14), etc. Thirty-three percent of women (n = 90) and 27% of men (n = 52) perceived unfair or unjust promotion/tenure/reappointment/reclassification. Twenty-nine percent of LGBQ Faculty and Staff (n = 4) and 29% of heterosexual Faculty and Staff (n = 115) also witnessed such conduct. Thirty percent of White respondents (n = 100) and 38% of People of Color (n = 17) perceived such conduct. Thirty-three percent of Staff respondents (n = 97) and 28% of Faculty respondents (n = 52) perceived unfair or unjust practices related to promotion/tenure/reappointment/reclassification. With regard to unfair or unjust promotion, 43 people provided their insights. General consensus suggested, “It's all based on who is up for promotion, and do those in power know them and like them.” Another theme that emerged was that “problem” faculty and staff were often reclassified or promoted to get them out of their current environments. One person agreed, “We move people around rather than address issues.” Others elaborated, “Some tenure/promotion decisions sometimes seem to be based on personality or fear of a lawsuit than on merit,” and “At least 5 current higher administration employees who were not doing a good job who instead of being terminated or disciplined or demoted for work performance they were promoted instead.” A few of the respondents lamented the lack of difference and diversity at Cal U, and suggested differences (of backgrounds, identities, and perspectives) thwarted some promotion/reclass efforts. Respondents explained, “There is a great deal of talk about diversity here, but a tremendous lack of tolerance for those who might think differently because of their diversity...” and “If you compare tenure-promotion for Faculty of Color and that of the majority (Anglo or White) the data would support the disparity.

117

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 35. Employee Respondents Who Believed They Had Observed Employment Practices that were Unfair, Unjust, or Would Inhibit Diversifying the Community

Hiring Practices

Employment-Related Disciplinary Actions

Procedures or Practices Related to Promotion/Tenure/ Reclassification

236

49.6

286

60.2

216

45.6

Yes

147

30.9

16.8

149

31.4

Don’t Know

19.5

109

22.9

109

23.0

Note: Answered by faculty and staff only (n = 485).

Faculty Members’ Views on University Policies One survey item queried Faculty members (n = 186) about their opinions regarding a variety of work-life issues specific to faculty work (Table 36). Forty-nine percent felt their research interests were valued by their colleagues (n = 89). Few Faculty felt pressured to change their teaching methods to achieve tenure/be promoted (23%, n = 42) or change their research agendas to achieve tenure (6%, n = 11) or be promoted (19%, n = 34). Fifty-eight percent of Faculty respondents believed the tenure process was clear (n = 105), and 60% felt tenure standards were reasonable (n = 109). Less than half of all Faculty felt the promotion process was clear (47%, n = 86) and the promotion standards were reasonable (45%, n = 82). More than half of all Faculty felt that their service contributions were important to tenure (63%, n = 113) and promotion (66%, n = 119). Thirty percent felt burdened by service responsibilities beyond those of their colleagues (n = 54).

118

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 36. Faculty Attitudes about Tenure and Advancement Processes Neither Agree nor Strongly Disagree Agree Agree n % n % n % Issues

Disagree n %

I feel pressured to change my methods of teaching to achieve tenure/be promoted.

7.2

16.0

13.8

24.9

20.4

I feel that my teaching expectations and research requirements are similar to that of my colleagues in other divisions.

11.2

40.8

11.2

18.4

8.4

My research interests are valued by my colleagues.

13.8

35.4

20.4

14.9

5.0

I feel pressured to change my research agenda to achieve tenure.

0.6

5.6

16.7

28.3

18.3

I feel pressured to change my research agenda to be promoted.

6.7

12.2

13.9

26.1

18.3

I believe that the tenure process is clear.

18.7

39.0

12.6

11.0

3.8

I believe that the promotion process is clear.

15.4

31.9

17.0

16.5

8.2

I believe that the tenure standards are reasonable.

18.7

41.2

16.5

4.4

6.0

I believe that the promotion standards are reasonable.

14.4

30.9

23.8

11.6

8.8

I feel that I am burdened by service responsibilities (e.g., committee memberships, departmental work assignments) beyond those of my colleagues.

11.0

18.8

21.0

22.1

17.1

I feel that my service contributions are important to tenure.

23.3

39.4

10.6

1.1

1.7

Strongly Disagree n

I feel that my service contributions are important to promotion. 45 25.1 74 41.3 22 12.3 4 2.2 3 1.7 Note: Table includes only faculty respondents (n = 186). These items allowed for a â&#x20AC;&#x153;Not Applicableâ&#x20AC;? response, which is available in Table B49.

119

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Thirty percent of all Faculty (n = 54) felt burdened by service responsibilities beyond those of their colleagues. Figure 52 illustrates that higher percentages of women faculty, LGBQ faculty, faculty of color, and faculty with disabilities felt burdened by service responsibilities than did men, heterosexual, White, and non-disabled faculty.

Agree* Neutral Disagree**

42 33

29 19

33 17

31 21

25 25 17

42 26

29 29 21

Figure 52. Faculty Who Felt Burdened by Service Responsibilities Beyond Those of Their Colleagues (%)

120

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Faculty and Staff Who Have Seriously Considered Leaving Cal U Eighteen percent of all respondents have seriously considered leaving Cal U because of the campus climate (n = 392). Thirty-nine percent of Staff respondents (n = 116) and 30% of Faculty respondents (n = 55) had seriously considered leaving Cal U because of the climate. Among Faculty and Staff, 37% of men (n = 71) and 33% of women (n = 92 had seriously considered leaving the institution. Thirty-five percent of White employees (n = 118) and 35% of People of Color employees (n = 16) had seriously considered leaving Cal U. Fifty-nine percent of employees with disabilities (n = 29) and 32% of employees without disabilities (n = 133) seriously considered leaving Cal U. And, 36% of U.S. Citizens (n = 165) and 14% of Non-U.S. Citizens (n = 1) had seriously considered leaving. Additionally, 29% of LGBQ employees (n = 4) and 34% of heterosexual respondents (n = 135) had seriously considered leaving the institution. More than 150 Faculty and Staff respondents further elaborated on why they seriously considered leaving Cal U and why they decided to stay. Several people cited the previous president’s “unbending, unfair & vindictive” leadership as their primary reason for thinking about leaving Cal U. Other Faculty and Staff named various unfit/unsupportive supervisors and administrators and tense work environments as their reasons for considering leaving. Some people suggested Cal U employees were “out for themselves,” “gossipy and mean-spirited,” and that office morale was very low. Many Faculty and Staff stayed at Cal U due to changes in leadership at the presidential and departmental levels. Some indicated they stayed for financial security, they did not find another job, or they needed the health benefits. Summary The results from this section suggest that most respondents felt the workplace was welcoming for a variety of Cal U groups. People of Color respondents were less likely than White respondents to believe the workplace was welcoming based on race. Respondents with Multiple Religious/Spiritual Affiliations were less likely than other or no religious/spiritual affiliations to believe the workplace was welcoming based on religious/spiritual status. LGBQ respondents

121

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

were less likely than heterosexual respondents to believe the climate was welcoming based on sexual orientation. Some employees had perceived unfair or unjust hiring (31%), unfair or unjust disciplinary actions (17%), or unfair or unjust promotion/tenure/reclassification (31%). Additionally, about half of all Staff and Faculty believed they had support from their co-workers, and felt positively about their ability to balance work-life issues. Not surprisingly, some differences in many of the aforementioned topics existed in the responses from people from various backgrounds and identities.

122

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Students Perceptions of Campus Climate This section of the report is dedicated to survey questions that were specific to Cal U students. Several survey items queried student respondents about their academic experiences, their general perceptions of the campus climate, and their comfort with their classes and their on-campus jobs. Some questions in this section include students only and one includes student and faculty responses. The tables are marked accordingly. Fifty-five percent of all students experienced financial hardship at Cal U (n = 912). Those students indicated they had difficulty purchasing books/equipment (77%, n = 701), affording tuition (68%, n = 619), affording fees (60%, n = 549), etc. (Table 37).

Table 37. Students Who Had Experienced Financial Hardship at Cal U Experience hardship through

Difficulty affording tuition

619

67.9

Difficulty affording fees

549

60.2

Difficulty purchasing my books/equipment

701

76.9

Difficulty participating in social events

264

28.9

Difficulty affording university meal plan

329

36.1

Difficulty participating in co-curricular events or activities (alternative spring breaks, class trips, etc.)

299

32.8

Difficulty traveling home during university breaks

234

25.7

Difficulty in affording housing

484

53.1

Difficulty in affording parking

446

48.9

Difficulty in affording transportation costs

293

32.1

Difficulty in affording health insurance

184

20.2

Other

6.9

Note: Table includes only students who answered that they experienced financial hardship (n = 912).

123

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

With regard to their comfort with the climate in their classrooms, undergraduate and graduate student respondents whose families earn less than $30,000 per year (i.e., Low Income) were slightly less comfortable than were respondents whose families earned $30,000 per year or more (i.e., Not Low Income; Figure 53).

Low Income (n = 374) Not Low Income (n = 1222)

55 49 32

Very comfortable

Comfortable

Neutral

Uncomfortable

Very Uncomfortable

Figure 53. Studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Comfort with Climate in Classes by Family Income Status (%)

Likewise, First Generation students were slightly less comfortable with the climate in their classes than were Not First Generation students (Figure 54).

124

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Figure54. Students’ Comfort with Climate in Classes by First Generation Status (%)

Student Experiences of Unwanted Sexual Contact Four percent of Students believed they had been the victims of sexual assault 52 while at Cal U (n = 66). Six of the student respondents who experienced unwanted sexual contact were men (1% of men) and 60 were women (6% of women students).

The survey defined sexual assault as “any sexual act directed against another person, forcibly, and/or with threat of force, and/or against that person’s will; or when the person is incapable of giving consent, (i.e., is unconscious, mentally incompetent, or intoxicated), including forcible rape, use of drugs to incapacitate, forcible sodomy, gang rape, sexual assault, sexual assault with an object, and forcible fondling.”

125

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Figure 55 further illustrates the student respondents who experienced sexual assault, where 9% of Non-U.S. Citizen students, 7% of student respondents with disabilities, and 6% of LGBQ student respondents were affected.

White People (4%) People of Color (5%) No Disability (4%) Disability (7%) LGBQ (6%) Heterosexual (4%) U.S. Citizen (4%) Non-U.S. Citizen (9%)

48 13

64 2

Figure 55. Student Experiences of Sexual Assault by Race, Disability, Sexual Orientation, and Citizenship (duplicated n)

126

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Students’ Academic Experiences The survey asked Students (n = 1,652) the degree to which they agreed or disagreed about a variety of academic experiences (Table 38). Fifty-eight percent (n = 931) felt few of their courses this year have been intellectually stimulating. The majority were satisfied with the extent of their intellectual development since enrolling at Cal U (82%, n = 1,302). Additionally, the majority of Students reported their academic experience has had a positive influence on their intellectual growth and interest in ideas (85%, n = 1,350) and that their interest in ideas and intellectual matters has increased since coming to Cal U (81%, n = 1,297). Table 38. Student Respondents’ Academic Experiences at Cal U

Strongly Agree

Academic Experiences

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Few of my courses this year have been intellectually stimulating.

455

28.5

476

29.8

247

15.5

308

19.3

110

6.9

I am satisfied with the extent of my intellectual development since enrolling at Cal U.

637

39.9

665

41.7

186

11.7

5.1

1.6

My academic experience has had a positive influence on my intellectual growth and interest in ideas.

741

46.5

609

38.2

172

10.8

3.0

1.5

My interest in ideas and intellectual matters has increased since coming to Cal U.

720

45.1

577

36.2

220

13.8

3.6

1.4

Note: Table includes students only (n = 1,652).

Furthermore, 86% of Students (n = 1,379) reported they were performing up to their full academic potential. Almost half of all Student respondents reported they performed academically as well as they had anticipated they would (78%, n = 1,246) (Table 39).

127

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

The majority of Students were satisfied with their academic experience at Cal U (78%, n = 1,249). Table illustrates these data by race, gender 53, disability, sexual orientation, firstgeneration status, and socioeconomic status where they differed. Table 39. Student Respondents’ Academic Experiences at Cal U

Strongly Agree

Academic Experiences I am performing up to my full academic potential. White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual First-Generation Not First Generation Low Income Not Low Income

I have performed academically as well as I anticipated I would.

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

784

48.8

595

37.0

121

7.5

5.7

0.9

571 118 238 540 680 88 47 656 175 608 178 590

48.3 45.4 41.2 53.1 49.9 40.7 38.5 50.5 50.7 48.3 48.4 49.2

442 95 228 363 505 83 54 462 133 461 134 447

37.4 36.5 39.4 35.7 37.1 38.4 44.3 35.6 38.6 36.6 36.4 37.3

89 25 62 58 96 22 12 97 20 101 30 86

7.5 9.6 10.7 5.7 7.0 10.2 9.8 7.5 5.8 8.0 8.2 7.2

69 19 43 48 68 22 7 75 14 78 22 67

5.8 7.3 7.4 4.7 5.0 10.2 5.7 5.8 4.1 6.2 6.0 5.6

11 3 7 7 13 1 2 9 3 11 4 9

0.9 1.2 1.2 0.7 1.0 0.5 1.6 0.7 0.9 0.9 1.1 0.8

675

42.2

571

35.7

197

12.3

130

8.1

1.6

146 35 83 113 157 37 24 151 35 161 58 134

12.4 13.6 14.4 11.2 11.6 17.2 19.7 11.7 10.2 12.8 15.8 11.2

90 29 50 78 102 24 9 108 33 97 33 93

7.6 11.2 8.7 7.7 7.5 11.2 7.4 8.4 9.6 7.7 9.0 7.8

17 7 7 18 19 6 0 23 9 16 4 19

1.4 2.7 1.2 1.8 1.4 2.8 0.0 1.8 2.6 1.3 1.1 1.6

503 42.7 421 35.8 90 34.9 97 37.6 201 35.0 234 40.7 470 46.5 332 32.8 590 43.5 487 35.9 75 34.9 73 34.0 46 37.7 43 35.2 558 43.2 451 34.9 135 39.4 131 38.2 540 43.1 439 35.0 151 41.3 120 32.8 510 42.7 437 36.6 Note: Table includes students, trainees, and postdocs only (n = 1,652). White People of Color Men Women No Disability Disability LGBQ Heterosexual First-Generation Not First Generation Low Income Not Low Income

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Figure 56 illustrates the percentage of Students who “strongly agreed”/ “agreed” that they were satisfied with their academic experiences at Cal U. With regard to race, White respondents (78%, n = 917) were similarly satisfied as were People of Color (77%, n = 197). Seventy-nine percent of respondents without disabilities (n = 1,073) and 73% of respondents with disabilities (n = 157) 53

Transgender respondents were too few to include in these analyses (n = 6).

128

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

were satisfied with their academic experiences. A higher percentage of First Generation respondents (82%, n = 283) than Not First Generation respondents (77%, n = 965) were satisfied, as were slightly more Not Low Income respondents (79%, n = 946) than Low Income respondents (76%, n = 275).

White People (n=917) People of Color (n=197) LGBQ (n=83) Heterosexual (n=1013) No Disability (n=1073) Disability (n=157)

79 73

First-Generation (n=283) Not First-Generation (n=965) Low Income (n=275) Not Low Income (n=946)

Figure 56. Students Who Strongly Agree/Agree that they were Satisfied with Academic Experiences at Cal U (%)

129

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Ninety-two percent of all Students intended to graduate from Cal U (n = 1,466), and 19% were considering transferring to another college or university due to academic reasons (n = 299). Table 40 presents an examination of Students’ intent to persist (“I intend to graduate from Cal U”) by selected demographic characteristics. When examining the data by race, a slightly higher percentage of White students (93%, n = 1,091) than Students of Color (88%, n = 228) intended to graduate from Cal U. With regard to gender, the majority of students indicate that they intend to graduate from Cal U (men, 92%, n = 528; women, 92%, n = 927). There were no differences by socioeconomic status (Low Income, 91%, n = 331; Not Low Income, 92%, n = 1,098) or by first generation status (First Generation, 92%, n = 315; not First Generation, 92%; n = 1,149). Based on sexual orientation, heterosexual students (92%, n = 1,193) believed they were more likely to persist than did LGBQ students (89%, n = 108). Table 40. Student Respondents’ Intent to Graduate from Cal U

Strongly Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

White People of Color

819 161

69.7 61.9

272 67

23.1 25.8

62 24

5.3 9.2

8 6

0.7 2.3

14 2

1.2 0.8

Men Women

385 705

66.8 69.9

143 222

24.8 22.0

35 58

6.1 5.7

5 12

0.9 1.2

8 12

1.4 1.2

Low Income Not Low Income

257

70.4

20.3

7.7

0.3

1.4

814

68.3

284

23.8

5.4

1.3

1.2

First Generation Not First Generation Sexual Orientation

226 872

65.9 69.6

89 277

25.9 22.1

21 73

6.1 5.8

2 15

0.6 1.2

5 15

1.5 1.2

LGBQ Heterosexual

80 901

65.6 69.8

28 292

23.0 22.6

8 75

6.6 5.8

3 9

2.5 0.7

3 14

2.5 1.1

Race

Gender 54

SES

First Generation Status

Note: Table reports student responses only (n = 1,652).

Transgender respondents were not included in these analyses as their numbers were too low to assure confidentiality (n = 6).

130

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Students’ Perceptions of Campus Climate The survey asked students about the perceptions they held about Cal U climate before they enrolled on campus (Table 41). Before they enrolled at Cal U, more than half of all student respondents found the climate was “very respectful/respectful” of all of the groups listed in Table 41.

131

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 41. Students’ Pre-enrollment Perceptions of Campus Climate

Group

Very Respectful n %

Respectful n %

Neither Respectful nor Disrespectful n %

Disrespectful n %

Very Disrespectful n %

Affected by psychological health issues

735

48.2

435

28.5

173

11.3

0.5

0.1

Affected by physical health issues

746

49.0

436

28.6

168

11.0

0.6

0.1

Female

794

52.2

397

26.1

170

11.2

0.8

0.3

From the Catholic religion

755

49.6

432

28.4

177

11.6

0.5

0.1

From religious affiliations other than Christian

719

47.3

438

28.8

190

12.5

1.1

0.5

From Christian affiliations

749

49.3

427

28.1

178

11.7

0.8

0.1

Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender

698

46.0

421

27.7

195

12.8

2.2

0.9

Immigrants

696

45.8

429

28.3

191

12.6

1.8

0.4

International students, staff, or faculty

728

48.0

425

28.0

184

12.1

1.0

0.2

Learning disabled

742

48.8

427

28.1

178

11.7

1.2

0.2

Male

821

54.1

388

25.6

159

10.5

0.4

0.1

Non-native English speakers

710

46.7

439

28.9

182

12.0

1.7

0.3

Parents/guardians

783

51.6

409

26.9

165

10.9

0.6

0.1

Providing care for other than a child

747

49.2

424

27.9

173

11.4

0.8

0.0

Physical disabled

764

50.5

418

27.6

161

10.6

1.3

0.1

Socioeconomically disadvantaged

744

48.9

415

27.3

177

11.6

1.2

0.5

Socioeconomically advantaged

766

50.5

405

26.7

177

11.7

0.3

0.1

Veterans/active military/reservists members

817

53.9

387

25.5

160

10.6

0.3

0.0

Working status

773

51.1

411

27.1

170

11.2

0.5

0.1

Note: Table reports student responses only (n = 1,652). This item allowed for a “Don’t Know” response, which is available in Table B77.

132

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

The majority of all faculty and student respondents found that the classroom/learning environment was welcoming for students based on all of the characteristics listed in Table 42. In examining student responses only, 83% of women students (n = 845), 78% of men students (n = 457), and 100% of transgender students (n = 6) found that the classroom climate was welcoming based on gender. Sixty-eight percent of Students of Color (n = 180) and 77% of White students (n = 913) found that the classroom climate was welcoming based on race. Sixty-three percent of LGBQ students (n = 76) and 71% of heterosexual students (n = 924) found that the climate was welcoming for students based on sexual orientation. Seventy-four percent of Christian students (n = 785), 71% of students with Other Religious/Spiritual Affiliations (n = 24), 67% of students with No Affiliation (n = 262), and 61% of students with Multiple Affiliations (n = 30) found that the classroom climate was welcoming based on religious/spiritual views. Seventy percent of Low Income students (n = 254) and 73% of Not Low Income students (n = 873) found that the classroom climate was welcoming based on socioeconomic status.

