Transcript Sue Rankin Presentation - University of Wisconsin

University of Wisconsin-Stout
Campus Climate Assessment
Results of Report
October 13, 2011
Climate In Higher Education
Community
Members
Creation
and
Distribution
of
Knowledge
Climate
(Living,
Working,
Learning)
Barcelo, 2004; Bauer, 1998, Kuh & Whitt, 1998; Hurtado, 1998, 2005; Ingle, 2005; Milhem, 2005;
Peterson, 1990; Rankin, 1994, 1998, 2003, 2005; Smith, 1999; Tierney, 1990; Worthington, 2008
Assessing Campus Climate
• Campus Climate is a construct
What is it?
• Current attitudes, behaviors, and standards
and practices of employees and students of an
institution
Definition?
• Personal Experiences
• Perceptions
How is it
measured? • Institutional Efforts
Rankin & Reason, 2008
Campus Climate & Students
How students
experience their
campus environment
influences both
learning and
developmental
outcomes.1
1
2
3
Discriminatory
environments have a
negative effect on
student learning.2
Research supports the
pedagogical value of
a diverse student
body and faculty on
enhancing learning
outcomes.3
Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991, 2005
Cabrera, Nora, Terenzini, Pascarella, & Hagedron, 1999; Feagin, Vera & Imani, 1996; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991.
Hale, 2004; Harper & Quaye , 2004; Harper, & Hurtado, 2007; Hurtado, 2003.
Campus Climate & Faculty/Staff
The personal and
professional
development of
employees including
faculty members,
administrators, and staff
members are impacted
by campus climate.1
1Settles,
Cortina, Malley, and Stewart (2006)
2002
3Silverschanz, Cortina, Konik, & Magley, 2007; Waldo, 1999
2Sears,
Faculty members who
judge their campus
climate more positively
are more likely to feel
personally supported and
perceive their work unit
as more supportive.2
Research underscores the
relationships between (1)
workplace discrimination
and negative job and
career attitudes and (2)
workplace encounters
with prejudice and lower
health and well-being..3
Project Objectives
Provide UW-Stout with
information, analysis, and
recommendations as they relate
to campus climate.
This information will be used in conjunction with
other data to provide UW-Stout with an inclusive
view of campus.
University of Wisconsin
System Mission
The mission of the system is to develop human resources, to discover and
disseminate knowledge, to extend knowledge and its application beyond the
boundaries of its campuses and to serve and stimulate society by developing
in students heightened intellectual, cultural and humane sensitivities,
scientific, professional and technological expertise and a sense of purpose.
Inherent in this broad mission are methods of instruction, research, extended
training and public service designed to educate people and improve the
human condition. Basic to every purpose of the system is the search for truth.
Core Mission of the
University Cluster
…“Serve the needs of women, minority,
disadvantaged, disabled, and nontraditional
students and seek racial and ethnic
diversification of the student body and the
professional faculty and staff.”
UW-Stout Mission Statement
University of Wisconsin-Stout is a career-focused,
comprehensive polytechnic university where
diverse students, faculty and staff integrate applied
learning, scientific theory, humanistic
understanding, creativity and research to solve realworld problems, grow the economy and serve a
global society.
Process to Date
Participating Institutions
Tier I
Spring 2008
Tier II
Fall 2009
UW Colleges
UW-Eau Claire
UW-La Crosse
UW-Parkside
UW-Milwaukee
UW-River Falls
UW-Oshkosh
UW-Whitewater
UW-Stevens Point
Process to Date
Participating Institutions
Tier III
Spring 2011
UW-Green Bay
UW-Platteville
UW-Madison
(CALS/DSL)
UW-Stout
UW-Superior
UW Extension
Overview of the Project
Phase I
• Fact-Finding Groups
Phase II
• Assessment Tool Development and Implementation
Phase III
• Data Analysis
Phase IV
• Final Report and Presentation
Survey Instrument
Final instrument


86 questions and additional space for respondents to provide commentary
On-line or paper & pencil options
Sample = Population

All students and employees of UW-Stout’s community received an
invitation to participate from the Chancellor.