133

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table 42. Student and Faculty Perceptions of Welcoming Classroom/Learning Environment Based on Demographic Characteristics

Group

Strongly Agree n %

Agree n

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Age

724

40.2

757

42.1

212

11.8

3.1

1.0

Commuter status

659

36.8

693

38.7

265

14.8

4.2

2.2

Country of origin

644

36.2

678

38.1

343

19.3

1.7

0.5

English language proficiency/ accent

627

35.2

679

38.1

336

18.9

3.3

0.4

Ethnicity

690

38.6

711

39.8

273

15.3

2.6

0.7

Gender

766

42.8

688

38.5

243

13.6

2.2

0.4

Gender expression

624

35.0

612

34.4

368

20.7

3.9

1.7

Immigrant status

607

34.1

594

33.3

421

23.6

2.5

0.3

Learning disability

713

39.9

632

35.4

288

16.1

2.7

0.8

Medical conditions

683

38.3

656

36.8

293

16.5

2.6

1.1

Military/veteran status

813

45.5

607

34.0

261

14.6

0.9

0.6

Caregiver status

610

34.0

684

38.1

342

19.1

3.3

1.1

Participation in a student organization

767

43.1

645

36.3

259

14.6

1.6

0.9

Participation in an athletic team

835

46.9

571

32.0

263

14.8

1.6

0.4

Psychological disorder

571

32.2

570

32.1

430

24.2

3.6

0.8

Physical characteristics

638

35.9

628

35.3

361

20.3

3.3

1.1

Physical disability

669

37.6

645

36.2

326

18.3

2.9

1.0

Political views

596

33.4

604

33.9

401

22.5

4.1

1.6

Race

697

39.1

650

36.5

321

18.0

2.6

1.1

Religious/spiritual views

644

36.2

626

35.2

359

20.2

3.2

1.5

Sexual orientation

623

35.0

630

35.4

356

20.0

4.2

1.1

Socioeconomic status

637

35.8

642

36.0

363

20.4

2.8

1.4

Note: Table includes faculty and student respondents only (n = 1,838).

Seventeen percent of students “strongly agreed”/“agreed” that they perceived tension in residence hall discussions regarding a person’s sexual orientation (n = 270; Table 43). Students

134

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

also perceived tensions regarding gender expression (17%, n = 259), race (16%, n = 245), religious/spiritual views (15%, n = 231), etc. Table 43. Student Perceptions of Tension in Residence Hall Discussions Based on Demographic Characteristics

Group

Strongly Agree n %

Caregiving status

Country of origin

Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

4.6

103

6.6

369

23.7

268

17.2

224

14.4

4.8

106

6.8

355

22.9

285

18.4

224

14.4

English language proficiency/ accent

4.8

125

8.1

356

23.0

276

17.8

213

13.8

Ethnicity

5.0

139

9.0

342

22.1

277

17.9

216

13.9

Gender

5.0

130

8.4

347

22.4

271

17.5

227

14.7

Gender expression

5.9

167

10.8

348

22.4

248

16.0

197

12.7

Immigrant status

4.6

111

7.2

366

23.6

268

17.3

218

14.1

Learning disability

4.8

111

7.1

368

23.7

269

17.3

222

14.3

Medical conditions

4.9

116

7.5

361

23.2

273

17.6

226

14.6

Military/veteran status

4.7

5.2

353

22.7

285

18.4

250

16.1

Participation in a student organization

4.8

102

6.6

349

22.5

281

18.1

245

15.8

Participation on an athletic team

4.8

103

6.6

348

22.4

281

18.1

243

15.7

Psychological disorder

4.6

132

8.5

360

23.2

259

16.7

212

13.7

Physical characteristics

5.2

130

8.4

359

23.1

261

16.8

212

13.7

Physical disability

4.8

120

7.8

359

23.2

269

17.4

221

14.3

Political views

5.7

132

8.5

367

23.6

252

16.2

208

13.4

Race

6.3

148

9.5

337

21.7

258

16.6

211

13.6

Religious/spiritual views

6.0

138

8.9

363

23.4

243

15.7

209

13.5

Sexual orientation

105

6.8

165

10.6

342

22.0

237

15.3

202

13.0

Socioeconomic status

5.5

116

7.5

370

23.9

255

16.5

214

13.8

Note: Table includes student respondents only (n = 1,652).

135

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

One of the survey items asked Students the degree to which they agreed with a number of statements about their interactions with faculty, students, and staff at Cal U (Table 44). Seventynine percent of Students felt valued by faculty in the classroom (n = 1,279), and 67% felt valued by other students in the classroom (n = 1,083). Students found that faculty (72%, n = 1,171), staff (66%, n = 1,074), and administrators (57%, n = 923) were genuinely concerned with their welfare. Thirty-six percent found that faculty pre-judged their abilities based on their perception of studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; identities/backgrounds (n = 580). Seventy-four percent of Students had faculty they perceived as role models (n = 1,206), and 59% had staff they perceived as role models (n = 952). Table 44. Student Respondentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Perceptions of Campus Climate Strongly Agree n %

Agree n

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

I feel valued by faculty in the classroom

563

34.6

716

44.0

242

14.9

4.7

1.4

I feel valued by other students in the classroom

431

26.6

652

40.2

404

24.9

5.4

1.9

I think CAL U faculty are genuinely concerned with my welfare

545

33.6

626

38.6

275

17.0

118

7.3

3.0

I think CAL U staff are genuinely concerned with my welfare

503

31.1

571

35.3

350

21.6

127

7.8

3.2

I think CAL U administrators are genuinely concerned about my welfare.

413

25.5

510

31.5

396

24.5

163

10.1

116

7.2

I think faculty pre-judge my abilities based on perceived identity/background

253

15.6

327

20.2

457

28.2

324

20.0

203

12.5

I believe the campus climate encourages free and open discussion of difficult topics

465

28.8

609

37.7

361

22.3

100

6.2

3.0

I have faculty who I perceive as role models

644

39.6

562

34.6

284

17.5

5.1

1.8

I have staff who I perceive as role models

483

30.0

469

29.1

455

28.2

115

7.1

2.3

Note: Table reports student responses only (n = 1,652).

136

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Students Who Have Seriously Considered Leaving As noted previously, 18% of all respondents (n = 392) had seriously considered leaving Cal U because of the climate, while 14% of all undergraduate students (n = 192) and 11% of all graduate students (n = 29) had seriously considered leaving the institution. Thirty-three percent of students considered leaving in their first year as students (n = 128), 26% considered leaving in their second years (n = 101), 13% in their third years (n = 51), and 5% in their fourth years (n = 18). Among students, 13% of women (n = 135), 14% of men (n = 82), and 33% of transgender respondents (n = 2) had seriously considered leaving. Nineteen percent of Students of Color (n = 50) and 12 % of White students (n = 148) had seriously considered leaving Cal U, as did 18% of LGBQ students (n = 22) and 13% of heterosexual students (n = 169). Fifteen percent of firstgeneration students (n = 51) and 13% of students who were not considered first-generation students (n = 169) had seriously considered leaving. Additionally, 16% of Low Income students (n = 58) and 13% of Not Low Income students (n = 160) had seriously considered leaving due to the campus climate. Students were invited to elaborate on why they seriously considered leaving Cal U. Almost 200 students provided additional comments. Several students indicated they considered leaving because the majors they wished to pursue were not available at Cal U. Others suggested that Cal U’s programs were not as thorough and well-regarded as programs at other institutions. Some students were homesick; thought Cal U was “boring and too small.” Several students had negative experiences with disinterested faculty or “rude and condescending” academic advisors. Some students worried about financing their educations, and one second-year student was already had “$40,000 in debt.” A number of student respondents said they stayed a Cal U because of peer friendships they had cultured, they wanted to stay close to home, they were “close to finishing” their degrees, they enjoyed their classes and their professors, and because they “didn’t want to take the time to switch” institutions.

137

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Summary By and large, studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; responses to a variety of items indicated that they held their academic and intellectual experiences and their interactions with faculty and other students at Cal U in a positive light. The majority of students felt the classroom climate was welcoming for all groups of students, and most students felt valued by faculty and other students in the classroom. Students thought that Cal U faculty and staff were genuinely concerned with their welfare. Fourteen percent of undergraduates and 11% of graduate students had seriously considered leaving Cal U, while 92% of all students intended to graduate from Cal U.

138

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Institutional Actions The survey asked Faculty and Staff to indicate how they thought the initiatives listed in Table 45 affected the climate at Cal U. Respondents were asked specifically to decide whether certain institutional actions positively or negatively affected the climate, or did not affect the climate. Readers will note that substantial proportions of respondents (13% - 50%) chose the “Don’t Know” response for the items in this survey question. Less than half of all Faculty and Staff thought providing flexibility for promotion for faculty (42%, n = 186), providing flexibility for computing the probationary period for tenure (38%, n = 168), and providing recognition and rewards for including diversity issues in courses across the curriculum (42%, n = 185) positively affected the campus climate (Table 45). Sixty-seven percent of employees (n = 298) thought providing, promoting, and improving access to counseling to those who experienced harassment positively affected the climate at Cal U positively influenced the climate. Some also thought that diversity training for staff (54%, n = 240) and faculty (49%, n = 217) positively affected the climate. A number of respondents felt mentorship for new faculty (64%, n = 286) and staff (72%, n = 322) positively influenced the climate. Forty-six percent (n = 202) of respondents felt diversity and equity training to search and tenure committees positively affected the climate. Seventy-six percent thought providing a clear and fair process to resolve conflicts positively affected the climate (n = 336). More than half of all faculty and staff Increasing funding to support efforts to change campus climate (54%, n = 241), increasing the diversity of the faculty and staff (53%, n = 234), increasing the diversity of the administration (53%, n = 234), and increasing the diversity of the student body (56%, n =249) positively influenced the climate.

139

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 45. Faculty/Staff Perceptions of How Initiatives Affected the Climate at Cal U

Initiatives

Positively Influence the Climate n %

No Influence on Campus Climate n %

Negatively Influence Campus Climate n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Providing flexibility for promotion for faculty

186

41.5

9.4

4.7

199

44.4

Providing flexibility for computing the probationary period for tenure (e.g., family leave)

168

37.5

8.9

3.1

226

50.4

Providing recognition and rewards for including diversity issues in courses across the curriculum

185

42.0

14.7

4.5

171

38.8

Providing diversity training for staff

240

53.5

107

23.8

4.9

17.8

Providing diversity training for faculty

217

49.1

20.6

3.4

119

26.9

Providing , promoting and improving access to counseling for people who have experienced harassment

298

67.0

10.6

1.6

20.9

Providing mentorship for new faculty

286

64.3

8.5

0.9

117

26.3

Providing mentorship for new staff

322

72.0

11.0

1.3

15.7

Providing a clear and fair process to resolve conflicts

336

75.7

9.5

2.0

12.8

Increasing funding to support efforts to change campus climate

241

53.9

16.1

2.7

122

27.3

Including diversity-related professional experiences as one of the criteria for hiring of staff/faculty

169

38.2

21.3

11.1

130

29.4

Providing diversity and equity training to search and tenure committees

202

45.7

18.1

4.8

139

31.4

Increasing the diversity of the faculty and staff

234

52.7

21.4

3.6

22.3

Increasing the diversity of the administration

234

52.8

20.8

3.4

102

23.0

Increasing the diversity of the student body 249 56.2 Note: Table reports faculty and staff responses only (n = 485).

17.2

2.7

106

23.9

More than half of all Students and Faculty found the courses offered at Cal U included sufficient materials, perspectives, and/or experiences of people based on all of the characteristics listed in Table 46. 140

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table 46. Student and Faculty Perception that Courses Offered at Included Sufficient Materials, Perspectives, and/or Experiences of People Based on Certain Characteristics

Characteristics

Strongly Agree n %

Agree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Age

442

26.7

464

28.0

396

23.9

3.7

1.3

Caregiving status

406

24.6

401

24.3

424

25.7

4.7

1.4

Country of origin

403

24.5

418

25.4

420

25.5

3.9

1.2

English language proficiency

413

25.1

423

25.7

420

25.5

3.8

1.2

Ethnicity

421

25.6

444

27.0

411

25.0

3.3

1.1

Gender

436

26.5

461

28.1

396

24.1

3.3

1.0

Gender expression

400

24.4

406

24.7

427

26.0

4.6

1.6

Immigrant status

381

23.2

394

24.0

444

27.1

4.3

1.1

Learning disability

420

25.6

423

25.7

411

25.0

3.8

1.3

Medical conditions

418

25.4

417

25.3

418

25.4

3.7

1.3

Level of education

436

26.6

451

27.5

395

24.1

3.1

1.3

Military/veteran status

442

27.0

403

24.6

414

25.3

2.7

1.3

Psychological disorder

403

24.6

388

23.7

422

25.7

4.0

1.2

Physical characteristics

409

24.9

392

23.9

437

26.6

3.9

1.4

Physical disability

424

25.9

404

24.6

420

25.6

3.6

1.2

Political views

408

24.9

409

24.9

435

26.5

3.8

1.0

Position (faculty, staff)

427

26.0

419

25.5

419

25.5

3.2

0.9

Race

434

26.4

432

26.3

413

25.2

3.0

1.3

Religious/spiritual views

404

24.6

419

25.5

427

26.0

4.0

1.4

Age

442

26.7

464

28.0

396

23.9

3.7

1.3

Caregiving status

406

24.6

401

24.3

424

25.7

4.7

1.4

Country of origin

403

24.5

418

25.4

420

25.5

3.9

1.2

English language proficiency/ accent

413

25.1

423

25.7

420

25.5

3.8

1.2

Ethnicity

421

25.6

444

27.0

411

25.0

3.3

1.1

Sexual orientation

401

24.5

389

23.7

435

26.6

4.7

1.7

Socioeconomic status

410

25.1

399

24.5

434

26.6

3.9

1.7

Note: Table includes only student and faculty responses (n = 1,838).

141

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Additionally, more than half of all students found that all of the initiatives listed in Table 47 positively influenced the climate.

Table 47. Student Perceptions of How Initiatives Affected the Climate at

Initiatives

Positively Influences Climate n %

No Influence on Climate n %

Negatively Influences Climate n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Providing diversity training for all students

856

56.1

345

22.6

2.0

295

19.3

Providing diversity training for all staff

974

63.7

256

16.7

1.2

281

18.4

Providing diversity training for all faculty

990

65.0

239

15.7

1.3

275

18.0

Providing a person to address student complaints of classroom inequity

1006

66.0

218

14.3

2.0

270

17.7

Increasing diversity of the faculty and staff

808

53.3

359

23.7

4.1

287

18.9

Increasing the diversity of the student body

851

56.1

344

22.7

3.4

270

17.8

Increasing opportunities for crosscultural dialogue among students

909

59.9

290

19.1

1.8

291

19.2

Increasing opportunities for crosscultural dialogue between faculty, staff and students

921

60.6

280

18.4

1.6

294

19.4

Incorporating issues of diversity and cross-cultural competence more effectively into the curriculum

885

58.7

302

20.0

3.0

276

18.3

68.8

211

14.0

0.7

248

16.4

Providing effective faculty mentorship 1038 of students Note: Table reports student responses only (n = 1,652).

Summary In addition to campus constituentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; personal experiences and perceptions of the campus climate, diversity-related actions taken by the institution, or not taken, as the case may be, may be perceived either as promoting a positive campus climate or impeding it. As the above data

142

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

suggest, respondents hold divergent opinions about the degree to which does, and should, promote diversity to shape campus climate.

143

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Next Steps Embarking on this campus-wide assessment is further evidence of Cal Uâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commitment to ensuring that all members of the community live in an environment that nurtures a culture of inclusiveness and respect in every campus and location in the system. The primary purpose of this report was to assess the climate within Cal U including how members of the community felt about issues related to inclusion and work-life issues. At a minimum the results add additional empirical data to the current knowledge base and provide more information on the experiences and perceptions for several sub-populations within the Cal U community. A summary of the successes and opportunities follow. A summary of the successes and opportunities (described earlier in this report) revealed a number of strengths/successes and four specific opportunities for improvement at Cal U. In terms of strengths, more than two-thirds of all employee respondents were highly satisfied or satisfied with their jobs/careers at Cal U (71%, n = 339), and more than half (60%, n = 282) were highly satisfied or satisfied with the way their careers/jobs have progressed. Second, the majority of respondents reported high levels of comfort with the climate at Cal U. In particular, 81% (n = 1,724) of all respondents reported that they were very comfortable and comfortable with the overall climate at Cal U. Additionally, 78% (n = 1,659) of respondents were very comfortable or comfortable with their departments or work units. Eighty-four percent students (n = 1,389) were very comfortable or comfortable with the climate in the classes, as were 94% of faculty members (n = 167). Third, students felt and thought very positively about their academic experiences at Cal U. A majority of Cal U students felt they were performing at their full academic potential (86%, n = 1,379); were satisfied with their academic experience at Cal U (82%, n = 1,249); were satisfied with the extent of their intellectual development since enrolling at Cal U (82%, n = 1,302); and, performed academically as well as they had anticipated they would (78%, n = 1,246). The majority of students felt their academic experience has had a positive influence on their intellectual growth and interest in ideas (85%, n = 1,350) and that their interest in ideas and 144

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

intellectual matters has increased since coming to Cal U (81%, n = 1,297). Ninety-two percent of students (n = 1,466) intended to graduate from Cal U University.

Fourth, the majority of employees expressed positive attitudes about work-life issues. For example, more than half of the respondents found Cal U demonstrated that it values a diverse faculty (67%, n = 318) and staff (64%, n = 308). More than half of all employees reported that they had supervisors/colleagues/co-workers (67%, n = 323) at Cal U who gave them career advice or guidance when they needed it, and 63% had support from supervisors/colleagues/coworkers regarding their job/career advancement (n = 302. Sixty-one percent had the equipment and supplies they needed to adequately perform their work (n = 290). Four opportunities revealed in the assessment included a racial disparity; differential treatment of Cal U members based on university position; a gender disparity; and issues and concerns for LGBQ individuals. The identification of these opportunities was based on repeated themes that emerged based on differences in the experiences and perceptions of campus climate by Cal U position, race, gender identity, and sexual identity. For a more detailed description of these opportunities, refer to the â&#x20AC;&#x153;Summary of Strengths and Opportunities Section.â&#x20AC;?

145

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

References Aguirre, A., & Messineo, M. (1997). Racially motivated incidents in higher education: What do they say about the campus climate for minority students? Equity & Excellence in Education, 30(2), 26-30. Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U). (1995). The drama of diversity and democracy. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Bartz, A. E. (1988). Basic statistical concepts. New York: Macmillan. Bauer, K. (1998). Campus climate: Understanding the critical components of todayâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s colleges and universities. New Directions for Institutional Research, No.98. Davis: Jossey-Bass. Bensimon, E. (2005). Equality as a fact, equality as a result: A matter of institutional accountability. Washington, DC: American Council on Education. Bogdan, R. C., & Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacontinued Boyer, E. (1990). Campus life: In search of community. Princeton, NJ: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. Brookfield, S. D. (2005). The Power of Critical Theory: Liberating Adult Learning and Teaching. Davis, CA: Jossey-Bass. Flowers, L., & Pascarella, E. (1999). Cognitive effects of college racial composition on African American students after 3 years of college. Journal of College Student Development, 40, 669-677. Guiffrida, D., Gouveia, A., Wall, A., & Seward, D. (2008). Development and validation of the Need for Relatedness at College Questionnaire (NRC-Q). Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 1(4), 251-261. doi: 10.1037/a0014051 Gurin, P., Dey, E. L., Hurtado, S., & Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72, 330-365. Handel, S., & Caloss, D. (1993). A Declaration of Community: Report of The University-wide Campus Community Task Force. Oakland, CA: Cal U. Harper, S. & S. Hurtado. (2007). Nine themes in campus racial climates and implications for institutional transformation. New Directions for Student Services, no.120, p7-24. Harper, S. R., & Quaye, S. J. (2004). Taking seriously the evidence regarding the effects of diversity on student learning in the college classroom: A call for faculty accountability. UrbanEd, 2(2), 43-47. 146

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Hurtado, S., & Ponjuan, L. (2005). Latino educational outcomes and the campus climate. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 4(3), 235-251. doi: 10.1177/1538192705276548 Hurtado, S., Milem, J., Clayton-Pedersen, A., & Allen, W. (1998). Enacting diverse learning environments: Improving the climate for racial/ethnic diversity in higher educations. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, vol. 26, no.8. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education. Ingle, G. (2005). Will your campus diversity initiative work. Academe, 91(5), 6-10. Johnson, A. (2005). Privilege, power, and difference (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill. Kuh, G., & Whitt, E. J. (1988). The invisible tapestry: Culture in American colleges and universities. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report, no. 1. Washington, DC: Association for the Study of Higher Education. Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Milem, J., Chang, M., & antonio, A. (2005). Making diversity work on campus: A researchbased perspective. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Pascarella, E. T., & Terenzini, P. T. (2005). How college affects students: A third decade of research (Vol. 2). Davis: Jossey-Bass. Peterson, M., & Spencer, M. (1990). Understanding academic culture and climate. In W. Tierney (Ed.), Assessing academic climates and cultures. Davis: Jossey-Bass. Rankin, S. (2006). Campus climate for sexual minority students: Challenges and best practices. In J. Jackson & M. Terrell (Eds.), Toward administrative reawakening: Creating and maintaining safe college campuses. Herndon, VA: Stylus. Rankin, S., & Reason, R. (2005). Differing perceptions: How students of color and white students perceive campus climate for underrepresented groups. Journal of Student College Development, 46(1), 43-61. Rankin, S. (2003). Campus climate for lesbian, gay, bisexual & transgender people: A legal perspective. Focus on Law Studies, 19(1), 10-17. Rankin, S. (2003). Campus climate for LGBT people: A national perspective. New York: NGLTF Policy Institute. Rankin, S. (2012). Climate reports. Retrieved 10-28-12, www.rankin-consulting.com

147

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Sears, J. T. (2002). The Institutional Climate for Lesbian, Gay and Bisexual Education Faculty. Journal of Homosexuality, 43(1), 11-37. doi: 10.1300/J082v43n01_02 Settles, I. H., Cortina, L. Settles, I. H., Cortina, L. M., Malley, J., & Stewart, A. J. (2006). The climate for women in academic science: The good, the bad, and the changeable. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 30(1), 47-58. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.2006.00261.x Silverschanz, P., Cortina, L., Konik, J., & Magley, V. (2008). Slurs, Snubs, and Queer Jokes: Incidence and Impact of Heterosexist Harassment in Academia. Sex Roles, 58(3-4), 179191. doi: 10.1007/s11199-007-9329-7 Smith, D. (2009). Diversity’s promise for higher education: Making it work. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press. Smith, D. G., Gerbick, G. L., Figueroa, M. A., Watkins, G. H., Levitan, T., Moore, L. C., Merchant, P. A., Beliak, H. D., & Figueroa, B. (1997). Diversity works: The emerging picture of how students benefit. Washington, DC: Association of American Colleges and Universities. Tierney, W. G. (Ed.). (1990). Assessing academic climates and cultures. Davis: Jossey-Bass. Trochim, W. (2000). The research methods knowledge base (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Atomic Dog. Waldo, C. (1999). Out on campus: Sexual orientation and academic climate in a university context. American Journal of Community Psychology, 26, 745-774. doi: 10.1023/A:1022110031745 Whitt, E. J., Edison, M. I., Pascarella, E. T., Terenzini, P. T., & Nora, A. (2001). Influences on students’ openness to diversity and challenge in the second and third years of college. The Journal of Higher Education, 72(2), 172-204.

148

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Appendices

Appendix A – Analysis of the Comments (Q104-Q105) Appendix B – Data Tables Appendix C – Survey

149

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Appendix A Comments Analysis Questions #104/#105 Out of the 2,137 surveys received from the Cal U of PA climate assessment, 1,227 respondents contributed remarks to the open-ended questions throughout the survey. No respondents answered all open-ended questions. As the first several items were follow-up questions that allowed respondents to provide more detail about their answers to a previous question, the comments provided for those several items were included in the body of the Cal U full report. This section of the report summarizes the comments 1 submitted for two last survey questions, and provides examples of those remarks echoed by several respondents. Differences between Experiences On-Campus and in the Community Surrounding Campus Approximately one-quarter of all respondents (n = 556) commented on how their experiences on campus differ from their experiences in the surrounding community. Many individuals indicated their experiences were similar on and off campus (“no difference between community and campus;” “The campus and community climate are similar to each other. I have not experienced negative experiences in either”). One respondent elaborated, “No difference. This is a very conservative, homogeneous region with few or no non-Christian, non-US-born populations. There seems to be no ethnic diversity (apart from African Americans) on or off-campus outside of select areas of Pittsburgh near major Universities.” Others, however, noted that they felt safer and more welcome on campus. One such person noted, “Cal U's campus climate is more welcoming to people of all backgrounds than the surrounding community. I don't believe that people of color, or LGBTQ students, find much warmth once they leave the immediate campus.” Likewise, one respondent suggested, “Racism, sexism, and homophobia, in my eyes, continue to be an issue within the Mon Valley and other various communities surrounding the campus. While at Cal U, I feel as though these various issues minimize greatly.” Another 1

This report provides respondents’ verbatim comments.

150

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

respondent offered a less common sentiment: “I feel much more respected and I am treated better in the community more so than I am on campus.” Some individuals commented on the rural nature of the surrounding community and how it affected Cal U constituents: Since Cal is located in a rural community, I believe that there are challenges in finding people and services that serve a more diverse population (i.e., people of color, LGBT community, international students/faculty/staff)- including access to different cultural activities or cuisines. An additional challenge may be our students/faculty and staff who may feel isolated by being in such a rural location and not having any support or community connection outside of the university. Additional Thoughts on Campus Climate One of the open-ended items allowed respondents to elaborate on any of their survey responses, further describe their experiences, or offer additional thoughts about climate issues. Three hundred sixty-one (361) respondents offered a wide range of comments. A few individuals applauded Cal U for promoting diversity and inclusion and gave examples of the positive steps they have seen. Others cautioned against attention to diversity/inclusion, as it would only serve to cement existing divisions. Many respondents also commented on a general “lack of cooperation and team spirit. The focus on what's best for me first is destructive.” People attributed the negative atmosphere to poor leadership and the “attitude of fear in the staff on campus. People are afraid of losing their jobs and so they plot against each other.” Several respondents noted that Cal U’s employee base and student body was almost exclusively White, and that most of the leadership across the University and departmentally was largely men. For instance, one person commented, “Becoming more open to hire minorities and women. Most of the searches at Cal U yield white males. Most of the people at Cal U are white. This campus is not diverse and it is not welcoming to diverse people.” Individuals referenced the “ole’ boys club” at Cal U. While some respondents felt, “Cal U promotes too often just to bolster women and minority numbers for reporting purposes and as such we have many unqualified people in 151

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

High Ranking positions who do not belong in those senior supervisory positions,” a number of respondents agreed that women faculty and staff were treated poorly by the University and by their male colleagues. With regard to race on campus, several people cited a lack of People of Color on campus and in leadership/authoritative positions. One person was “tired of hearing coworkers use black students as a scapegoat for all that is wrong here. The black students are treated differently, and it is wrong. “While most people who commented on the state of African Americans on campus believed their numbers were few, some people felt, “African American students are treated much better than all other students at Cal since they are given special treatment, opportunities, and advantages that are not given or available to students of other races.” Throughout the last few qualitative questions, many people offered suggestions to improve the Cal U climate. Many respondents called for better communication and more transparency from the administration. Several respondents believed the University ought to improve the recruitment and retention of underrepresented faculty, staff, and students with regard to race/ethnicity and gender. Others suggested workshops and training based on issues of equity and inclusion for faculty, staff, and students. Several people suggested Cal U could “improve the climate by doing checks and balances to see who is actually working and who are just collecting a pay check.” Furthermore, one person offered, “The climate in my opinion should be one of quality, accountability, credibility, responsibility, result oriented, and from a behavior perspective, we should all be helping each other meet our goals and be successful. WE need to focus on the success of the total organization by meeting the goals in our individual sectors.” Thoughts on the Survey and Process In addition, many respondents commented on the survey and process itself. Some applauded the University’s participation in the study and wanted to make certain that the results of the survey were made public and used to improve Cal U. Several respondents thought the survey was a “great idea” and “all the questions that were asked were very 152

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

greatly detailed and helped a lot with all the information.” Other respondents thought the questionnaire was “too long” and “repetitive, “ and wondered if the “void of leadership” would use any of the results to enact positive changes on campus. Regarding the survey’s content, some respondents wanted to see questions other than “social, diversity” questions. Rather, they hoped the survey would cover financial issues, employee morale, curriculum/program issues, etc. Some respondents feared retribution for completing the survey. Several respondents insisted that Cal U leadership share with its constituents the climate assessment findings and initiatives instituted as a result. “Each year things seem to be getting better.”

153

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Appendix B PART I: Demographics The demographic information tables contain actual percentages except where noted.

Table B1 What is your primary position at Cal U? (Question 1) Position

1386

64.9

Started at Cal U as a first year student

819

59.1

Transferred from another institution

311

22.4

Missing

256

18.5

Graduate Student

266

12.4

Tenured faculty

Undergrad Student

107

5.0

Classroom/on-line

41.1

Instructor

Assistant

Associate

Professor

Non Classroom Instructor

2 0

Assistant

Associate

Professor

Missing

1.9

57.0

Tenure-track faculty

1.5

Classroom/on-line

67.7

Instructor

Assistant

Associate

Professor

Non Classroom

Instructor

Assistant

Associate

Professor

Missing Temporary Part Time faculty

12.9

19.4

1.5

Classroom/on-line

59.4

Instructor

Assistant

154

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B1 cont. Associate Professor Non Classroom

n 0 2 6

Instructor

Assistant

Associate

Professor

Missing Temporary Full Time faculty

21.9

0.7

Instructor

Assistant

Associate

Professor

0 0

Instructor

Assistant

Associate

Professor

Missing Staff

18.8

Classroom/on-line

Non Classroom

0 299

14.0

AFSCME

17.1

APSCUF

1.0

AVI

0.7

Cal Bookstore

CCAC Nursing Staff

Coaches

Foundation for CALU

Management

16.4

OPEIU Nurses

0.7

SAI

3.0

SCUPA State University Administrators

12.0

SPFPA Police/Security

0.3

Vulcan Village

0.3

Other auxiliary staff

2.3

124

41.5

Missing

4.7

Note: There are no missing data for the primary categories in this question; all respondents were required to select an answer. There are missing data for the sub-categories as indicated. Due to the large number of missing responses for the third-level categories, no percentages are provided.

155

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B2 Are you full-time or part-time in that primary status? (Question 2) Status

Full-time

1975

92.4

Part time

154

7.2

Missing

0.4

Table B3 The majority of my time at Cal U is spent at _____________. (Question 3) Location

1938

90.7

CCAC

0.4

South point

0.3

171

8.3

0.3

Main Campus

Exclusive On-line Programs of Study Missing

Table B4 What is your assigned birth sex? (Question 33) Gender

Male

788

36.9

Female

1320

61.8

Intersex

0.5

Missing

0.9

156

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B5 What is your gender identity? (Mark all that apply) (Question 34) Gender

Man

789

36.9

Woman

1319

61.7

Transgender

0.3

Other

0.1

Missing

0.9

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses

157

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B6 What is your race/ethnicity? (Question 35) Race/ethnicity

African

0.8

African American/Black

170

8.0

Alaskan Native

0.0

Asian

0.5

Asian American

0.3

Caribbean/West Indian

0.3

European

2.7

1590

74.4

Indian subcontinent

0.1

Latino(a)/Hispanic

1.9

Latin American

0.4

Middle Eastern

1.0

Native American Indian

2.7

Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native

0.2

Southeast Asian

0.1

158

7.4

European American/White

Other

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses

158

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B7 Which term best describes your sexual orientation? (Question 36) Sexual Identity

Asexual

177

8.3

Bisexual

2.9

Gay

1.3

1731

81.0

Lesbian

1.4

Queer

0.9

Questioning

0.6

Other

1.2

Missing

2.5

Heterosexual

Table B8 What is your age? (Question 37) Age

17-20

720

33.7

21-25

621

29.1

26-30

157

7.3

31-39

178

8.3

40-49

165

7.7

50-59

171

8.0

60 and over

2.6

Missing

3.2

159

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B9 What is your family care giving status? (Mark all that apply) (Question 38) Group

No one

1112

18.1

Children 18 years of age or under

386

18.1

Children over 18 years of age, but still legally dependant (in college, disabled, etc.)

441

20.6

Independent adult children over 18 years of age

237

11.1

Senior family member

114

5.3

Other

0.5

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses

Table B10 Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the U.S. armed forces? (Question 39) Member Status

1999

93.5

Active military

0.5

Reservist

1.3

Veteran

3.2

Missing

1.5

I have not been in the military

160

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B11 Students Only: What is the highest level of education achieved by your primary parent(s)/guardian(s)? (Question 40)

Parent /Legal Guardian 1

Parent/Legal Guardian 2

Level of Education

No high school

2.8

3.0

Completed high school/GED

507

30.7

487

29.5

Some college

241

14.6

234

14.2

Business/Technical certificate/degree

152

9.2

167

10.1

Associate’s degree

153

9.3

146

8.8

Bachelor’s degree

288

17.4

293

17.7

Some graduate work

2.3

1.6

Master’s degree

159

9.6

120

7.3

Doctoral degree

1.5

0.6

Professional degree (MD, MFA, JD)

0.9

0.7

Unknown

0.6

2.4

Not applicable

0.8

1.8

Missing

0.3

2.5

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

161

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B12 Faculty/Staff Only: What is your highest completed level of education? (Question 41) Level of Education

No high school

0.0

Some high school

0.0

Completed high school/GED

1.2

Some college

4.5

Business/Technical certificate/degree

3.7

Associate’s degree

4.5

Bachelor’s degree

15.5

Some graduate work

4.1

Master’s degree

164

33.8

Doctoral degree

138

28.5

Professional degree (e.g. MD, JD, DVM)

2.3

Missing

1.9

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485)

162

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B13 Students Only: Where are you in your college career? (Question 42) College Status

Non-degree

0.1

First year: 0-29.5 credits

312

18.9

Sophomore: 30-59.9 credits

354

21.4

Junior: 60-89.5 credits

336

20.3

Senior: 90 or more credits

387

23.4

Graduate student

260

15.7

0.1

Missing

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

163

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B14 Faculty Only: With which academic or administrative work unit are you primarily affiliated at this time? (Question 43) Work Unit

Academic Development Services

3.8

Applied Engineering and Technology

3.2

Art and Design

2.2

Biological and Environmental Sciences

4.8

Business and Economics

0.5

Chemistry and Physics

2.2

Communication Disorders

0.5

Counselor Education and Services

2.7

Early, Middle and Special Education

6.5

Earth Science

2.7

Educational Administration and Leadership

1.1

English

2.7

Exercise Science and Sport Studies

5.4

Health Science

5.4

History and Political Science

2.7

Justice, Law and Society

3.2

Library Services

1.6

Mathematics, Computer Science & Information Systems

7.0

Modern Languages and Cultures

0.5

Music

2.7

Nursing

1.1

Philosophy

1.1

Professional Studies

1.1

Psychology

3.2

Secondary Ed & Administrative Leadership

3.2

Social Work

4.8

Student Services

1.1

Theater and Dance

2.2

Missing

17.7

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were faculty (n = 186) in Question 1.

164

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B15 Staff Only: With which work unit are you primarily affiliated at this time? (Question 44) Work Unit

Direct Reports

4.7

Vice President for Academic Affairs

31.1

Vice President for Administration and Finance

14.0

Vice President for Student Affairs

25.4

Vice President for University Technology

6.4

Vice President of Marketing and University Relations

4.3

Interim Vice President for University Advancement & Alumni Relations

4.3

Missing

9.7

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were staff in Question 1 (n = 299).

165

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B16 Undergraduate Students Only: What is your academic major? (Question 45) Academic Major

Undeclared/General Education

2.5

Accounting

2.2

Admission Referral

0.0

Anthropology

1.5

Arabic Language and Culture

0.4

Art/Art Studio

1.4

Associate in Nursing with CCAC

0.1

Athletic Training/Sport Management

6.9

Biology

6.7

Business Administration

136

9.8

Chemistry

1.4

Commercial Music Technology/ Pre-Commercial Music Technology

1.8

Communication Disorders

3.5

Communication Studies

3.8

Computer Engineering Technology

0.9

Computer Science Technology

2.5

Computer Engineering Tech/Technical Studies/ Electrical Engineering Tech

0.7

Criminal Justice/Justice Studies

6.6

Drafting Design Technology/ Computer Aided Design Drafting

0.0

Early High school admits

0.0

Elementary Education/Elementary Education Services

3.0

Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Services

3.0

Electrical Engineering Technology

1.2

Elementary Certification/Early Childhood Certification

0.4

English

2.2

Environmental Studies

3.2

Geography/Geology/Earth Science

3.8

General Studies â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Education

0.1

General Studies in Liberal Art

0.1

General Studies in Science and Technology

0.1

Grades 4-8/Spec Education

0.9

Graphic Communications Technology

0.1

166

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B16 cont.

Graphics and Multimedia/Graphic Design

3.8

History

2.2

Industrial Technology

0.6

International Studies

0.6

Liberal Studies

1.8

Mathematics/Computer Science/ Computer Information Systems

1.7

Mentally Handicap/Early Child

0.1

Nursing

2.7

Parks and Recreation Management

0.7

Philosophy

0.6

Political Science

1.5

Pre-College Online Program/Pre-College Honors Portal

0.0

Pre-Education

0.2

PreK-4/Spec Education

2.5

Pre Physical Therapist Assist/Physical Therapist Assistant

0.9

Psychology

6.9

Physics

0.2

Professional or Personal Development

0.1

Science and Technology

1.3

Secondary Education/Secondary Ed Certification

6.0

Social Sciences/Liberal Studies

0.4

Social Sciences/Sociology

0.8

Social Work/Gerontology

2.9

Spanish/Spanish for Business

0.3

Technology Education

0.7

Theatre

0.9

Visiting Students

0.1

60+ CAP

0.0

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were undergraduate students in Question 1 (n = 1386). Note: Students were able to select up to two choices, so there is no “missing”.

167

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B17 Graduate Students Only: What is your academic major/department? (Question 46) Academic Program

Non-Degree

0.4

Advanced Studies in Secondary Education

1.1

Athletic Training/Exercise Science & Health Promo

5.6

Business Administration

9.4

Communication Disorders

3.8

Early Childhood Education/Cert Only

0.8

Early Childhood Education

1.5

Elementary Education/Cert only

0.4

Elementary Education

4.5

K-12 Principle/Cert Only

3.8

Intercollegiate Athletic Administration

0.8

Master of Arts â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Teaching

5.6

Mentally/Physically Handicap

3.0

Nursing Administration and Leadership

1.5

Performance Enhancement and Injury Prevention/ Rehabilitation Science

6.0

Reading/Cert Only

0.0

Reading Specialist

2.3

School Counseling/Cert Only

0.0

School Counseling/PCER

6.4

School Psychology

3.4

School Psychology/CERT Only

0.0

Secondary Guidance Certificate

0.0

Social Science Criminal Justice

2.6

Social Science/Legal Studies

6.4

Social Work/Community & Agency Counseling

13.2

Spanish for Law Enforcement/Spanish for Business

0.4

Sports Counseling/Sport Management

3.4

Sport Psychology

1.5

Superintendent Letter of Eligibility

0.8

Technology Education

1.9

Wellness and Fitness

5.3

Missing

4.5

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were graduate students in Question 1 (n = 266).

168

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B18 Do you have a disability that substantially affects a major life activity? (mark all that apply) (Question 47) Disability

No disability

1808

84.6

ADD/ADHD

3.8

Aspergerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s/High functioning Autism

0.4

Emotional/Psychological

3.3

Hearing

1.1

Learning disabled

1.5

Medical/Health

2.7

Physical/Mobility ambulatory

1.0

Physical/Mobility non-ambulatory

0.7

Visual

0.8

Other

0.6

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses

169

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B19 What is your citizenship status? Mark all that apply. (Question 48) Citizenship Status

2058

96.3

US Citizen â&#x20AC;&#x201C;naturalized

1.2

Dual citizenship

0.3

Permanent Resident (immigrant)

0.7

Permanent Resident (refugee)

0.0

A visa holder (F-1, J-1, H1-B, A, L, or G visas)

0.7

Undocumented resident

0.0

Missing

0.8

US citizen

Table B20 How many years have you lived in the United States? (Question 49) Years in US

Less than a year

0.2

1-5 years

0.9

6-10 years

0.4

11-20 years

716

33.5

21-40 years

928

43.4

More than 40 years

345

16.1

Missing

114

5.3

170

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B21 Is English the language that was/is primarily spoken in your home? (Question 50) English Spoken at Home

Yes

2080

97.3

2.0

Missing

0.7

Table B22 What is your religious or spiritual identity? (Question 52) Spiritual Identity

101

4.7

Atheist

Nondenominational Christian

128

6.0

0.2

Pagan

0.7

103

4.8

Pentecostal

1.3

Assembly of God

1.1

Presbyterian

151

7.1

Baha’i

0.1

Protestant

3.7

Baptist

148

6.9

Quaker

0.2

Buddhist

1.2

Rastafarian

0.3

Christian Orthodox

182

8.5

Roman Catholic

524

24.5

Confucianist

0.1

Russian Orthodox

0.5

Druid

0.3

Scientologist

0.1

Episcopalian

0.7

Seventh Day Adventist

0.2

Evangelical

0.5

Shinto

0.1

Hindu

0.1

Sikh

0.0

Jehovah’s Witness

0.1

Taoist

0.2

Jewish

1.1

United Methodist

127

5.9

Latter Day Saints (Mormon)

0.3

Unitarian Universalist

0.5

Lutheran

4.4

United Church of Christ

0.9

Mennonite

0.3

Wiccan

0.6

Moravian

0.1

Spiritual, but no religious affiliation

145

6.8

Muslim

0.7

No affiliation

228

10.7

Native American Traditional Practitioner or Ceremonial

Other

3.3

0.2

Agnostic AME

Note: Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses

171

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B23 Faculty/Staff only: How long have you been employed by Cal U? (Question 53) Length of employment

Less than a year

1.0

1-5 years

134

27.6

6-10 years

115

23.7

11-15 years

12.8

16-20 years

7.4

21-30 years

15.3

More than 30 years

2.3

Missing

9.9

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were faculty/staff in Question 1 (n = 485)

Table B24 Are you a Cal U alumnus/Alumna? (Question 54) Alumni Status

Yes

317

14.8

1790

83.8

1.4

Missing

172

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B25 Students Only: Are you currently dependent (family/guardian assisting with your living/educational expenses) or independent (you are the sole provider for your living/educational expenses)? (Question 55) Dependency Status

Dependent

1140

69.0

Independent

506

30.6

0.4

Missing

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652)

Table B26 Students Only: What is your best estimate of your familyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s yearly income (if partnered, married, or a dependent student) or your yearly income (if single or an independent student)? (Question 56) Income

Below $29,999

2.6

$30,000-$39,999

374

22.6

$40,000-$59,999

173

10.5

$60,000-79,999

317

19.2

$80,000-$99,999

246

14.9

$100,000-129,999

165

10.0

$130,000- $199,999

4.2

$200,000 -$249,999

1.9

$250,000 or above

1.6

Missing

2.6

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

173

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B27 Students Only: Where do you live? (Question 57) Residence

On-campus residence halls

460

27.8

Off campus - Vulcan Village

193

11.7

Off campus - Within walking distance to campus

349

21.1

Off Campus Commuter

493

29.8

Off campus â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Global online

147

8.9

Missing

0.6

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

Table B28 Students Only: Are you employed either on campus or off-campus? (Question 58 and 59) Employed

748

45.3

Yes

891

53.9

1-10 hours/week

218

24.5

11-20 hours/week

264

29.6

21-30 hours/week

176

19.8

31-40 hours/week

168

18.9

More than 40 hours/week

6.2

Missing

1.3

0.8

Missing

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652)

174

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B29 Students Only: How are you currently paying for college? (Question 60) Payment for college

Academics scholarship

302

18.3

Athletics scholarship

2.8

Credit card

113

6.8

Family contribution

564

34.1

Loans

1263

76.5

Need-based institutional grant

221

13.4

Pell grant

516

31.2

Personal contribution/job

373

22.6

Tuition remission through Cal U employee

2.2

Other

127

7.7

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

175

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B30 Students Only: Do you participate in any of the following types of clubs/organizations at Cal U? (Mark all that apply) (Question 61) Clubs/Organizations

I do not participate in any student organizations

600

36.3

Student Leadership Groups

203

12.3

Academic/Professional Organizations

380

23.0

Special Interest Organizations

152

9.2

Campus Community Groups

136

8.2

Political Groups

1.8

Religious Organizations

115

7.0

Service Organizations

5.1

Social Fraternities or Sororities

183

11.1

Publications and Media Organizations

1.9

Intramurals/Clubs Sports

179

10.8

Music/Performance Organizations

140

8.5

NCAA Varsity Athletics

3.9

Honor Societies

234

14.2

Residence Hall Organizations

3.0

Other

133

8.1

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652). Percentages may not sum to 100% due to multiple responses.