Results include information regarding:




Respondents’ personal experiences at UW-Stout
Respondents’ perceptions of climate at UW-Stout
Respondents’ perceptions of institutional actions
Respondents’ input into recommendations for change
Survey Assessment Limitations
Self-selection bias
Response rates
Social desirability
Caution in generalizing results for
constituent groups with significantly lower
response rates
Method Limitation
Data were not reported for groups of
fewer than 5 individuals where identity
could be compromised.
Instead, small groups were combined to
eliminate possibility of identifying
individuals.
Results
Response Rates
Who are the respondents?
 1,877 people responded to the call to
participate (18.5% overall response rate).
 Several respondents contributed remarks to
one or more of the open-ended questions.
Student Response Rates (13%)
Non-Degree Seeking (7%, n=30)
Associate Degree (n=16)
Bachelor Degree (14%, n=1,109)
Master Degree (13%, n=96)
Professional Degree (n=5)
Faculty Response Rates (56%)
Instructional Academic Staff (27%, n=46)
Instructor (n=16)
Assistant Professor (62%, n=72)
Associate Professor (68%, n=56)
Professor (74%, n=64)
Staff Response Rates (39%)
Limited Term Employee (n=31)
Classified Staff Represented (n=118)
Classified Staff Non-Represented (n=37)
Non-Instructional/Other Academic Staff (35%, n=93)
Administrator (n=41)
Other (n=47)
Student Response Rates by
Selected Demographics
By
Race
Students of
Color
25% (n=113)
White
Students
13% (n=1125)
By
Gender
Women
16% (n=743)
Men
11% (n=502)
Results
Additional Demographic
Characteristics
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)
(Duplicated Total)
African
African American/Black
1699
Alaskan Native
Asian
Asian American
Southeast Asian
Caribbean/West Indian
Caucasian/White
Indian subcontinent
Latino(a)/Hispanic
Middle Eastern
Native American Indian
Pacific Islander
Other
13
12
2
52
31
14
5
6
26
5
25
7
26
Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)
(Unduplicated Total)
Respondents by Position Status
and Gender Identity (n)
Undergraduate Students
Graduate Students
Faculty
Academic Staff
683
Classified Staff
462
60
119
99
Women
94
131
40
63
58
Men
5 transgender respondents are not included in this review to protect anonymity
Respondents by Position Status and
Sexual Identity (n)
Respondents by Ability/Disability (n)
Mobility impairment
Sensory impairment
Learning disability
Mental health disorder
Chronic health disorder
103
Other
48
34
45
28
19
1
Respondents by
Spiritual Affiliation and Campus
n
%
1,163
62.0
Other than Christian
287
17.0
No affiliation
386
21.0
Christian
Citizenship Status by Position
Students
Employees
n
%
n
%
1189
95.3
527
92.6
U.S. citizen – naturalized
17
1.4
16
2.8
Dual citizenship
7
0.6
2
0.4
Permanent resident (immigrant)
8
0.6
11
1.9
International (F-1, J-1, or H1-B, or other visa)
3
0.2
0
0.0
U.S.-born citizen
Students by Class Standing (n)
Student Respondents’ College
Career (n)
Income by Student Position Status (n)
Undergraduate Dependent
Undergraduate Independent
Graduate students
236
189
164
99
82
54
68
57
46
21
21
28
6
14
3
Respondents’ Parental Status
by Position Status (n)
Students’ Residence
Students’ Residence
n
%
509
39.8
Private residence hall
4
0.3
University housing apartment
10
0.8
Fraternity/sorority housing
6
0.5
Off-campus apartment/house
560
43.8
With partner/spouse/children
90
7.0
Other
14
1.1
University housing residence hall
Findings
Overall Comfort Levels
Campus Climate
74%
Department/Work Unit Climate
73%
Classroom Climate
81%
Least Comfortable with Overall
Campus Climate
People of Color
LGBQ
Least Comfortable with Climate in
Department/Work Unit
People of Color
Women
Least Comfortable with Classroom
Climate
Students/Faculty of Color
LGBQ Students/Faculty
Overall Satisfaction
75%
• Employees who were “highly satisfied” or
“satisfied” with their jobs at UW-Stout
63%
• Employees who were “highly satisfied” or
“satisfied” with the way their careers have
progressed at UW-Stout
84%
• Students who were “highly satisfied” or
“satisfied” with their education at UWStout
Levels of Satisfaction by
Demographic Groups
Satisfaction
with Job and
Career
Progression
•People of Color and
Classified Staff least
satisfied
•LGBQ and Academic
Staff most satisfied
Student Satisfaction with Education at
UW-Stout (%)
* Highly Satisfied and Satisfied collapsed into one category.