176

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B31 Students Only: On average, how many hours a week during the academic year do you spend on experiential learning activities? (Question 62) Average Hours per Week

None

428

25.9

1-5 hours

418

25.3

6-10 hours

308

18.6

11-20 hours

167

10.1

More than 20 hours

102

6.2

Missing

229

13.9

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

Table B32 Students Only: If you are a current student, how many total years will you spend at CALU to complete your degree? (Question 63) Years till completion

1 year

5.6

2 years

264

16.0

3 years

182

11.0

4 years

823

49.8

5 years

213

12.9

6 years

3.1

7 years

0.6

8 years

0.2

9 years

0.2

More than 9 years

0.2

Missing

0.5

Note: Table includes only those who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

177

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

PART II: Findings **The tables in this section all contain valid percentages except where noted**

Table B33 Overall, how comfortable are you with the climate at CALU? (Question 4) Comfort

Very comfortable

601

28.2

Comfortable

1123

52.6

Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable

260

12.2

Uncomfortable

120

5.6

Very uncomfortable

1.4

Table B34 Overall, how comfortable are you with the climate in your department/work unit? (Question 5) Comfort

Very comfortable

790

37.2

Comfortable

869

40.9

Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable

222

10.4

Uncomfortable

2.3

Very uncomfortable

4.0

178

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B35 Students/Faculty only: Overall, how comfortable are you with the climate in your classes? (Question 6) Comfort

Very comfortable

612

33.4

Comfortable

944

51.4

Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable

180

9.8

Uncomfortable

3.1

Very uncomfortable

0.9

Not applicable

1.4

Note: Table includes answers from only those who indicated they were students, post-docs, graduate students or faculty in Question 1 (n = 1838).

Table B36 Have you ever seriously considered leaving Cal U because of the climate? (Question 7) Considered Leaving

Yes

392

18.4

1739

81.6

179

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B37 When did you consider leaving? (Question 8) When leaving

During my first year as a student

128

32.7

During my second year as a student

101

25.8

During my third year as a student

13.0

During my fourth year as a student

4.6

Faculty

13.8

Staff

114

29.1

Note: Table includes answers from only those who indicated they considered leaving in Question 7 (n = 392).

180

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B38 Within the past year, have you personally experienced any exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored) intimidating, offensive, and/or hostile conduct (bullying, harassing behavior) that has interfered with your ability to work or learn at Cal U? (Question 10) Experienced

Yes

328

15.4

1803

84.6

181

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B39 What do you believe the conduct was based upon? (Question 11) Based On:

My gender

26.8

My position (staff, faculty, student)

25.3

My age

23.2

My educational level

14.0

My political views

10.7

My race

10.4

My philosophical views

10.1

My discipline of study

9.8

My ethnicity

8.2

My participation in an organization/team

8.2

My religious/spiritual views

8.2

My physical characteristics

7.9

My medical condition

5.5

My sexual orientation

5.5

My educational modality (on-line, classroom)

4.6

My socioeconomic status

4.3

My learning disability

2.7

My country of origin

2.1

My psychological disorder

2.1

My physical disability

2.1

My care giving status

1.8

My English language proficiency/accent

1.5

My gender expression

1.5

My developmental disorder

0.9

My military/veteran status

0.9

My immigrant status

0.3

Other

26.8

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 328).

182

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B40 How did you experience this conduct? (Question 12) Form

I felt intimidated/bullied

160

48.8

I felt I was deliberately ignored or excluded

141

43.0

I felt isolated or left out

114

34.8

I was the target of derogatory verbal remarks

19.8

I felt isolated or left out when work was required in groups

17.7

I observed others staring at me

15.5

I feared getting a poor grade because of a hostile classroom environment

14.3

I feared for my physical safety

12.8

I received a low performance evaluation

10.1

I received derogatory written comments

9.8

I was the victim of derogatory/unsolicited emails, text messages, Facebook posts, Twitter posts

6.4

I received derogatory phone calls

5.5

I received threats of physical violence

5.2

Someone assumed I was admitted/hired/promoted due to my identity

3.7

I was the target of racial/ethnic profiling

2.7

I was the target of stalking

2.7

I was the victim of a crime

2.1

I was the target of graffiti/vandalism

1.8

I was the target of physical violence

1.8

I feared for my family’s safety

1.5

Someone assumed I was not admitted/hired/promoted due to my identity

1.2

I was singled out as the “resident authority” due to my identity

0.3

Other

18.0

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

183

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B41 Where did this conduct occur? (Question 13) Location

In a classroom

23.8

While working at a campus job

22.3

In a meeting with a group of people

20.4

In a campus office

18.9

In a public space on campus

18.3

At a campus event

12.2

In a faculty office

11.0

In a meeting with one other person

10.4

Off campus

10.1

While walking on campus

9.1

In campus housing

8.5

On a social networking sites/Facebook/Twitter/cell phone/other form of technological communication

8.5

In a campus dining facility

6.4

In an on-line class

4.0

In athletic facilities

4.0

Vulcan village

3.4

In off-campus housing

3.0

Off campus Cal U sponsored event

0.9

Other

9.1

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

184

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B42 Who/what was the source of this conduct? (Question 14) Source

Student

105

32.0

Faculty member

29.3

Administrator

16.8

Co-worker

13.1

Staff member

12.5

Supervisor

10.4

Department head

10.1

Friend

7.6

Stranger

7.6

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know source

4.0

Campus visitors

3.0

Teaching asst./Grad asst./Lab asst./Tutor

3.0

Social Networking site (e.g.. Facebook, Twitter)

2.7

Borough police

2.1

Person that I supervise

2.1

Faculty advisor

1.8

Alumni

1.5

Off campus community member

1.5

Athletic coach/trainer

1.2

Public Safety/University Police

0.9

Board member

0.6

Campus media

0.6

Community assistant

0.0

Donor

0.0

Partner/spouse

0.0

Other

10.4

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

185

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B43 Please describe your reactions to experiencing this conduct? (Question 15) Reactions

I was angry

156

47.6

I told a friend

124

37.8

I told a family member

115

35.1

I felt embarrassed

29.9

I did nothing

29.0

I ignored it

27.4

I avoided the harasser

24.1

I was afraid

19.8

I sought support from a faculty member

17.1

I confronted the harasser at the time

13.4

I didn’t report it for fear that my complaint would not be taken seriously

13.1

I sought support from an administrator

12.2

I sought support from a staff person

11.9

I sought support from campus resource

11.0

I left the situation immediately

10.7

I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official

10.7

I didn’t know who to go to

10.4

I felt somehow responsible

10.1

I did report it but I did not feel the complaint was taken seriously

9.5

I confronted the harasser later

8.8

I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g. pastor, rabbi, priest)

5.2

I sought information on-line

4.02.7

I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services

3.0

I sought support from student staff (e.g. peer counselor)

2.7

It didn’t affect me at the time

1.8

I contacted a local law enforcement official

1.8

Other

11.9

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 328). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

186

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B44 Have you ever been a victim of sexual assault while at Cal U? (Question 17) Victim of Sexual Assault

Yes

3.6

2045

96.4

0.7

Missing

187

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B45 Who did this to you? (Question 18) Source

Student

53.2

Friend

23.4

Stranger

15.6

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know source

6.5

Campus visitors

3.9

Co-worker

3.9

Off campus community member

2.6

Department head

2.6

Faculty member

2.6

Supervisor

2.6

Administrator

1.3

Alumni

1.3

Athletic coach/trainer

1.3

Campus media

1.3

Staff member

1.3

Board member

0.0

Borough police

0.0

Community assistant

0.0

Counselor

0.0

Donor

0.0

Faculty advisor

0.0

Maintenance Staff

0.0

Partner/spouse

0.0

Person that I supervise

0.0

Public Safety/University Police

0.0

Teaching asst./Grad asst./Lab asst./Tutor

0.0

Other

2.6

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced sexual assault (n = 77). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

188

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B46 Where did this incident occur? (Question 19) Location of Sexual Assault

Off-campus

55.3

On-campus

44.7

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced sexual assault (n = 77).

Table B47 Please describe your response to experiencing the incident(s)? (Question 20) Reactions

I told a friend

62.3

I felt embarrassed

46.8

I was angry

40.3

I left the situation immediately

32.5

I felt somehow responsible

29.9

I ignored it

27.3

I was afraid

27.3

I did nothing

22.1

I sought support from campus resource

10.4

I told a family member

10.4

It didn’t affect me at the time

7.8

I didn’t know who to go to

7.8

I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official

6.5

I sought support from an administrator

5.2

I sought information on-line

5.2

I sought support from a staff person

3.9

I contacted a local law enforcement official

2.6

I sought support from a faculty member

2.6

I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g. pastor, rabbi, priest)

1.3

I sought support from student staff (e.g. peer counselor)

1.3

I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services

0.0

Other

10.4

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced sexual assault (n = 77). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

189

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B48 Staff/Faculty Only: Please respond to the following statements. (Question 23) Strongly Agree n %

Agree n %

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Not Applicable n %

I am reluctant to bring up issues that concern me for fear that it will affect my performance evaluation or tenure/merit/promotion decision

13.7

17.0

13.1

114

23.7

135

28.1

4.4

I am comfortable asking questions about performance expectations.

154

32.4

199

41.9

12.2

7.6

5.3

0.6

My colleagues/co-workers expect me to represent “the point of view” of my identity

6.8

14.8

175

36.9

15.6

15.8

10.1

My colleagues/co-workers treat me with less respect than other faculty/staff.

6.7

10.2

13.3

132

27.5

197

41.0

1.3

I constantly feel under scrutiny by my colleagues due to my identity

2.3

4.8

14.3

131

27.6

226

47.6

3.4

I am reluctant to take leave that I am entitled to for fear that it may affect my job/career

6.3

10.9

10.0

112

23.4

213

44.6

4.8

I have to work harder than I believe my colleagues/co-workers do in order to be perceived as legitimate

10.5

16.1

15.3

109

22.8

161

33.7

1.7

I have to work harder than I believe my colleagues/co-workers do to achieve the same recognition

12.6

17.6

14.9

104

21.8

152

31.9

1.3

There are many unwritten rules concerning how one is expected to interact with colleagues in my work unit

9.6

18.9

19.1

102

21.4

139

29.1

1.9

My colleagues have higher expectations of me than other faculty/staff

5.3

14.8

110

23.3

124

26.2

132

27.9

2.5

I believe salary determinations are fair

11.9

117

24.5

20.8

100

21.0

19.1

2.7

I believe salary determinations are clear

13.0

142

29.8

101

21.2

18.7

15.3

1.9

I think the university understands the value of a diverse faculty

101

21.1

217

45.4

18.6

5.4

4.0

100

20.9

6.5

7.7

0.4

98 20.5 210 43.9 I think the university understands the value of a diverse staff Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

190

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B49 Faculty Only: As a faculty memberâ&#x20AC;Ś (Question 25) Strongly Agree n %

Agree n %

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Not Applicable n %

I feel pressured to change my methods of teaching to achieve tenure/be promoted.

7.2

16.0

13.8

24.9

20.4

17.7

I feel that my teaching expectations and research requirements are similar to that of my colleagues in other divisions.

11.2

40.8

11.2

18.4

8.4

10.1

My research interests are valued by my colleagues.

13.8

35.4

20.4

14.9

5.0

10.5

I feel pressured to change my research agenda to achieve tenure.

0.6

5.6

16.7

28.3

18.3

30.6

I feel pressured to change my research agenda to be promoted.

6.7

12.2

13.9

26.1

18.3

22.8

I believe that the tenure process is clear.

18.7

39.0

12.6

11.0

3.8

14.8

I believe that the promotion process is clear.

15.4

31.9

17.0

16.5

8.2

11.0

I believe that the tenure standards are reasonable.

18.7

41.2

16.5

4.4

6.0

13.2

I believe that the promotion standards are reasonable.

14.4

30.9

23.8

11.6

8.8

10.5

I feel that I am burdened by service responsibilities (e.g., committee memberships, departmental work assignments) beyond those of my colleagues.

11.0

18.8

21.0

22.1

17.1

9.9

I feel that my service contributions are important to tenure.

23.3

39.4

10.6

1.1

1.7

23.9

I feel that my service contributions are important to promotion. 45 25.1 74 41.3 Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty in Question 1 (n = 186).

12.3

2.2

1.7

17.3

191

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B50 Staff/Faculty Only: As a faculty/staff memberâ&#x20AC;Ś (Question 27) Strongly Agree n %

Agree n %

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Not Applicable n %

I often have to forgo professional activities because of personal responsibilities

2.7

12.4

19.3

172

36.1

121

25.4

4.2

I find that personal responsibilities and commitments have slowed down my job/career progression

4.0

10.1

18.1

175

36.8

136

28.6

2.5

I find that Cal U is supportive of taking leave.

16.8

153

32.1

134

28.2

9.5

4.6

8.8

I have to miss out on important things in my personal life because of professional responsibilities

7.6

19.3

18.3

159

33.4

19.7

1.7

I feel that staff who have children are considered by Cal U to be less committed to their jobs/careers

3.2

6.1

123

25.9

151

31.8

121

25.5

7.6

I feel that staff who do not have children are often burdened with work responsibilities (e.g., stay late, off-hour work, work weekends) beyond those who do have children

5.9

7.4

115

24.2

149

31.4

115

24.2

6.9

I feel that faculty who have children are considered by Cal U to be less committed to the jobs/careers.

2.1

4.4

114

23.9

117

24.5

110

23.1

105

22.0

I feel that faculty who do not have children are often burdened with work responsibilities (e.g., stay late, off-hour work, work weekends) beyond those who do have children

3.4

4.8

113

23.7

111

23.3

20.4

116

24.4

I find it difficult to balance childcare with my work responsibilities

2.1

7.0

16.0

18.4

13.7

203

42.8

I find it difficult to balance eldercare with my work responsibilities

2.3

7.4

16.2

12.7

11.4

237

50.0

I feel that my colleagues do not balance their child care responsibilities with their professional responsibilities

2.3

8.2

147

30.9

123

25.8

101

21.2

11.6

151

31.9

20.3

20.7

109

23.0

I feel that my colleagues do not balance their eldercare 5 1.1 14 3.0 responsibilities with their professional responsibilities Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

192

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B51 Staff/Faculty Only: Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about the resources that are available to you: (Question 29) Strongly Agree n %

Agree n %

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Not Applicable n %

I have supervisors/colleagues/co-workers who give me job/career advice guidance when I need it.

119

24.8

204

42.5

15.0

6.5

8.3

1.0

1.9

I have support from supervisors/colleagues/co-workers regarding my job/career advancement.

103

21.5

199

41.5

15.6

9.0

10.0

0.8

1.7

I have the equipment and supplies I need to adequately perform my work.

18.3

203

42.6

9.5

16.8

12.8

0.0

I believe that Cal U treats salaried and hourly staff 65 13.7 167 35.1 91 19.1 within my respective job classification equitably. Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

12.0

12.2

2.5

5.5

193

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B52 Staff/Faculty Only: As a faculty/staff member, how satisfied are you with… (Question 31) Highly Satisfied n %

Satisfied n %

Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied n %

Dissatisfied n %

Highly Dissatisfied n %

Don’t Know n %

Not Applicable n %

Your compensation as compared to that of other Cal U colleagues/co-workers with a similar level of experience

11.3

167

35.1

16.0

17.6

12.8

5.5

1.7

Your access to health benefits

128

26.7

256

53.4

9.2

2.7

1.7

0.6

5.6

Your job/career at Cal U

107

22.5

232

48.7

14.5

8.2

5.0

0.4

0.6

The way your job/career has progressed at Cal U

19.0

192

40.5

16.9

13.5

8.4

0.4

1.3

The size and quality of your work space as compared to your departmental colleagues’/co-workers’ work space

116

24.4

207

43.6

11.2

11.8

6.3

0.4

2.3

Your access to research support as compared to your colleagues’/co-workers’ access to research support

11.8

162

34.0

17.9

7.4

5.3

1.1

108

22.7

86 18.1 175 36.9 57 Your access to partner benefits Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

12.0

3.4

1.9

1.3

125

26.4

194

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B53 Within the past year, have you observed any conduct or communications directed towards a person or group of people at UCSD that you believe created an exclusionary, intimidating, offensive and/or hostile (bullied, harassing) working or learning environment? (Question 64) Observed Conduct or Communications

Yes

458

21.6

1661

78.4

195

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B54 Who/what were the targets of this conduct? (Question 65) Target(s)

Student

275

60.0

Friend

14.6

Faculty member

13.3

Stranger

12.4

Co-worker

11.1

Staff member

10.5

Administrator

6.3

Social networking site

5.9

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know target

5.2

Supervisor

2.4

Athletic coach/trainer

2.0

Campus visitor(s)

2.0

Department head

2.0

Borough police

1.7

Partner/spouse

1.7

Teaching assistant/Writing associate/Lab assistant/Tutor

1.7

Person that I supervise

1.5

Faculty advisor

1.3

Public safety/University Police

1.1

Alumni

0.9

Community assistant

0.9

Off campus community member

0.9

Community assistant

0.9

Board member

0.7

Donor

0.4

Other

6.1

Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

196

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B55 Who/what was the source of this conduct? (Question 66) Source

Student

198

43.2

Faculty member

16.2

Stranger

14.0

Administrator

12.0

Staff member

9.2

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know source

8.3

Co-worker

7.4

Supervisor

5.9

Borough police

5.2

Friend

5.2

Social networking site

5.2

Department head

4.6

Campus visitor(s)

3.9

Off campus community member

3.3

Public safety/University Police

3.3

Athletic coach/trainer

2.2

Alumni

1.5

Faculty advisor

1.3

Community assistant

0.9

Person that I supervise

0.9

Teaching assistant/Writing associate/Lab assistant/Tutor

0.9

Board member

0.7

Partner/spouse

0.7

Donor

0.4

Other

6.3

Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

197

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B56 What do you believe was the basis for this conduct? (Question 67) Based On

Sexual orientation

21.4

Gender

20.7

Position (staff, faculty, student)

19.4

Race

17.2

Age

15.9

Religious/spiritual views

15.5

Gender expression

14.0

Ethnicity

12.9

Physical characteristics

11.1

Philosophical views

9.2

Political views

8.7

Learning disability

6.3

Physical disability

6.3

Educational level

6.1

Socioeconomic status

5.7

Participation in an organization/team

5.5

Discipline of study

5.2

Medical condition

5.0

Country of origin

4.8

Developmental disorder

4.1

Psychological disorder

3.1

Immigrant/citizen status

1.7

Educational modality (online, classroom)

1.5

Military/veteran status

1.5

English language proficiency/accent

1.3

Caregiving status

0.9

Other

17.7

Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

198

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B57 What forms of behaviors have you observed or personally been made aware of? (Question 68) Form

Derogatory remarks

231

50.4

Intimidated/bullied

163

35.6

Deliberately ignored or excluded

148

32.3

Isolated or left out

125

27.3

Isolated or left out when work was required in groups

18.1

Racial/ethnic profiling

17.5

Assumption that someone was admitted/hired/promoted based on his/her identity

16.6

Derogatory/unsolicited e-mails, text messages, Facebook posts, Twitter posts

12.2

Derogatory written comments

11.4

Threats of physical violence

10.7

Assumption that someone was not admitted/hired/promoted based on his/her identity

9.4

Receipt of a low performance evaluation

7.9

Stalking

7.4

Receipt of a poor grade

7.2

Graffiti/vandalism

5.0

Physical violence

4.8

Derogatory phone calls

4.4

Singled out as the “resident authority”

4.4

Victim of a crime

4.4

Other

5.2

Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

199

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B58 Where did this conduct occur? (Question 69) Location

In a public space on campus

129

28.2

In a classroom

100

21.8

Off campus

18.6

At a campus event

16.4

While walking on campus

14.4

In a meeting with a group of people

12.2

In a campus office

11.1

While working at a campus job

11.1

In campus housing

9.8

In a faculty office

6.8

In a meeting with one other person

6.8

On a social networking sites/Facebook/Twitter/cell phone/other form of technological communication

6.6

In a campus dining facility

5.7

In off campus housing

5.5

Vulcan village

4.1

In athletic facilities

2.4

In an on-line class

1.5

Off campus Cal U sponsored event

1.5

Other

6.3

Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

200

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B59 Please describe your reactions to observing this conduct? (Question 70) Reactions

I was angry

180

39.3

I told a friend

110

24.0

I did nothing

19.7

I told a family member

18.6

I felt embarrassed

15.7

I confronted the harasser at the time

12.7

I ignored it

11.4

I was afraid

10.3

I left the situation immediately

9.8

I didn’t know who to go to

9.0

I confronted the harasser later

8.5

It didn’t affect me at the time

7.6

I didn’t report it for fear that my complaint would not be taken seriously

7.0

I sought support from a staff person

6.6

I sought support from a faculty member

6.6

I sought support from an administrator

6.3

I sought support from campus resource

5.2

I did report it but I did not feel the complaint was taken seriously

4.8

I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official

3.5

I contacted a local law enforcement official

2.2

I sought support from student staff (e.g. peer counselor)

2.2

I sought information on-line

2.2

I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g. pastor, rabbi, priest)

1.3

I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services

1.1

Other

7.9

Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 458). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

201

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B60 Faculty/Staff Only: I have perceived unfair and unjust hiring practices at Cal U. (Question 72) Perceived Unfair/Unjust Hiring

236

49.6

Yes

147

30.9

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know

19.5

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

202

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B61 Staff/Faculty only: I believe that the unfair and unjust hiring practices were based upon: (Question 73) Based On

Position (staff, faculty, student)

28.6

Gender

17.0

Race

16.3

Age

12.2

Ethnicity

11.6

Educational level

8.2

Philosophical views

6.1

Physical characteristics

5.4

Political views

4.8

Sexual orientation

3.4

Caregiving status

2.7

Military/veteran status

2.7

Country of origin

2.0

Gender expression

2.0

Religious/spiritual views

2.0

Participation in an organization

1.4

Physical disability

1.4

Educational modality (online, classroom)

0.7

English language proficiency/accent

0.7

Immigrant status

0.7

Developmental disorder

0.0

Discipline of study

0.0

Learning disability

0.0

Medical condition

0.0

Psychological disorder

0.0

Socioeconomic status

1.4

Other

45.6

Note: Only answered by employees who perceived discriminatory practices (n = 147). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

203

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B62 Faculty/Staff only: I have perceived unfair or unjust employment-related discipline or action up to and including dismissal at Cal U. (Question 75) Perceived Unfair/Unjust Disciplinary Actions

286

60.2

Yes

16.8

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know

109

22.9

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

204

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B63 Faculty/Staff Only: I believe that the unfair or unjust, employment-related disciplinary actions were based upon: (Question 76) Based On

Position (staff, faculty, student)

21.3

Gender

18.8

Age

17.5

Philosophical views

16.3

Political views

8.8

Race

8.8

Medical condition

6.3

Caregiving status

3.8

Educational level

3.8

Ethnicity

3.8

Religious/spiritual views

3.8

Gender expression

2.5

Military/veteran status

2.5

Participation in an organization

2.5

Psychological disorder

2.5

Physical characteristics

2.5

Sexual orientation

2.5

Discipline of study

1.3

Educational modality (online, classroom)

1.3

Immigrant status

1.3

Country of origin

0.0

Developmental disorder

0.0

English language proficiency/accent

0.0

Learning disability

0.0

Physical disability

0.0

Socioeconomic status

0.0

Other

40.0

Note: Only answered by employees who perceived discriminatory practices (n = 80). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

205

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B64 Faculty/Staff only: I have perceived unfair or unjust behavior, procedures, or employment practices related to promotion/tenure/reappointment/reclassification practices at Cal U. (Question 78) Perceived Unfair/ Unjust Promotion

216

45.6

Yes

149

31.4

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t know

109

23.0

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

206

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B65 Faculty/Staff Only: I believe that the unfair or unjust behavior, procedures, or employment practices related to promotion/tenure/reappointment/reclassification were based upon: (Question 79) Based On

Position (staff, faculty, student)

35.6

Gender

16.8

Age

10.1

Philosophical views

10.1

Race

9.4

Educational level

7.4

Discipline of study

6.7

Political views

6.7

Ethnicity

6.0

Physical characteristics

4.0

Educational modality (online, classroom)

3.4

Caregiving status

2.7

Religious/spiritual views

2.0

Immigrant status

1.3

Participation in an organization

1.3

Gender expression

0.7

Military/veteran status

0.7

Physical disability

0.7

Sexual orientation

0.7

Socioeconomic status

0.7

Country of origin

0.0

Developmental disorder

0.0

English language proficiency/accent

0.0

Learning disability

0.0

Medical condition

0.0

Psychological disorder

0.0

Other

40.9

Note: Only answered by employees who observed discriminatory practices (n = 149). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

207

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B66 Using a scale of 1-5, please rate the overall climate on campus on the following dimensions: (Question 81) 1

Standard Deviation n

Mean n

Friendly/Hostile

875

41.6

805

38.3

345

16.4

3.1

0.6

1.8

0.9

Cooperative/Uncooperative

692

33.0

821

39.1

405

19.3

143

6.8

1.8

2.1

1.0

Improving/Regressing

655

31.3

717

34.3

526

25.2

144

6.9

2.3

2.1

1.0

Positive for persons with disabilities/Negative

813

39.1

733

35.2

428

20.6

3.8

1.3

1.9

0.9

Positive for people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual/Negative

611

29.3

677

32.5

669

32.1

100

4.8

1.2

2.2

0.9

Positive for people of Jewish heritage/Negative

602

29.1

507

24.5

886

42.8

2.9

0.7

2.2

0.9

Positive for people of Islamic faith/Negative

560

27.0

482

23.3

916

44.2

4.2

1.4

2.3

1.0

Positive for people of Christian faith/Negative

874

42.2

614

29.6

528

25.5

2.2

0.5

1.9

0.9

Positive for people of other faith backgrounds faith/Negative

633

30.7

535

25.9

806

39.1

3.4

0.9

2.2

0.9

Positive for people of color/Negative

926

44.6

639

30.8

426

20.5

3.0

1.2

1.9

0.9

Positive for men/Negative

990

47.8

630

30.4

402

19.4

1.9

0.6

1.8

0.9

Positive for women/Negative

931

44.8

662

31.9

396

19.1

3.6

0.7

1.8

0.9

Positive for non-native English speakers/Negative

583

28.2

552

26.7

785

37.9

115

5.6

1.7

2.3

1.0

Positive for people who are immigrants/Negative

588

28.5

542

26.3

812

39.4

4.8

1.0

2.2

1.0

Dimension

208

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B66 (cont.)

Mean

Standard Deviation

Positive for people who are not U.S. Citizens/Negative

637

31.0

542

26.3

774

37.6

4.3

0.8

2.2

0.9

Welcoming/Not welcoming

928

44.4

776

37.1

258

12.4

101

4.8

1.2

1.8

0.9

Respectful/disrespectful

816

39.0

753

36.0

351

16.8

132

6.3

1.9

2.0

1.0

Positive for people who are caring for children/Negative

717

34.6

670

32.3

587

28.3

3.8

1.0

2.0

0.9

Positive for people who are caring for relatives/Negative

691

33.5

618

30.0

662

32.1

3.7

0.7

2.1

0.9

Positive for people of high socioeconomic status/Negative

791

38.3

623

30.2

593

28.7

2.3

0.5

2.0

0.9

Positive for people of low socioeconomic status/Negative

630

30.6

599

29.1

646

31.4

136

6.6

2.3

2.2

1.0

Positive for veterans/active military/Negative

947

45.7

620

30.0

453

21.9

1.8

0.6

1.8

0.9

209

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B67 Using a scale of 1-5, please rate the overall climate on campus on the following dimensions: (Question 82) 1

Standard Deviation n

Mean n

Not racist/racist

809

38.6

661

31.6

445

21.2

140

6.7

1.9

2.0

1.0

Not sexist/sexist

801

38.3

685

32.8

431

20.6

135

6.5

1.8

2.0

1.0

Not homophobic/homophobic

733

35.2

632

30.4

523

25.1

154

7.4

1.8

2.1

1.0

Not age biased/age biased

819

39.4

639

30.7

440

21.2

147

7.1

1.6

2.0

1.0

Not classist (socioeconomic status)/classist

780

37.7

599

29.0

507

24.5

147

7.1

1.7

2.1

1.0

Not classist (position: faculty, staff, student)/ classist

751

36.2

585

28.2

478

23.1

204

9.8

2.6

2.1

1.1

Ablest/Not ablest

819

39.7

601

29.1

549

26.6

3.1

1.5

2.0

1.0

Dimension

210

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B68 Students/Faculty Only: The classroom climate is welcoming for students based on their: (Question 83) Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Characteristic

Strongly Agree n %

Age

724

40.2

757

42.1

212

11.8

3.1

1.0

1.8

Commuter status

659

36.8

693

38.7

265

14.8

4.2

2.2

3.3

Country of origin

644

36.2

678

38.1

343

19.3

1.7

0.5

4.3

English language proficiency/ accent

627

35.2

679

38.1

336

18.9

3.3

0.4

4.0

Ethnicity

690

38.6

711

39.8

273

15.3

2.6

0.7

3.1

Gender

766

42.8

688

38.5

243

13.6

2.2

0.4

2.5

Gender expression

624

35.0

612

34.4

368

20.7

3.9

1.7

4.3

Immigrant status

607

34.1

594

33.3

421

23.6

2.5

0.3

110

6.2

Learning disability

713

39.9

632

35.4

288

16.1

2.7

0.8

4.9

Medical conditions

683

38.3

656

36.8

293

16.5

2.6

1.1

4.7

Military/veteran status

813

45.5

607

34.0

261

14.6

0.9

0.6

4.4

Caregiver status

610

34.0

684

38.1

342

19.1

3.3

1.1

4.4

Participation in a student organization

767

43.1

645

36.3

259

14.6

1.6

0.9

3.5

Participation in an athletic team

835

46.9

571

32.0

263

14.8

1.6

0.4

4.3

Psychological disorder

571

32.2

570

32.1

430

24.2

3.6

0.8

125

7.0

Physical characteristics

638

35.9

628

35.3

361

20.3

3.3

1.1

4.0

Physical disability

669

37.6

645

36.2

326

18.3

2.9

1.0

4.0

Political views

596

33.4

604

33.9

401

22.5

4.1

1.6

4.5

Race

697

39.1

650

36.5

321

18.0

2.6

1.1

2.7

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

211

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree n %

Table B68 (cont.)

Strongly Agree n %

Religious/spiritual views

644

36.2

626

35.2

359

20.2

3.2

1.5

3.7

Sexual orientation

623

35.0

630

35.4

356

20.0

4.2

1.1

4.3

Socioeconomic status

637

35.8

642

36.0

363

20.4

2.8

1.4

3.6

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or students in Question 1 (n = 1838).

212

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B69 Students Only: The climate for students is enhanced through their participation in the following organizations. (mark all that apply) (Question 84) Organizations

I do not participate in any student organizations

589

35.7

Student Leadership Groups

363

22.0

Academic/Professional Organizations

435

26.3

Special Interest Organizations

287

17.4

Campus Community Groups

247

15.0

Political Groups

136

8.2

Religious Organizations

227

13.7

Service Organizations

197

11.9

Social Fraternities or Sororities

279

16.9

Publications and Media Organizations

129

7.8

Intramurals/Clubs Sports

290

17.6

Music/Performance Organizations

244

14.8

NCAA Varsity Athletics

193

11.7

Honor Societies

311

18.8

Residence Hall Organizations

175

10.6

Other

4.3

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

213

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B70 Students Only: Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements: (Question 85) Strongly Agree n %

Agree n

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree

Disagree n

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

I feel valued by faculty in the classroom

563

34.6

716

44.0

242

14.9

4.7

1.4

0.6

I feel valued by other students in the classroom

431

26.6

652

40.2

404

24.9

5.4

1.9

1.0

I think Cal U faculty are genuinely concerned with my welfare

275

17.0

545

33.6

626

38.6

118

7.3

3.0

0.4

I think Cal U staff are genuinely concerned with my welfare

127

7.8

503

31.1

571

35.3

3.2

1.0

I think Cal U administrators are genuinely concerned about my welfare.

413

25.5

510

31.5

10.1

116

7.2

1.3

I think faculty pre-judge my abilities based on perceived identity/background

253

15.6

327

20.2

324

20.0

203

12.5

3.5

I believe the campus climate encourages free and open discussion of difficult topics

465

28.8

609

37.7

100

6.2

3.0

2.1

I have faculty who I perceive as role models

644

39.6

562

34.6

284

17.5

5.1

1.8

1.5

I have staff who I perceive as role models

483

30.0

469

29.1

455

28.2

115

7.1

2.3

3.3

350 396 457 361

21.6 24.5

163

28.2 22.3

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

214

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B71 Student/Faculty Only: I perceive tension in the classroom discussions with regard to a person’s: (Question 86) Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Characteristic

Strongly Agree n %

Age

119

6.7

219

12.4

422

23.9

521

29.5

407

23.0

4.5

Commuter status

100

5.7

146

8.3

449

25.5

552

31.4

420

23.9

5.3

Country of origin

4.9

163

9.3

468

26.7

524

29.9

406

23.2

106

6.1

English language proficiency/ accent

5.5

215

12.2

458

26.0

510

29.0

373

21.2

107

6.1

Ethnicity

103

5.9

213

12.1

443

25.2

505

28.7

401

22.8

5.3

Gender

105

6.0

189

10.7

444

25.2

512

29.1

426

24.2

4.9

Gender expression

121

6.9

251

14.3

456

25.9

457

26.0

368

20.9

108

6.1

Immigrant status

5.3

164

9.3

477

27.1

508

28.9

394

22.4

122

6.9

Learning disability

5.5

187

10.6

463

26.3

497

28.3

409

23.3

105

6.0

Medical conditions

5.3

149

8.5

467

26.5

512

29.1

426

24.2

111

6.3

Military/veteran status

5.1

123

7.0

441

25.1

519

29.5

480

27.3

104

5.9

Caregiver status

5.0

184

10.4

453

25.7

535

30.3

400

22.7

103

5.8

Participation in a student organization

5.5

148

8.4

457

26.0

508

28.9

443

25.2

104

5.9

Participation on an athletic team

109

6.2

163

9.3

436

24.9

499

28.4

434

24.7

113

6.4

Psychological disorder

5.4

172

9.8

488

27.8

475

27.1

386

22.0

140

8.0

Physical characteristics

5.6

179

10.2

476

27.1

505

28.7

396

22.5

102

5.8

Physical disability

5.3

172

9.8

470

26.8

497

28.3

417

23.8

105

6.0

Political views

140

8.0

262

14.9

458

26.1

434

24.7

371

21.1

5.2

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Don’t Know n %

215

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Disagree

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Table B71 (cont.)

Strongly Agree n %

Race

117

6.7

211

12.1

450

25.7

475

27.2

408

23.3

5.0

Religious/spiritual views

130

7.4

246

14.0

450

25.6

446

25.4

391

22.3

5.3

Sexual orientation

126

7.2

257

14.6

450

25.6

451

25.7

370

21.1

103

5.9

Socioeconomic status

102

5.8

185

10.6

478

27.3

482

27.5

407

23.2

5.5

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were students or faculty in Question 1 (n = 1838).

216

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Table B72 Students Only: I perceive tension in the residence hall discussions with regard to a person’s: (Question 87) Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Characteristic

Strongly Agree n %

Caregiving status

4.6

103

6.6

369

23.7

268

17.2

224

14.4

523

33.6

Country of origin

4.8

106

6.8

355

22.9

285

18.4

224

14.4

507

32.7

English language proficiency/ accent

4.8

125

8.1

356

23.0

276

17.8

213

13.8

505

32.6

Ethnicity

5.0

139

9.0

342

22.1

277

17.9

216

13.9

499

32.2

Gender

5.0

130

8.4

347

22.4

271

17.5

227

14.7

496

32.0

Gender expression

5.9

167

10.8

348

22.4

248

16.0

197

12.7

501

32.3

Immigrant status

4.6

111

7.2

366

23.6

268

17.3

218

14.1

516

33.3

Learning disability

4.8

111

7.1

368

23.7

269

17.3

222

14.3

508

32.7

Medical conditions

4.9

116

7.5

361

23.2

273

17.6

226

14.6

501

32.3

Military/veteran status

4.7

5.2

353

22.7

285

18.4

250

16.1

511

32.9

Participation in a student organization

4.8

102

6.6

349

22.5

281

18.1

245

15.8

501

32.3

Participation on an athletic team

4.8

103

6.6

348

22.4

281

18.1

243

15.7

503

32.4

Psychological disorder

4.6

132

8.5

360

23.2

259

16.7

212

13.7

517

33.3

Physical characteristics

5.2

130

8.4

359

23.1

261

16.8

212

13.7

508

32.8

Physical disability

4.8

120

7.8

359

23.2

269

17.4

221

14.3

504

32.6

Political views

5.7

132

8.5

367

23.6

252

16.2

208

13.4

505

32.5

Race

6.3

148

9.5

337

21.7

258

16.6

211

13.6

499

32.2

Religious/spiritual views

6.0

138

8.9

363

23.4

243

15.7

209

13.5

506

32.6

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Don’t Know n %

217

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Table B72 (cont.)

Strongly Agree n %

Sexual orientation

105

6.8

165

10.6

342

22.0

237

15.3

202

13.0

501

32.3

Socioeconomic status

5.5

116

7.5

370

23.9

255

16.5

214

13.8

507

32.8

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

218

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B73 Faculty/Staff Only: The workplace climate is welcoming for faculty/staff based on their: (Question 88) Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Characteristic

Strongly Agree n %

Age

115

24.9

192

41.6

20.4

8.5

1.7

2.8

Caregiving status

20.9

173

37.6

116

25.2

5.7

1.7

8.9

Country of origin

106

23.2

167

36.5

121

26.5

3.9

1.1

8.8

English language proficiency/accent

105

23.0

171

37.5

119

26.1

5.0

1.1

7.2

Ethnicity

127

27.9

174

38.2

106

23.2

4.4

2.0

4.4

Gender

122

26.7

176

38.5

108

23.6

5.5

2.4

3.3

Gender expression

21.7

136

29.8

134

29.4

7.2

2.6

9.2

Immigrant status

101

22.2

141

31.1

134

29.5

5.3

0.9

11.0

Learning disability

105

23.1

153

33.7

117

25.8

4.2

1.5

11.7

Medical conditions

106

23.3

167

36.8

118

26.0

4.0

1.5

8.4

Level of education

103

22.4

177

38.6

108

23.5

7.8

3.1

4.6

Military/veteran status

140

30.8

171

37.6

100

22.0

1.8

0.9

7.0

Psychological disorder

18.0

124

27.6

138

30.7

4.9

1.6

17.3

Physical characteristics

21.9

153

33.8

135

29.9

4.4

2.0

8.0

Physical disability

108

23.9

151

33.4

121

26.8

4.9

2.4

8.6

Political views

20.8

136

29.8

138

30.3

7.7

3.7

7.7

Position

100

21.7

161

35.0

115

25.0

10.7

4.3

3.3

Race

122

27.1

154

34.1

118

26.2

6.2

2.9

3.5

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

219

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Strongly Disagree

Table B73 (cont.)

Strongly Agree n %

Religious/spiritual views

101

22.2

148

32.6

143

31.5

5.9

2.0

5.7

Sexual orientation

21.1

147

32.4

141

31.1

6.8

3.1

5.5

Socioeconomic status

102

22.7

161

35.9

131

29.2

4.5

2.9

4.9

Disagree n

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n = 485).