** Highly Dissatisfied and Dissatisfied collapsed into one category.
Challenges and Opportunities
Experiences with Harassment
21%
385 respondents indicated that
they had personally experienced
exclusionary, intimidating,
offensive and/or hostile conduct
that interfered with their ability to
work or learn at UW-Stout
Form of Perceived Offensive, Hostile,
or Intimidating Conduct
n
%
Deliberately ignored or excluded
177
46.0
Intimidation/bullying
141
36.6
Stares
68
17.7
Target of derogatory remarks
60
15.6
Isolated or left out when working in groups
60
15.6
Derogatory written comments
46
11.9
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 385).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Personally Experienced Based on…(%)
University Status (n=101)
Gender (n=87)
Age (n=81)
Educational Level (n=54)
26
23
21
14
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to
University Status (by University Status) (%)
(n=161)¹
(n=103)¹
(n=54)¹
(n=56)¹
(n=26)²
(n=33)²
(n=16)²
(n=23)²
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.
² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Gender Identity (%)
Overall experienced conduct¹
Experienced conduct due
to gender²
1
2
31
22
18
10
Women
Men
(n=238)¹
(n=140)¹
(n=73)²
(n=14)²
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.
² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Racial Identity (%)
Overall experienced conduct¹
Experienced conduct due to race²
41
31
19
1
People of Color
White
(n=54)¹
(n=313)¹
(n=22)²
(n=3)²
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.
² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct
Due to Sexual Identity (%)
(n=32)¹
(n=318)¹
(n=15)²
(n=4)²
¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.
² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.
Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive,
Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct Due to Disability (%)
(n=35)¹
(n=9)¹
(n=9)¹
(n=15)¹
(n=13)²
(n=2)²
(n=1)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.
Location of Perceived Harassment
n
%
While working at a campus job
131
34.0
In a class
102
26.0
In a meeting with a group of people
96
25.0
In campus office
75
20.0
In University residence halls
54
14.0
In meeting with one other person
54
14.0
Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 385).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Source of Perceived Conduct by
Position Status (n)
What did you
1
do?
Personal responses:




Was angry (55%)
Felt embarrassed (39%)
Avoided the harasser (37%)
Told a friend (36%)
Reporting responses:





1
Made an official complaint to campus employee/official (21% )
Didn’t report it for fear of retaliation (17%)
Confronted the harasser at the time (14%)
Did report it but my complaint was not taken seriously (12%)
Didn’t report it for fear complaint would not be taken seriously (11%)
Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 385).
Respondents could mark more than one response
Sexual Harassment/Sexual Assault
The survey defined sexual harassment as “A repeated course of conduct
whereby one person engages in verbal or physical behavior of a sexual
nature, that is unwelcome, serves no legitimate purpose, intimidates
another person, and has the effect of creating an intimidating, hostile, or
offensive work or classroom environment.”
The survey defined sexual assault as “Intentional physical contact, such
as sexual intercourse or touching, of a person’s intimate body parts by
someone who did not have permission to make such contact.”
Sexual Misconduct at UW-Stout
8%
Believed they had been
touched in a sexual
manner that made
them feel
uncomfortable or
fearful
4%
Were fearful of being
sexually harassed at
UW-Stout
Respondents Who Experienced
Sexual Assault
2%
33 respondents
were victims of
sexual assault
Respondents Who Believed They Were
Sexually Assaulted By Select Demographics
Gender
Race
Position
Sexual
Orientation
Women (29)
White
People (31)
Students (30)
Heterosexual
(28)
Men (<5)
People of
Color (n<5)
Employees
(n<5)
LGBQQ (<5)
Respondents Who Believed They
Were Sexually Assaulted
Where did it occur?