220

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B74 How would you rate the accessibility on campus for people with physical, learning, psychological or medical disabilities? (Question 89)

Fully Accessible

Accessible With Assistance or Intervention

Not Accessible

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know

926

45.5

471

23.2

1.6

603

29.7

Azorsky Hall

722

36.0

396

19.8

4.4

799

39.9

Coover

535

26.8

239

12.0

118

5.9

1106

55.4

Eberly Building

1130

56.4

313

15.6

1.4

534

26.6

Dixon

972

48.6

354

17.7

2.1

631

31.6

Duda

1172

58.8

248

12.4

0.8

556

27.9

Frich

686

34.3

328

16.4

3.4

917

45.9

Gallagher

671

33.6

326

16.3

4.3

915

45.8

Hamer

840

42.1

311

15.6

1.4

819

41.0

Helsel

617

31.1

240

12.1

1.2

1103

55.6

Herron Hall (Fitness Center)

955

48.0

305

15.3

1.4

703

35.3

Keystone

919

45.9

406

20.3

2.5

626

31.3

Morgan

789

39.5

345

17.3

3.6

790

39.6

New Science

712

35.9

265

13.3

3.7

935

47.1

Noss Hall

958

48.0

327

16.4

1.8

674

33.8

Old Main

612

30.8

356

17.9

4.8

922

46.4

South Hall

582

29.3

273

13.7

4.1

1049

52.8

Steele

880

44.3

265

13.4

0.9

822

41.4

Vulcan

642

32.3

264

13.3

2.5

1033

52.0

Watkins

612

30.8

284

14.3

3.9

1012

51.0

Classrooms, labs

802

40.5

462

23.3

2.1

674

34.0

Residence Halls

959

48.2

283

14.2

0.8

731

36.8

Physical Accessibility Athletic Facilities Buildings

221

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Fully Accessible Table B74 (cont.)

Accessible With Assistance or Intervention n

Not Accessible

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know

Vulcan village

638

32.1

309

15.6

123

6.2

916

46.1

Computer labs

867

43.7

385

19.4

1.6

699

35.3

Dining facilities

974

49.1

384

19.4

1.6

594

30.0

Elevators

1157

56.6

291

14.7

0.9

521

26.2

Health/Wellness Center

1015

51.0

277

13.9

0.6

687

34.5

Mandarino Library

1119

56.2

323

16.2

1.0

528

26.5

On-campus transportation

714

35.8

428

21.5

3.7

777

39.0

Parking

950

47.7

379

19.0

3.8

588

29.5

Restrooms

1002

50.3

414

20.8

1.9

538

27.0

Studios/ Performing Arts spaces

658

33.2

264

13.3

1.3

1034

52.2

Walkways and pedestrian paths

1119

56.6

365

18.5

1.9

455

23.0

Information in alternate formats

889

44.9

386

19.5

2.0

667

33.7

Instructors

935

47.2

393

19.9

2.1

609

30.8

Instructional materials

891

45.5

410

20.9

2.1

618

31.5

Cal U Website

1214

61.3

341

17.2

3.0

368

18.6

D2L

1066

53.8

383

19.3

4.3

447

22.6

VIP

1086

55.3

368

18.7

3.4

442

22.5

Course instruction/materials

222

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B75 How would you rate the climate on campus for people who are/have: (Question 91)

Group

Very Respectful n %

Moderately Respectful n %

Neither Respectful nor Disrespectful n %

Moderately Disrespectful n %

Very Disrespectful n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Affected by psychological health issues

640

31.9

590

29.4

305

15.2

3.2

0.6

396

19.7

Affected by physical health issues

736

36.8

613

30.6

268

13.4

3.3

0.5

306

15.3

Female

859

43.0

608

30.4

252

12.6

4.0

0.6

189

9.5

From religious affiliations other than Christian

660

33.1

589

29.5

338

17.0

4.8

0.9

294

14.7

From Christian affiliations

824

41.2

571

28.5

300

15.0

2.1

0.6

250

12.5

Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender

601

30.0

604

30.2

340

17.0

143

7.1

1.4

285

14.2

Immigrants

646

32.4

516

25.9

373

18.7

3.7

0.6

375

18.8

International students, staff, or faculty

731

36.6

592

29.7

303

15.2

3.3

0.5

295

14.8

Learning disabled

715

36.0

565

28.4

320

16.1

3.0

0.5

319

16.0

Male

983

49.2

520

26.0

254

12.7

1.1

0.4

210

10.5

Non-native English speakers

640

32.1

560

28.1

356

17.9

4.0

0.5

347

17.4

Parents/guardians

821

41.2

568

28.5

299

15.0

1.6

0.1

274

13.7

People of color

831

41.6

567

28.4

279

14.0

3.4

0.8

238

11.9

Providing care for other than a child

707

35.4

536

26.9

330

16.5

2.0

0.4

374

18.7

Physical disabled

755

38.1

574

28.9

274

13.8

3.7

0.5

297

15.0

Socioeconomically disadvantaged

688

34.5

527

26.5

340

17.1

104

5.2

1.1

311

15.6

Socioeconomically advantaged

793

39.9

534

26.9

324

16.3

1.0

0.4

307

15.5

Veterans/active military/reservists members

946

47.3

503

25.2

249

12.5

0.7

0.3

281

14.1

Other

221

25.5

171

19.7

142

16.4

1.4

0.6

316

36.4

223

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B76 How would you rate the climate on campus for persons from the following racial/ethnic backgrounds? (Question 92) Very Respectful Background

Moderately Respectful

Neither Respectful nor Disrespectful

Moderately Disrespectful

Very Disrespectful

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know

African

803

40.7

523

26.5

235

11.9

4.0

0.8

316

16.0

African American/Black

836

42.4

550

27.9

222

11.3

4.9

1.2

243

12.3

Alaskan Native

692

35.3

422

21.5

260

13.3

0.4

0.2

578

29.5

Asian

749

38.1

511

26.0

260

13.2

2.2

0.3

396

20.2

Asian American

772

39.3

505

25.7

261

13.3

1.6

0.3

389

19.8

Southeast Asian

716

36.5

484

24.7

255

13.0

1.5

0.2

476

24.2

Caribbean/West Indian

702

35.9

457

23.4

260

13.3

1.0

0.2

513

26.2

European American/White

938

47.6

523

26.6

223

11.3

1.9

0.5

237

12.0

Indian subcontinent

710

36.1

459

23.3

276

14.0

1.6

0.2

487

24.8

Latino(a)/Hispanic

760

38.7

522

26.6

261

13.3

1.9

0.4

379

19.3

Latin American

757

38.7

507

25.9

261

13.3

1.5

0.2

399

20.4

Middle Easter

699

35.6

476

24.3

265

13.5

3.6

1.2

426

21.7

Native American Indian

712

36.4

467

23.9

262

13.4

1.0

0.1

495

25.3

Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Natives

703

36.1

462

23.7

252

12.9

0.6

0.1

518

26.6

Multiracial, multiethnic or multicultural persons

767

39.2

509

26.0

250

12.8

1.8

0.5

384

19.6

Other

196

24.4

157

19.6

132

16.4

0.6

0.2

311

38.7

224

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B77 Students Only: Before I enrolled, I expected the campus climate would be ______________ for people who are: (Question 93)

Group

Very Respectful n %

Respectful n %

Neither Respectful nor Disrespectful n %

Disrespectful n %

Very Disrespectful n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Affected by psychological health issues

735

48.2

435

28.5

173

11.3

0.5

0.1

172

11.3

Affected by physical health issues

746

49.0

436

28.6

168

11.0

0.6

0.1

162

10.6

Female

794

52.2

397

26.1

170

11.2

0.8

0.3

144

9.5

From the Catholic religion

755

49.6

432

28.4

177

11.6

0.5

0.1

150

9.8

From religious affiliations other than Christian

719

47.3

438

28.8

190

12.5

1.1

0.5

151

9.9

From Christian affiliations

749

49.3

427

28.1

178

11.7

0.8

0.1

151

9.9

Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender

698

46.0

421

27.7

195

12.8

2.2

0.9

158

10.4

Immigrants

696

45.8

429

28.3

191

12.6

1.8

0.4

169

11.1

International students, staff, or faculty

728

48.0

425

28.0

184

12.1

1.0

0.2

162

10.7

Learning disabled

742

48.8

427

28.1

178

11.7

1.2

0.2

152

10.0

Male

821

54.1

388

25.6

159

10.5

0.4

0.1

143

9.4

Non-native English speakers

710

46.7

439

28.9

182

12.0

1.7

0.3

158

10.4

Parents/guardians

783

51.6

409

26.9

165

10.9

0.6

0.1

151

9.9

Providing care for other than a child

747

49.2

424

27.9

173

11.4

0.8

0.0

162

10.7

Physical disabled

764

50.5

418

27.6

161

10.6

1.3

0.1

150

9.9

Socioeconomically disadvantaged

744

48.9

415

27.3

177

11.6

1.2

0.5

159

10.5

Socioeconomically advantaged

766

50.5

405

26.7

177

11.7

0.3

0.1

161

10.6

Veterans/active military/reservists members

817

53.9

387

25.5

160

10.6

0.3

0.0

148

9.8

Working status

773

51.1

411

27.1

170

11.2

0.5

0.1

151

10.0

Other

217

34.5

149

23.7

14.1

0.2

0.3

171

27.2

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

225

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B78 Students Only: Do you experience financial hardship at Cal U? (Question 94)

Experience hardship

Yes

912

55.2

683

41.3

Missing

3.5

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652)

Table B79 Students Only: How do you experience the financial hardship? (Mark all that apply) (Question 95) Experience hardship through

Difficulty affording tuition

619

67.9

Difficulty affording fees

549

60.2

Difficulty purchasing my books/equipment

701

76.9

Difficulty participating in social events

264

28.9

Difficulty affording university meal plan

329

36.1

Difficulty participating in co-curricular events or activities (alternative spring breaks, class trips, etc.)

299

32.8

Difficulty traveling home during university breaks

234

25.7

Difficulty in affording housing

484

53.1

Difficulty in affording parking

446

48.9

Difficulty in affording transportation costs

293

32.1

Difficulty in affording health insurance

184

20.2

Other

6.9

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they experienced financial hardship in Question 94 (n = 912).

226

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B80 Students Only: The following questions ask you about your academic experience (Question 96)

Academic Experience

Strongly Agree n %

I am performing up to my full academic potential.

784

Few of my courses this year have been intellectually stimulating.

Agree

Neither Agree or Disagree n %

Disagree %

Strongly Disagree n %

48.8

595

37.0

121

7.5

5.7

0.9

455

28.5

476

29.8

247

15.5

308

19.3

110

6.9

I am satisfied with my academic experience at Cal U.

568

35.6

681

42.7

217

13.6

6.1

2.1

I am satisfied with the extent of my intellectual development since enrolling at Cal U.

637

39.9

665

41.7

186

11.7

5.1

1.6

I have performed academically as well as I anticipated I would.

675

42.2

571

35.7

197

12.3

130

8.1

1.6

My academic experience has had a positive influence on my intellectual growth and interest in ideas.

741

46.5

609

38.2

172

10.8

3.0

1.5

My interest in ideas and intellectual matters has increased since coming to Cal U.

720

45.1

577

36.2

220

13.8

3.6

1.4

I intend to graduate from my current institution.

1099

68.8

367

23.0

5.9

1.1

1.3

I am considering transferring to another college or university due to academic reasons.

156

9.8

143

9.0

208

13.0

340

21.3

747

46.9

Note: Table includes only those who answered that they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652).

227

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B81 Student/Faculty Only: Does the curriculum at Cal U include materials, perspectives, and/or experiences of people based on their: (Question 99) Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Characteristic

Strongly Agree n %

Age

442

26.7

464

28.0

396

23.9

3.7

1.3

271

16.4

Caregiving status

406

24.6

401

24.3

424

25.7

4.7

1.4

316

19.2

Country of origin

403

24.5

418

25.4

420

25.5

3.9

1.2

320

19.5

English language proficiency/ accent

413

25.1

423

25.7

420

25.5

3.8

1.2

309

18.8

Ethnicity

421

25.6

444

27.0

411

25.0

3.3

1.1

295

18.0

Gender

436

26.5

461

28.1

396

24.1

3.3

1.0

278

16.9

Gender expression

400

24.4

406

24.7

427

26.0

4.6

1.6

307

18.7

Immigrant status

381

23.2

394

24.0

444

27.1

4.3

1.1

331

20.2

Learning disability

420

25.6

423

25.7

411

25.0

3.8

1.3

305

18.6

Medical conditions

418

25.4

417

25.3

418

25.4

3.7

1.3

312

18.9

Level of education

436

26.6

451

27.5

395

24.1

3.1

1.3

287

17.5

Military/veteran status

442

27.0

403

24.6

414

25.3

2.7

1.3

315

19.2

Psychological disorder

403

24.6

388

23.7

422

25.7

4.0

1.2

343

20.9

Physical characteristics

409

24.9

392

23.9

437

26.6

3.9

1.4

317

19.3

Physical disability

424

25.9

404

24.6

420

25.6

3.6

1.2

314

19.1

Political views

408

24.9

409

24.9

435

26.5

3.8

1.0

309

18.8

Position (faculty, staff)

427

26.0

419

25.5

419

25.5

3.2

0.9

312

19.0

Race

434

26.4

432

26.3

413

25.2

3.0

1.3

292

17.8

Religious/spiritual views

404

24.6

419

25.5

427

26.0

4.0

1.4

302

18.4

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

228

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Agree

Neither Agree nor Disagree n %

Table B81 (cont.)

Strongly Agree n %

Sexual orientation

401

24.5

389

23.7

435

26.6

4.7

1.7

308

18.8

Socioeconomic status

410

25.1

399

24.5

434

26.6

3.9

1.7

297

18.2

Disagree n

Strongly Disagree n %

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n %

Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were students or faculty in Question 1 (n = 1838).

229

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B82 Faculty/Staff Only: How do you feel each of the following initiatives influence (if currently available) or could influence (if not currently available at Cal U) the climate at Cal U? (Question 100)

Initiative

Positively Influence Campus Climate n %

Has no Influence on Campus Climate n %

Negatively Influence Campus Climate n %

Providing flexibility for promotion for faculty

186

41.5

9.4

Providing flexibility for computing the probationary period for tenure (e.g., family leave)

168

37.5

8.9

Providing recognition and rewards for including diversity issues in courses across the curriculum

185

42.0

Providing diversity training for staff

240

53.5

Providing diversity training for faculty

217

Providing , promoting and improving access to counseling for people who have experienced harassment

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n

4.7

199

44.4

3.1

226

50.4

14.7

4.5

171

38.8

107

23.8

4.9

17.8

49.1

20.6

3.4

119

26.9

298

67.0

10.6

1.6

20.9

Providing mentorship for new faculty

286

64.3

8.5

0.9

117

26.3

Providing mentorship for new staff

322

72.0

11.0

1.3

15.7

Providing a clear and fair process to resolve conflicts

336

75.7

9.5

2.0

12.8

Increasing funding to support efforts to change campus climate

241

53.9

16.1

2.7

122

27.3

Including diversity-related professional experiences as one of the criteria for hiring of staff/faculty

169

38.2

21.3

11.1

130

29.4

Providing diversity and equity training to search and tenure committees

202

45.7

18.1

4.8

139

31.4

Increasing the diversity of the faculty and staff

234

52.7

21.4

3.6

22.3

Increasing the diversity of the administration

234

52.8

20.8

3.4

102

23.0

17.2

2.7

106

23.9

Increasing the diversity of the student body 249 56.2 Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were faculty or staff in Question 1 (n =485).

230

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

Table B83 Students Only: How do you feel each the following initiatives influence (if currently available) or could influence (if not currently available at Cal U) the climate at Cal U? (Question 102)

Initiative

Positively Influence Campus Climate n %

Has No Influence on Campus Climate n %

Negatively Influences Campus Climate n %

Providing diversity training for all students

856

56.1

345

22.6

Providing diversity training for all staff

974

63.7

256

16.7

Providing diversity training for all faculty

990

65.0

239

Providing a person to address student complaints of classroom inequity

1006

66.0

Increasing diversity of the faculty and staff

808

Increasing the diversity of the student body

Donâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t Know n

2.0

295

19.3

1.2

281

18.4

15.7

1.3

275

18.0

218

14.3

2.0

270

17.7

53.3

359

23.7

4.1

287

18.9

851

56.1

344

22.7

3.4

270

17.8

Increasing opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue among students

909

59.9

290

19.1

1.8

291

19.2

Increasing opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue between faculty, staff and students

921

60.6

280

18.4

1.6

294

19.4

Incorporating issues of diversity and cross-cultural competence more effectively into the curriculum

885

58.7

302

20.0

3.0

276

18.3

Providing effective faculty mentorship of students 1038 68.8 211 Note: Table includes only those respondents who indicated they were students in Question 1 (n = 1652)

14.0

0.7

248

16.4

231

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report â&#x20AC;&#x201C; October 2013

This survey is accessible in alternative formats. For more information please contact: Office of Students with Disabilities Dr. Cheryl Bilitski 724-938-5781 Azorsky Hall, Room 105

California University of Pennsylvania Climate Assessment for Learning, Living, and Working on Campus (Administered by Rankin & Associates, Consulting) Purpose You are invited to participate in a survey of students, faculty, staff and administrators regarding the climate at California University of Pennsylvania (CAL U). The results of the survey will provide important information about our climate and will enable us to improve the environment for learning, living, and working at the University. Procedures Please complete the attached survey. Your participation is confidential. Please answer the questions as openly and honestly as possible. You may skip questions. The survey will take between 20 and 30 minutes to complete. You must be 18 years of age or older to participate. When you have completed the survey, please return it directly to the external consultants (Rankin and Associates) using the enclosed envelope. Any comments provided by participants are also separated at submission so that comments are not attributed to any demographic characteristics. These comments will be analyzed using content analysis and submitted as an appendix to the survey report. Anonymous quotes from submitted comments will also be used throughout the report to give â&#x20AC;&#x153;voiceâ&#x20AC;? to the quantitative data. Discomforts and Risks There are no anticipated risks in participating in this assessment beyond those experienced in everyday life. Some of the questions are personal and might cause discomfort. In the event that any questions asked are disturbing, you may stop responding to the survey at any time. Participants who experience discomfort are encouraged to contact: Counseling Center Carter Hall, Room G53 724-938-4056 Emergency walk-in hours are Monday-Friday from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. If you need emergency assistance after office hours, please call the SPHS Hotline at 724-379-6093 or 1-888-386-2114 Benefits The results of the survey will provide important information about our climate and will help us in our efforts to ensure that the environment at California University of Pennsylvania is conducive to learning, living, and working.

232

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Voluntary Participation Participation in this assessment is voluntary. If you decide to participate, you do not have to answer any questions on the survey that you do not wish to answer. Individuals will not be identified and only group data will be reported (e.g., the analysis will include only aggregate data). Please note that you can choose to withdraw your responses at any time before you submit your answers. Refusal to take part in this assessment will involve no penalty or loss of student or employee benefits. Statement of Confidentiality for Participation In the event of any publication or presentation resulting from the assessment, no personally identifiable information will be shared. The external consultant (Rankin & Associates) will not report any group data for groups of fewer than 5 individuals that may be small enough to compromise confidentiality. Instead, Rankin & Associates will combine the groups to eliminate any potential for demographic information to be identifiable. Please also remember that you do not have to answer any question or questions about which you are uncomfortable. Statement of Anonymity for Comments Upon submission, all comments from participants will be de-identified in an attempt to make those comments anonymous. Thus, participant comments will not be attributable to their author nor to any demographic characteristics. However, depending on what you say, others who know you may be able to attribute certain comments to you. The anonymous comments will be analyzed using content analysis and submitted as an appendix to the survey report. In order to give “voice” to the quantitative data, some anonymous comments may be quoted in publications related to this survey. Right to Ask Questions You can ask questions about this assessment. Questions concerning this project should be directed to: Susan R. Rankin, Ph.D. Principal & Senior Research Associate Rankin and Associates, Consulting sue@rankin-consulting.com 814-625-2780 Questions regarding the survey process may also be directed to: Norman G. Hasbrouck Special Assistant to the President & Director, Office of Continuous Improvement California University of Pennsylvania Hasbrouck@calu.edu (724) 938-1561 Questions concerning the rights of participants should be directed to: Robert Skwarecki Associate Professor Chair, Institutional Review Board California University of Pennsylvania skwarecki@calu.edu 724-938-4177 This informed consent form was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board (#11-049) at the California University of Pennsylvania on 2-07-2012. It will expire on 2-06-2013 233

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Directions Please read and answer each question carefully. For each answer, darken the appropriate oval completely. If you want to change an answer, erase your first answer completely and darken the oval of your new answer. You may decline to answer specific questions. Survey Terms and Definitions Ableism: Discrimination against people based on the physical ability of their bodies, especially discrimination against people with disabilities in favor of people who are not disabled. American Indian (Native American): A person having origin in any of the original tribes of North America who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliation or community recognition. Asexual: A person who does not experience sexual attraction. Unlike celibacy, which people choose, asexuality is an intrinsic part of an individual. Assigned Birth Sex: Refers to the assigning (naming) of the biological sex of a baby at birth. Climate: Current attitudes, behaviors, and standards of employees and students concerning the access for, inclusion of, and level of respect for individual and group needs, abilities, and potential. Disability: A person who has a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities. Eldercare: A person who has primary responsibility in caring for an older partner or family member. Ethnic Identity: A unique social and cultural heritage shared by a group of people. Family Leave: The Family Medical Leave Act is a labor law requiring employers with 50 or more employees to provide certain employees with job-protected unpaid leave due to one of the following situations: a serious health condition that makes the employee unable to perform his or her job; caring for a sick family member; caring for a new child (including birth, adoption or foster care). Gender Identity: A person’s inner sense of being man, woman, both, or neither. The internal identity may or may not be expressed outwardly, and may or may not correspond to one’s physical characteristics. Gender Expression: The manner in which a person outwardly represents gender, regardless of the physical characteristics that might typically define the individual as male or female. Harassment: Harassment is defined as any type of behavior based on race, religion, sex, national origin, ancestry, age, sexual orientation, disability, veteran status or other protected class status that is sufficiently severe, persistent, or pervasive that it substantially interferes with an individual’s work, educational performance, participation in extra-curricular activities, or equal access to the University’s resources and opportunities. Intersex: A general term used for a variety of conditions in which a person is born with a reproductive or sexual anatomy that doesn’t seem to fit the typical definitions of female or male. Multiculturalism: An environment in which cultures are celebrated and not hindered by majority values and beliefs. Non-Native English Speakers: People for whom English is not their first language. People of Color: People who self-identify as other than White. 234

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Physical Characteristics: Term that refers to one’s appearance. Position: The status one holds by virtue of her/his position/status within the institution (e.g., staff, full-time faculty, part-time faculty, administrator, etc.) Racial Identity: A socially constructed category about a group of people based on generalized physical features such as skin color, hair type, shape of eyes, physique, etc. Sexual Harassment: California University’s definition of sexual harassment is consistent with the guidelines of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s current definition of sexual harassment. That definition includes unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature. Examples include: Submission to such conduct is either implicitly or explicitly made a term or condition of an individual’s employment or education. Submission to or rejection of such conduct is used as the basis for employment or educational decisions affecting that individual. Such conduct has the purpose or effect of unreasonably interfering with an individual’s work performance or education experience or creating an intimidating, hostile, or offensive work or educational environment. Sexual harassment may take many forms, including deliberate or careless use of offensive or demeaning terms connected with a person’s gender or sexual orientation; sexually suggestive comments, compliments, jokes, innuendos, or questions; offensive displays; sexual gestures or unwanted touching; pressure for dates or sexual favors; attempted or actual assault; rape; threats or implications that refusal of sexual favors, or unwillingness to accept or tolerate offensive sexual conduct or communication, might affect a person’s academic progress, personal safety or future employment. Sexual Assault: Any sexual act directed against another person, forcibly, and/or with threat of force, and/or against that person’s will; or when the survivor is incapable of giving consent, (i.e., is unconscious, mentally incompetent, or intoxicated), including forcible rape, use of drugs to incapacitate, forcible sodomy, gang rape, sexual assault, sexual assault with an object, and forcible fondling. Sexual Orientation: Term that refers to the sex of the people one tends to be emotionally, physically, and sexually attracted to; this is inclusive of, but not limited to, lesbians, gay men, bisexual people, heterosexual people, and those who identify as queer. Socioeconomic Status: The status one holds in society based on one’s level of income, wealth, education, and familial background. Social Support: The resources other people provide, including a person's perception that he or she can rely on other people for help with problems or in times of crisis. Having feelings of connectedness and being a part of a community. Transgender: Umbrella term for someone whose self-identity challenges traditional societal definitions of male and female.

Please do not complete this survey more than once.

235

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

1. What is your primary position at CAL U? (Please mark only one) Undergraduate student Started at CAL U as a first-year student Transferred from another institution Graduate student Tenured faculty Classroom/on-line Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Non-classroom Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Tenure-track faculty Classroom/on-line Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Non-classroom Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Temporary Part-Time faculty Classroom/on-line Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Non-classroom Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Temporary Full-Time faculty Classroom/on-line Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Non-classroom Instructor Assistant Associate Professor Staff AFSCME APSCUF AVI Cal Bookstore 236

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

CCAC Nursing Staff Coaches Foundation for CALU Management OPEIU Nurses SAI SCUPA State University Administrators SPFPA Police/Security Vulcan Village Other auxiliary staff (Please specify) _________________________________

2. Are you full-time or part-time in that primary status? Full-time Part-time 3. The majority of my time at Cal U is spent at: Main campus CCAC Southpoint Exclusive On-line Programs of Study

Part 1: Personal Experiences During The Past Year… 4. Overall, how comfortable are you with the climate at CALU? Very comfortable Comfortable Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable Uncomfortable Very uncomfortable 5. Overall, how comfortable are you with the climate in your department/work unit? Very comfortable Comfortable Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable Uncomfortable Very uncomfortable Not applicable 6. Overall, how comfortable are you with the climate in your classes? Very comfortable Comfortable Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable Uncomfortable Very uncomfortable Not applicable 7. Have you ever seriously considered leaving CAL U because of the climate? Yes No

237

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

8. When did you consider leaving? (Mark all that apply) During my first year as a student During my second year as a student During my third year as a student During my fourth year as a student Faculty (please specify when) ___________________________________ Staff (please specify when) _____________________________________ 9. Why did you consider leaving and why did you decide to stay? ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

10. Within the past year, have you personally experienced any exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) that has interfered with your ability to work or learn at CAL U? Yes No 11. What do you believe this conduct was based upon? (Mark all that apply) My age My care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) My country of origin My developmental disorder My discipline of study My educational level My educational modality (on-line, classroom) My English language proficiency/accent My ethnicity My gender My gender expression My immigrant status My learning disability My medical condition My military/veteran status My participation in an organization/team (please specify) ________________________ My psychological disorder My physical characteristics My physical disability My philosophical views My political views My position (staff, faculty, student) My race My religious/spiritual views My sexual orientation My socioeconomic status Other (please specify) ___________________________________

238

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

12. How did you experience this conduct? (Mark all that apply) I feared for my physical safety I feared for my family’s safety I feared getting a poor grade because of a hostile classroom environment I felt I was deliberately ignored or excluded I felt intimidated/bullied I felt isolated or left out when work was required in groups I felt isolated or left out I observed others staring at me I received derogatory written comments I received derogatory phone calls I received threats of physical violence I received a low performance evaluation I was singled out as the “resident authority” due to my identity I was the target of derogatory verbal remarks I was the target of graffiti/vandalism (e.g., event advertisements removed or defaced) I was the target of physical violence I was the target of racial/ethnic profiling I was the target of stalking I was the victim of a crime I was the victim of derogatory/unsolicited e-mails, text messages, Facebook posts, Twitter posts Someone assumed I was admitted/hired/promoted due to my identity Someone assumed I was not admitted/hired/promoted due to my identity Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 13. Where did this conduct occur? (Mark all that apply) At a campus event In a classroom In an on-line class In a campus dining facility In a campus office In a faculty office In a public space on campus In a meeting with one other person In a meeting with a group of people In athletic facilities In campus housing In off-campus housing Off campus Off campus CAL U sponsored event Vulcan village While working at a campus job While walking on campus On a social networking sites/Facebook/Twitter/cell phone/e-mail/other forms of technological communication Other (please specify) ___________________________________

239

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

14. Who/what was the source of this conduct? (Mark all that apply) Administrator Alumni Athletic coach/trainer Board member Borough police Campus media (posters, brochures, flyers, handouts, web sites, etc.) Campus visitor(s) Community assistant Co-worker Off campus community member Department head Donor Don’t know source Faculty advisor Faculty member Friend Partner/spouse Person that I supervise Public Safety/University Police Staff member Stranger Student Social networking site (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) Supervisor Teaching assistant/Graduate assistant/Lab assistant/Tutor Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 15. Please describe your reactions to experiencing this conduct. (Mark all that apply) I did nothing I felt embarrassed I felt somehow responsible I ignored it I was afraid I was angry It didn’t affect me at the time I left the situation immediately I confronted the harasser at the time I confronted the harasser later I avoided the harasser I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services I sought support from a campus resource (Counseling Center, Women’s Center, ENDV, Social Equity, etc.) I told a friend I told a family member I contacted a local law enforcement official I sought support from a staff person I sought support from an administrator I sought support from a faculty member I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g., pastor, rabbi, priest) I sought support from student staff (e.g., community assistant) I sought information on-line I didn’t know who to go to I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official I didn’t report it for fear that my complaint would not be taken seriously I did report it but it but I did not feel the complaint was taken seriously Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 240

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

16. If you would like to elaborate on your personal experiences, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

The following questions are related to sexual assault. The definition of sexual assault used at CALU follows for your information. Sexual assault: Any sexual act directed against another person, forcibly, and/or with threat of force, and/or against that person’s will; or when the survivor is incapable of giving consent, (i.e., is unconscious, mentally incompetent, or intoxicated), including forcible rape, use of drugs to incapacitate, forcible sodomy, gang rape, sexual assault, sexual assault with an object, and forcible fondling. 17. Have you ever been a victim of sexual assault (e.g., unwanted fondling, unwanted touching) while at CALU? Yes No 18. Who did this to you? (Mark all that apply) Administrator Alumni Athletic coach/trainer Board member Borough police Campus media (posters, brochures, flyers, handouts, web sites, etc.) Campus visitor(s) Community assistant Counselor Co-worker Off campus community member Department head Donor Don’t know source Faculty advisor Faculty member Friend Maintenance Staff Partner/spouse Person that I supervise Public Safety/University Police Staff member Stranger Student Supervisor Teaching assistant/graduate assistant/Lab assistant/Tutor Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 19. Where did the incident(s) occur? (Mark all that apply) Off-campus (please specify location) ___________________________________ On-campus (please specify location) ___________________________________

241

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

20. Please describe your response to experiencing the incident(s). (Mark all that apply) I did nothing I felt embarrassed I felt somehow responsible I ignored it I was afraid I was angry It didn’t affect me at the time I left the situation immediately I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services I sought support from a campus resource (Counseling Center, Women’s Center, ENDV, Social Equity, etc.) I told a friend I told a family member I contacted a local law enforcement official I sought support from a staff person I sought support from an administrator I sought support from a faculty member I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g., pastor, rabbi, priest, etc.) I sought support from student staff (e.g., community assistant) I sought information on-line I didn’t know who to go to I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 21. If you did not report the sexual assault to a campus official or staff member please explain why you did not. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

22. If you did report the sexual assault to a campus official or staff member, did you feel that it was responded to appropriately? If not, please explain why you felt that it was not. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

242

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Part 2: Work-Life 23. Faculty/Staff only: As a faculty/staff member … Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

Not applicable

I am reluctant to bring up issues that concern me for fear that it will affect my performance evaluation or tenure decision.

I am comfortable asking questions about performance expectations.

My colleagues/co-workers expect me to represent “the point of view” of my identity (e.g., ability, ethnicity, gender, race, religion, sexual orientation).

My colleagues/co-workers treat me with less respect than other faculty/staff.

I constantly feel under scrutiny by my colleagues due to my identity.

I am reluctant to take leave that I am entitled to for fear that it may affect my job/career.

I have to work harder than I believe my colleagues do in order to be perceived as legitimate.

I have to work harder than I believe my colleagues do to achieve the same recognition.

There are many unwritten rules concerning how one is expected to interact with colleagues in my work unit.

My colleagues have higher expectations of me than of other faculty/staff.

I believe salary determinations are fair.

I believe salary determinations are clear.

I think the university understands the value of a diverse faculty.

I think the university understands the value of a diverse staff.

24. If you would like to elaborate on any of your responses to the previous questions, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

243

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

25. Faculty only: As a faculty member … Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Not applicable

I feel pressured to change my methods of teaching to achieve tenure/be promoted.

I feel that my teaching expectations and research requirements are similar to that of my colleagues in other divisions.

My research interests are valued by my colleagues.

I feel pressured to change my research agenda to achieve tenure.

I feel pressured to change my research agenda to be promoted.

I believe that the tenure process is clear.

I believe that the promotion process is clear.

I believe that the tenure standards are reasonable.

I believe that the promotion standards are reasonable.

I feel that I am burdened by service responsibilities (committee membership, advising, student group, etc.) beyond those of my colleagues.

I feel that my service contributions are important to tenure.

I feel that my service contributions are important to promotion.

26. If you would like to elaborate on any of your responses to the previous questions, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

244

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

27. Faculty/Staff Only: As a faculty/staff member… Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Not applicable

I often have to forgo professional activities because of personal responsibilities.

I find that personal responsibilities and commitments have slowed down my job/career progression.

I find that CAL U is supportive of taking leave.

I have to miss out on important things in my personal life because of professional responsibilities.

I feel that staff who have children are considered by CAL U to be less committed to their jobs/careers.

I feel that staff who do not have children are often burdened with work responsibilities (e.g., stay late, off-hour work, work week-ends) beyond those who do have children.

I feel that faculty who have children are considered by CAL U to be less committed to their jobs/careers.

I feel that faculty who do not have children are often burdened with work responsibilities (e.g., stay late, early classes) beyond those who do have children.

I find it difficult to balance childcare with my work responsibilities.

I find it difficult to balance eldercare with my work responsibilities.

I feel that my colleagues do not adequately balance their childcare responsibilities with their professional responsibilities.

I feel that my colleagues do not adequately balance their eldercare responsibilities with their professional responsibilities.

28. If you would like to elaborate on any of your responses to the previous questions, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

245

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

29. Faculty/Staff only: Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements about the resources that are available to you: Strongly agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don't know

Not applicable

I have supervisors/colleagues/coworkers who give me job/career advice or guidance when I need it.

I have support from supervisors/colleagues/co-workers regarding my job/career advancement.

I have the equipment and supplies I need to adequately perform my work.

I believe that CAL U treats salaried and hourly staff within my respective job classification equitably.

30. If you would like to elaborate on any of your responses to the previous questions, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

31. As a faculty/staff member, how satisfied are you with… Highly satisfied

Satisfied

Neither satisfied nor Highly dissatisfied Dissatisfied dissatisfied

Don't know

Not applicable

Your compensation as compared to that of other CAL U colleagues/coworkers with a similar level of experience?

Your access to health benefits?

Your job/career at CAL U?

The way your job/career has progressed at CAL U?

The size and quality of your work space as compared to your departmental colleagues’/co-workers’ work space?

Your access to research support as compared to your colleagues’/coworkers’ access to research support?

Your access to partner benefits (e.g., tax benefits, health benefits, tuition remission, etc).

32. Why are you satisfied or dissatisfied with your job and/or the way your job/career has progressed at CAL U? ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 246

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Part 3: Demographic Information 33. What is your assigned birth sex? Male Female Intersex 34. What is your gender identity? Man Woman Transgender Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 35. What is your race/ethnicity? (If you are of a multi-racial/multi-ethnic/multi-cultural identity, mark all that apply) African (if you wish please specify) ___________________________________ African American/Black (not Hispanic) (if you wish please specify) _________________ Alaskan Native (if you wish please specify corporation) _________________________ Asian (if you wish please specify) ___________________________________ Asian American (if you wish please specify) ___________________________________ Caribbean/West Indian (if you wish please specify) _____________________________ European (if you wish please specify) ___________________________________ European American/White (if you wish please specify) __________________________ Indian subcontinent (if you wish please specify) _______________________________ Latino(a)/Hispanic (if you wish please specify) ________________________________ Latin American (if you wish please specify) ___________________________________ Middle Eastern (if you wish please specify) ___________________________________ Native American Indian (if you wish please specify Tribal affiliations) _______________ Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native (if you wish please specify) _____________________ Southeast Asian (if you wish please specify) __________________________________ Other (if you wish please specify) ___________________________________ 36. Which term best describes your sexual orientation? Asexual Bisexual Gay Heterosexual Lesbian Queer Questioning Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 37. What is your age? _________ years 38. What is your family care giving status (Mark all that apply)? None Children under 18 years of age Children over 18 years of age, but still legally dependent (in college, disabled, etc.) Independent adult children over 18 years of age Senior family member Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 247

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

39. Are you, or have you ever been, a member of the U.S. Armed Forces? I have not been in the military Active military status Reservist Veteran status

Master’s degree

Doctoral degree

Unknown

Not applicable

Other professional degree (e.g., MD, MFA, JD)

Some graduate work

Business/Technical certificate/degree

Some college

Bachelor’s degree

Parent/Guardian 1 Parent/Guardian 2

Completed high school/GED

No high school

Associate’s degree

40. Students Only: What is the highest level of education achieved by your primary parent(s)/guardian(s)?

41. Faculty/Staff Only: What is your highest completed level of education? No high school Some high school Completed high school/GED Some college Business /Technical certificate/degree Associate’s degree Bachelor’s degree Some graduate work Master’s degree Doctoral degree Other professional degree (e.g., MD, MFA, JD) 42. Students only: Where are you in your college career? Non-degree student First year (0-29.5 credits) Sophomore (30-59.9 credits) Junior (60-89.5 credits) Senior (90 or more credits) Graduate student 43. Faculty only: With which academic division/department are you primarily affiliated with at this time? Academic Development Services Applied Engineering and Technology Art & Design Biological and Environmental Sciences Business and Economics Chemistry and Physics Communication Disorders Communication Studies Counselor Education and Services Early, Middle & Special Education Earth Science Educational Administration & Leadership English 248

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Exercise Science and Sport Studies Health Science History and Political Science Justice, Law and Society Library Services Mathematics, Computer Science & Information Systems Modern Languages and Cultures Music Nursing Philosophy Professional Studies Psychology Secondary Ed & Administrative Leadership Social Work Student Services Theatre and Dance

44. Staff only: With which work unit are you primarily affiliated with at this time? Direct Reports (If you report directly to Dr. Armenti, not to any of the vice-presidents) Vice President for Academic Affairs (Provost Gerri Jones) Academic Development Services Academic Records Applied Engineering and Technology Art & Design Biological and Environmental Sciences Business and Economics Chemistry and Physics Communication Disorders Communication Studies Counselor Education and Services Early, Middle & Special Education Earth Science Educational Administration & Leadership English Exercise Science and Sport Studies Health Science History and Political Science Justice, Law and Society Library Services Mathematics, Computer Science & Information Systems Modern Languages and Cultures Music Nursing Philosophy Professional Studies Psychology Secondary Ed & Administrative Leadership Social Work Student Services Theatre and Dance Academic Records Vice President for Administration and Finance (Mr. Bob Thorn) Vice President for Student Affairs (Dr. Lenora Angelone) Vice President for University Technology (Dr. Charles Mance) Vice President of Marketing and University Relations (Mr. Craig Butzine) Interim Vice President for University Advancement & Alumni Relations (Ms. Sharon Navoney) 249

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

45. Undergraduate Students only: What is your academic major? (Only make two choices) Undeclared/General Education Accounting Admission Referral Anthropology Arabic Language and Culture Art/Art Studio Associate in Nursing with CCAC Athletic Training/Sport Management Biology Business Administration Chemistry Commercial Music Technology/Pre-Commercial Music Technology Communication Disorders Communication Studies Computer Engineering Technology Computer Science Technology Computer Engineering Tech/Technical Studies/Electrical Engineering Tech Criminal Justice/Justice Studies Drafting Design Technology/Computer Aided Design Drafting Early High School Admits Elementary Education /Elementary Education Services Early Childhood Education/Early Childhood Services Electrical Engineering Technology Elementary Certification/Early Childhood Certification English Environmental Studies Geography/Geology/Earth Science General Studies – Education General Studies in Liberal Art General Studies Science & Technology Grades 4-8/Spec Education Graphic Communications Technology Graphics and Multimedia/Graphic Design History Industrial Technology International Studies Liberal Studies Mathematics/Computer Science/Computer Information Systems Mentally Handicap/Early Child Nursing Parks and Recreation Management Philosophy Political Science Pre-College Online Program/Pre-College Honors Portal Pre-Education PreK-4/Spec Education Pre Physical Therapist Assist/Physical Therapist Assistant Psychology Physics Professional or Personal Development Science and Technology Secondary Education/Secondary Ed Certification Social Sciences/Liberal Studies Social Sciences/Sociology Social Work/Gerontology 250

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Spanish/Spanish for Business Technology Education Theatre Visiting Students 60+ CAP

46. Graduate Students only: What is your academic major/department? Non-Degree Advanced Studies in Secondary Education Athletic Training/ Exercise Science & Health Promo Business Administration Communication Disorders Early Childhood Education/Cert Only Early Childhood Education Elementary Education/Cert only Elementary Education K-12 Principal/Cert Only Intercollegiate Athletic Administration Master of Arts - Teaching Mentally/Physically Handicap Nursing Administration & Leadership Performance Enhancement & Injury Prevention/Rehabilitation Science Reading/Cert Only Reading Specialist School Counseling/Cert Only School Counseling/PCER School Psychology School Psychology/Cert Only Secondary Guidance Certificate Social Science Criminal Justice Social Science/Legal Studies Social Work/Community & Agency Counseling Spanish for Law Enforcement/Spanish for Business Sports Counseling/Sport Management Sport Psychology Superintendent Letter of Eligibility Technology Education Wellness and Fitness 47. Do you have a disability that substantially affects a major life activity? (Mark all that apply) No disability ADD/ADHD Asperger’s/High functioning Autism Emotional/psychological Hearing Learning disabled Medical/health Physical/mobility ambulatory Physical/mobility non-ambulatory Visual Other (please specify) ___________________________________

251

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

48. What is your citizenship status? U.S. citizen U.S. citizen – naturalized Dual citizenship Permanent resident (immigrant) Permanent resident (refugee) International (F-1, J-1, H1-B, A, L, or G visas) Undocumented resident 49. How many years have you lived in the United States? ______ years 50. Is English the language that was/is primarily spoken in your home? Yes No 51. What is the primary language that was/is primarily spoken in your home? _________________________ 52. What is your religious or spiritual identity? (Mark all that apply) Agnostic AME Atheist Assembly of God Baha’i Baptist Buddhist Christian Orthodox Confucianist Druid Episcopalian Evangelical Hindu Jehovah’s Witness Jewish Latter Day Saints (Mormon) Lutheran Mennonite Moravian Muslim Native American Traditional Practitioner or Ceremonial Nondenominational Christian Pagan Pentecostal Presbyterian Protestant Quaker Rastafarian Roman Catholic Russian Orthodox Scientologist Seventh Day Adventist Shinto Sikh Taoist United Methodist Unitarian Universalist United Church of Christ 252

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Wiccan Spiritual, but no religious affiliation No affiliation Other (please specify) ___________________________________

53. Faculty/Staff only: How many years have you been employed by CAL U? _________ years 54. Are you a CAL U alumnus/alumna? Yes No 55. Students only: Are you currently dependent (family/guardian is assisting with your living/educational expenses) or independent (you are the sole provider for your living/educational expenses) Dependent Independent 56. Students only: What is your best estimate of your family’s yearly income (if partnered, married, or a dependent student) or your yearly income (if single or an independent student)? Below $29,999 $30,000 - $39,999 $40,000 - $59,999 $60,000 - $79,999 $80,000 - $99,999 $100,000 - $129,999 $130,000 - $199,999 $200,000 - $249,999 $250,000 and above 57. Students only: Where do you live? On campus residence halls Off campus - Vulcan Village Off campus - Within walking distance to campus Off Campus Commuter (living independently or with family/guardian) Off campus – Global online 58. Students only: Are you employed either on campus or off-campus on average more than eight hours per week? Yes No 59. Students only: How many hours per week do you work? __________ hours 60. Students only: How are you currently paying for college? (Mark all that apply) Academic scholarship Athletics scholarship Credit card Family contribution Loans Need-based institutional grant Pell grant Personal contribution /job Tuition remission through CAL U employee Other (please specify) ___________________________________

253

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

61. Students only: Do you participate in any of the following clubs/organizations at CAL U? (Mark all that apply)

I do not participate in any clubs/organizations Student Leadership Groups (Student Government, Student Association, Inc., Mentors, Ambassadors, etc.) Academic/Professional Organizations (History Club, Psychology Club, Anthropology Club, etc.) Special Interest Organizations (Photography Club, Commuter Council, Veterans Group, etc.) Campus Community Groups (Black Student Union, CAL U Men United, Hispanic Student Association,

Political Groups (Cal Campaign Consultants, College Democrats, College Republicans, etc.) Religious Organizations Service Organizations/Civic Engagement (Volunteer Office, Circle K, Friends of Rachel, etc.) Social Fraternities and Sororities Publications and Media Organizations (Keystone, PRSSA, etc.) Intramurals/ Clubs Sports Music/Performance Organizations (Mon Valley Dance Council, University Choir, University Band,

NCAA Varsity Athletics Honor Societies (Kappa Omicron Nu, Alpha Phi Sigma, Lambda Pi Eta, Pi Kappa Delta, etc.) Residence Hall Organizations Other (please specify) ___________________________________

International Club, Rainbow Alliance, Veterans Club, Women’s Center, etc.)

Vulcanettes Dance Squad, etc.)

62. Students only: On average, how many hours a week during the academic year do you spend on experiential learning activities (labs, studios, internships)? ________ hours 63. Students only: If you are a current student how many total years will you spend at CALU to complete your degree? 1 year 2 years 3 years 4 years 5 years 6 years 7 years 8 years 9 years more than 9 years

Part 4: Perceptions of Campus Climate 64. Within the past year, have you observed any conduct directed toward a person or group of people on campus that you believe created an exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile (harassing) working or learning environment? Yes No

254

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

65. Who/what was the target of this conduct? (Mark all that apply) Administrator Alumni Athletic coach/trainer Board member Borough police Campus visitor(s) Community assistant Co-worker Off campus community member Department head Donor Don’t know Faculty advisor Faculty member Friend Partner/spouse Person that I supervise Public Safety/University Police Community assistant Staff member Stranger Student Social networking site (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) Supervisor Teaching assistant/graduate assistant/Lab assistant/Tutor Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 66. Who/what was the source of this conduct? (Mark all that apply) Administrator Alumni Athletic coach/trainer Board member Borough police Campus visitor(s) Community assistant Co-worker Off campus community member Department head Donor Don’t know source Faculty advisor Faculty member Friend Partner/spouse Person that I supervise Public Safety/University Police Staff member Stranger Student Social networking site (Facebook, Twitter, etc.) Supervisor Teaching assistant/graduate assistant/Lab assistant/Tutor Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 255

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

67. What do you believe was the basis for this conduct? (Mark all that apply) Age Care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) Country of origin Developmental disorder Discipline of study Educational level Educational modality (on-line, classroom) English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression Immigrant status Learning disability Medical condition Military/veteran status Participation in an organization (please specify) ______________________________ Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Philosophical views Political views Position (staff, faculty, student) Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status Other (please specify) ___________________________________

68. Based on one’s identity, what forms of conduct have you observed or personally been made aware of? (Mark all that apply) Assumption that someone was admitted/hired/promoted based on his/her identity Assumption that someone was not admitted/hired/promoted based on his/her identity Deliberately ignored or excluded Derogatory remarks Derogatory/unsolicited e-mails, text messages, Facebook posts, Twitter posts Derogatory written comments Derogatory phone calls Graffiti (e.g., event advertisements removed or defaced) Intimidated/bullied Isolated or left out when work was required in groups Isolated or left out Racial/ethnic profiling Received a low performance evaluation Received a poor grade Physical violence Singled out as the “resident authority” (token) Stalking Threats of physical violence Victim of a crime Other (please specify) ___________________________________

256

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

69. Where did this conduct occur? (Mark all that apply) At a campus event In a classroom In an on-line class In a campus dining facility In a campus office In a faculty office In a public space on campus In a meeting with one other person In a meeting with a group of people In athletic facilities In campus housing In off-campus housing Off campus Off campus CAL U sponsored event Vulcan village While working at a campus job While walking on campus On a social networking sites/Facebook/Twitter/cell phone/e-mail/other forms of technological communication Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 70. Please describe your reactions to observing this conduct. (Mark all that apply) I did nothing I felt embarrassed I ignored it I was afraid I was angry It didn’t affect me at the time I left the situation immediately I confronted the harasser at the time I confronted the harasser later I sought support from off-campus hot-line/advocacy services I sought support from campus resource (Counseling Center, Women’s Center, ENDV, Social Equity, etc.) I told a friend I told a family member I contacted a local law enforcement official I sought support from a staff person I sought support from an administrator I sought support from a faculty member I sought support from a spiritual advisor (e.g., pastor, rabbi, priest) I sought support from student staff (e.g., community assistant) I sought information on-line I didn’t know who to go to I made an official complaint to a campus employee/official I didn’t report it for fear that my complaint would not be taken seriously I did report it but I did not feel the complaint was taken seriously Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 71. If you would like to elaborate on your observations, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 257

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

72. Faculty/Staff only: I have perceived unfair and unjust hiring practices at CAL U (e.g., hiring supervisor bias, search committee bias, lack of effort in diversifying recruiting pool). Yes No Don't know 73. Faculty/Staff only: I believe that the unfair and unjust hiring practices were based upon (Mark all that apply) Age Care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) Country of origin Developmental disorder Discipline of study Educational level Educational modality (on-line, classroom) English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression Immigrant status Learning disability Medical condition Military/veteran status Participation in an organization (please specify) _______________________________ Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Philosophical views Political views Position (staff, faculty, student) Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 74. Faculty/Staff only: If you would like to elaborate on your observations, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

75. Faculty/ Staff only: I have perceived unfair or unjust employment-related disciplinary actions up to and including dismissal at CAL U. Yes No Don't know

258

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

76. Faculty/Staff only: I believe that the unfair or unjust employment-related disciplinary actions were based upon (Mark all that apply) Age Care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) Country of origin Developmental disorder Discipline of study Educational level Educational modality (on-line, classroom) English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression Immigrant status Learning disability Medical condition Military/veteran status Participation in an organization (please specify) _______________________________ Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Philosophical views Political views Position (staff, faculty, student) Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status Other (please specify) ___________________________________ 77. Faculty/Staff only: If you would like to elaborate on your observations, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 78. Faculty/Staff only: I have perceived unfair or unjust behavior, procedures, or employment practices related to promotion/tenure/reappointment/reclassification at CAL U. Yes No Don't know 79. Faculty/Staff only: I believe the unfair or unjust behavior, procedures, or employment practices related to promotion/tenure/reappointment/reclassification were based upon… (Mark all that apply) Age Care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) Country of origin Developmental disorder Discipline of study Educational level Educational modality (on-line, classroom) English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression 259

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

Immigrant status Learning disability Medical condition Military/veteran status Participation in an organization (please specify) _______________________________ Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Philosophical views Political views Position (staff, faculty, student) Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status Other (please specify) ___________________________________

80. Faculty/Staff only: If you would like to elaborate on your observations, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 81. Using a scale of 1-5, please rate the overall climate on campus on the following dimensions: (Note: As an example, for the first item, “friendly—hostile,” 1=very friendly, 2=somewhat friendly, 3=neither friendly nor hostile, 4=somewhat hostile, and 5=very hostile) Friendly Cooperative Improving Positive for persons with disabilities Positive for people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender Positive for people of Jewish heritage Positive for people of Islamic faith Positive for people of Christian faith Positive for people of other faith backgrounds Positive for People of Color Positive for men Positive for women Positive for non-native English speakers Positive for people who are immigrants Positive for people who are not U.S. citizens Welcoming Respectful Positive for people who are caring for children Positive for people who are caring for relatives Positive for people of high socioeconomic status Positive for people of low socioeconomic status Positive for veterans/active military

5 Hostile Uncooperative Regressing Negative for persons with disabilities Negative for people who identify as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgender Negative for people of Jewish heritage Negative for people of Islamic faith Negative for people of Christian faith Negative for people of other faith backgrounds Negative for People of Color Negative for men Negative for women Negative for non-native English speakers Negative for people who are immigrants Negative for people who are not U.S. citizens Not welcoming Disrespectful Negative for people who are caring children Negative for people who are caring for relatives Negative for people of high socioeconomic status Negative for people of low socioeconomic status Negative for veterans/active military 260

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

82. Using a scale of 1-5, please rate the overall climate on campus on the following dimensions: (Note: As an example, for the first item, 1= completely free of racism, 2=mostly free of racism, 3=occasionally encounter racism; 4= regularly encounter racism; 5=constantly encounter racism) Not racist Not sexist Not homophobic Not age biased Not classist (socioeconomic status) Not classist (position: faculty, staff, student) Not ablest

5 Racist Sexist Homophobic Age biased Classist (socioeconomic status) Classist (position: faculty, staff, student) Ablest

83. Faculty/Students only: The classroom climate is welcoming for students based on their: Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don't know

Age (e.g., non-traditional students)

Commuter status

Country of origin

English language proficiency/accent

Ethnicity

Gender

Gender expression

Immigrant status

Learning disability

Medical conditions

Military/veteran status

Caregiver status (e.g. having children, relatives)

Participation in a student organization

Participation in an athletic team

Psychological disorder

Physical characteristics

Physical disability

Political views

Race

Religious/spiritual views

Sexual orientation

Socioeconomic status

261

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

84. The climate for students is enhanced through their participation in the following organizations. (Mark all that apply).

NCAA Varsity Athletics Honor Societies (Kappa Omicron Nu, Alpha Phi Sigma, Lambda Pi Eta, Pi Kappa Delta, etc.) Residence Hall Organizations Other (please specify) ___________________________________

International Club, Rainbow Alliance, Veterans Club, Women’s Center, etc.)

Vulcanettes Dance Squad, etc.)

85. Students only: Please indicate your level of agreement to the following statements: Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don't know

I feel valued by faculty in the classroom.

I feel valued by other students in the classroom.

I think CAL U faculty are genuinely concerned with my welfare.

I think CAL U staff are genuinely concerned with my welfare.

I think CAL U administrators are genuinely concerned with my welfare.

I think faculty pre-judge my abilities based on their perception of my identity/background.

I believe the campus climate encourages free and open discussion of difficult topics.

I have faculty who I perceive as role models.

I have staff who I perceive as role models.

262

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

86. Student/Faculty only: I perceive tension in classroom discussions with regard to a person’s:

Age (e.g., non-traditional students) Caregiver status (e.g. having children, relatives) Commuter status Country of origin English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression Immigrant status Learning disability Medical conditions Military/veteran status Participation in a student organization Participation in an athletic team Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Political views Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don't know

87. Student only: I perceive tension in residence hall discussions with regard to a person’s:

Care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) Country of origin English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression Immigrant status Learning disability Medical conditions Military/veteran status Participation in a student organization Participation in an athletic team Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Political views Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree 263

Don't know

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

88. Faculty/Staff only: The workplace climate is welcoming for faculty/staff based on their:

Age Care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) Country of origin English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression Immigrant status Learning disability Level of education Medical conditions Military/veteran status Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Political views Position (faculty, staff) Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

264

Don't know

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

89. How would you rate the accessibility on campus for people with physical, learning, psychological, or medical disabilities? Fully accessible

Accessible with assistance or intervention

Not accessible

Don't know

Physical Accessibility Athletic facilities (stadiums, arena, etc.)

Buildings Azorsky Hall Coover Eberly Building Dixon Duda Frich Gallagher Hamer Helsel Herron Hall (Fitness Center) Keystone Morgan New Science Noss Hall Old Main South Hall Steele Vulcan Watkins Classrooms, labs Residence Halls Vulcan Village Computer labs Dining Facilities Elevators Health/Wellness Center Mandarino Library On-campus transportation Parking Restrooms Studios/Performing Arts Spaces Walkways and pedestrian paths

Course instruction/materials Information in Alternative Formats Instructors Instructional Materials

CAL U Website D2L VIP

265

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

90. If you would like to elaborate on your observations to Question 89, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 91. How would you rate the climate on campus for people who are…

Affected by psychological health issues Affected by physical health issues Female From religious affiliations other than Christian From Christian affiliations Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender Immigrants International students, staff, or faculty Learning disabled Male Non-native English speakers Parents/guardians People of Color Providing care for other than a child (e.g., elder care) Physically disabled Socioeconomically disadvantaged Socioeconomically advantaged Veterans/active military/reservists members Other (please specify) ____________

Very respectful

Moderately respectful

Neither respectful nor disrespectful

Moderately disrespectful

Very disrespectful

Don't know

92. How would you rate the climate on campus for persons from the following racial/ethnic backgrounds?

African African American/Black Alaskan Native Asian Asian American Southeast Asian Caribbean/West Indian European American/White Indian subcontinent Latino(a)/Hispanic Latin American Middle Eastern Native American Indian Pacific Islanders/Hawaiian Natives Multiracial, multiethnic, or multicultural persons Other (please specify) ____________

Very respectful

Moderately respectful

Neither respectful nor disrespectful

Moderately disrespectful

Very disrespectful

Don't know

266

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

93. Students only. Before I enrolled, I expected that the campus climate would be _____for people who are…

Affected by psychological health issues Affected by physical health issues Female From the Catholic religion From religious affiliations other than Christian From Christian affiliations Gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender Immigrants International students, staff, or faculty Learning disabled Male Non-native English speakers Parents/guardians Providing care for either a child or family member Physically disabled Socioeconomically disadvantaged Socioeconomically advantaged Veterans/active military members Working status (part-time employment) Other (please specify)

____________________________

Very Moderately Respectful Respectful

Neither Respectful nor Disrespectful

Moderately Disrespectful

Very Disrespectful

Don’t Know

94. Students Only: Do you experience financial hardship at CAL U? Yes No

95. How do you experience financial hardship? (Mark all that apply) Difficulty affording tuition Difficulty affording fees Difficulty purchasing my books/equipment Difficulty participating in social events Difficulty affording university meal plan Difficulty participating in co-curricular events or activities (alternative spring breaks, class trips, etc.) Difficulty traveling home during university breaks Difficulty in affording housing Difficulty in affording parking Difficulty in affording transportation costs Difficulty in affording health insurance Other (please specify) ___________________________________

267

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

96. Students only: The following questions ask you about your academic experience. I am performing up to my full academic potential. Few of my courses this year have been intellectually stimulating. I am satisfied with my academic experience at CAL U. I am satisfied with the extent of my intellectual development since enrolling at CAL U. I have performed academically as well as I anticipated I would. My academic experience has had a positive influence on my intellectual growth and interest in ideas. My interest in ideas and intellectual matters has increased since coming to CAL U. I intend to graduate from CAL U. I am considering transferring to another college or university.

Stongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Part 5: Institutional Actions Relative to Climate Issues 97. Please list any organizations/offices/departments you feel who foster diversity/inclusion on campus on the lines below. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

98. Please list any organizations/offices/departments you feel who inhibit diversity/inclusion on campus on the lines below. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

268

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

99. Students/Faculty only: Does the curriculum at CAL U include materials, perspectives, and/or experiences of people based on their: Age Care-giving status (e.g., child care, elder care) Country of origin English language proficiency/accent Ethnicity Gender Gender expression Immigrant status Learning disability Medical conditions Level of education Military/veteran status Psychological disorder Physical characteristics Physical disability Political views Position (faculty, staff) Race Religious/spiritual views Sexual orientation Socioeconomic status

Strongly agree

Agree

Neither agree nor disagree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

Don't know

100. Faculty/Staff only. How do you feel each of the following initiatives influence (if currently available at CAL U) or could influence (if not currently available at CAL U) the climate at CAL U?

Providing more flexibility for promotion for faculty. Providing more flexibility for computing the probationary period for tenure (e.g., family leave). Providing recognition and rewards for including diversity issues in courses across the curriculum. Providing diversity training for staff. Providing diversity training for faculty. Providing, promoting and improving access to counseling for people who have experienced harassment. Providing mentorship for new faculty. Providing mentorship for new staff. Providing a clear and fair process to resolve conflicts. Increasing funding to support efforts to change campus climate. Including diversity-related professional experiences as one of the criteria for hiring of staff/faculty. Providing diversity and equity training to search and tenure committees. Increasing the diversity of the faculty and staff. Increasing the diversity of the administration. Increasing the diversity of the student body.

Positively influenced campus climate

Has not influenced campus climate

Negatively influenced campus climate

Don't know

269

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

101. If you would like to elaborate on how any of the above influence campus climate, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 102. Students only. How do you feel each of the following initiatives influence (if currently available at CAL U) or could influence (if not currently available at CAL U) the climate at CAL U?

Providing diversity training for all students. Providing diversity training for all staff. Providing diversity training for all faculty. Providing a person to address student complaints of classroom inequity. Increasing the diversity of the faculty and staff. Increasing the diversity of the student body. Increasing opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue among students. Increasing opportunities for cross-cultural dialogue between faculty, staff and students. Incorporating issues of diversity and cross-cultural competence more effectively into the curriculum. Providing more effective faculty mentorship of students.

Positively influence campus climate

Has not influence on campus climate

Negatively influence campus climate

Don't know

103. If you would like to elaborate on how any of the above influence campus climate, please do so here. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________

Part 6: Your Additional Comments 104. Are your experiences on campus different from those you experience in the community surrounding campus? If so, how are these experiences different and where do they occur? ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 105. This survey has asked you to reflect upon a large number of issues related to the climate and your experiences in this climate, using a multiple-choice format. If you would like to elaborate upon any of your survey responses, further describe your experiences, or offer additional thoughts about these issues and ways that the college might improve the climate, we encourage you to do so in the space provided below. ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ ____________________________________________________________________________________ 270

Rankin & Associates Consulting Cal U Climate Assessment Project Cal U Report – October 2013

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS SURVEY

We recognize that answering some of the questions on this survey may have been difficult for people who have witnessed or experienced acts of discrimination. Participants who experience discomfort are encouraged to contact: Counseling Center Carter Hall, Room G53 724-938-4056 Emergency walk-in hours are Monday-Friday from 8:00 A.M. to 4:00 P.M. If you need emergency assistance after office hours, please call the SPHS Hotline at 724-379-6093 or 1-888-386-2114 To thank all members of the CAL U for their participation in this survey, we are offering the opportunity to win a “Climate Survey Thank You” prize. Submitting your contact information (your campus e-mail address) for a prize is optional. No survey information is connected to entering your e-mail address. To be eligible to win a prize, simply enter your campus e-mail address at the link below. Please submit only one entry per person. Duplicate entries will be discarded. Randomly drawn names will be selected from the submitted e-mails for the following prizes: Students One (1) IPad One (1) $500.00 scholarship Faculty One (1) IPad Staff One (1) IPad Following is the link for you to enter your e-mail address for a chance at a “Climate Survey Thank You!” prize: http://dev.calu.edu/campus-life/campus-climate-survey/prizes/index.aspx Thanks again for your participation. Survey results will be available in Fall 2012.

271