Off-campus (n = 18)
On-campus (n = 10)
Who were the offenders?
What did you do1?
Told a friend (n = 20)
Did nothing (n = 9)
Told family member (n = 7)
1Respondents
could mark more than one response
Students (n = 14)
Stranger (n = 11)
Acquaintance (n = 5)
Friend (n = 6)
Respondents Who Seriously Considered
Leaving UW-Stout
48% (n = 888) of all Respondents
Students (38%)
Faculty (71%)
Academic Staff (69%)
Classified Staff (62%)
Employee Respondents Who Seriously
Considered Leaving UW-Stout
Gender
Identity
• Women (65%)
• Men (72%)
Racial
Identity
• Employees of Color (75%)
• White Employees (66%)
Sexual
Identity
• LGBQ (79%)
• Heterosexual (67%)
Student Respondents Who Seriously
Considered Leaving UW-Stout
Gender
Identity
• Women (38%)
• Men (38%)
Racial
Identity
• Students of Color (46%)
• White Students (37%)
Sexual
Identity
• LGBQ (38%)
• Heterosexual (38%)
Perceptions
Respondents Who Observed or Were Personally Made
Aware of Conduct That Created an Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive and/or Hostile Working or Learning
Environment
Yes
%
n
30.0
552
Form of Observed Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive, or Hostile Conduct
n
%
Derogatory remarks
183
33.2
Deliberately ignored or excluded
167
30.3
Racial/ethnic profiling
141
25.5
Stares
141
25.5
Intimidation/bullying
140
25.4
Derogatory written comments
136
24.6
Someone isolated or left out because of their identity
107
19.4
Graffiti
101
18.3
Threats of physical violence
92
16.7
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 552).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Observed Harassment Based on…(%)
47
Sexual Orientation (n=259)
Race (n=175)
Ethnicity (n=156)
Gender (n=147)
Gender Expression (n=115)
Gender Identity (n=103)
32
28
27
21
19
Source of Observed Exclusionary, Intimidating,
Offensive, or Hostile Conduct (%)
Source
• Students (45%)
• Did not know the
source (18%)
• Faculty (16%)
• Colleagues (15%)
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 552).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
Location of Observed Exclusionary,
Intimidating, Offensive, or Hostile Conduct
In a class
40%
n = 66
While working at a campus job
27%
n = 45
In a meeting with a group of people
23%
Note: Only answered by respondents who observed harassment (n = 552).
Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.
n = 38
Perceived Discrimination
Employees Only
Hiring Practices
(27%, n = 156)
Employment Practices Up to and Including Dismissal
(17%, n = 102)
Employment Practices Related to Promotion (25%, n = 146)
Perceived Discrimination
Gender was the primary basis for
discriminatory hiring, employment-related
disciplinary actions, and practices related to
promotion.
Work-Life Issues
The majority of employee respondents expressed
positive attitudes about work-life issues.
Welcoming Workplace Climate
 More than half of all employees thought the workplace climate was
welcoming of “difference” based on all characteristics listed in
survey except mental health status and learning disability status .
 Respondents of Color and LGBQ Respondents were least likely to
believe the workplace climate was welcoming for employees based
on gender and race.
 Respondents of Color were least likely to believe the workplace
climate was welcoming based on sexual orientation.
Students’ Access to College is Being
Compromised by…
• Concerns about financial debt upon
53% graduation
• Tuition increases were not met by
53% corresponding increase in financial aid
40%
• Lack of financial aid
Institutional Actions
Inclusive Curriculum
More than half of all students and faculty felt the
curriculum included materials, perspectives, and/or
experiences of people based on 14 of 16
demographics characteristics except mental health
status and sexual orientation.
Visible Leadership
More than half of the respondents “strongly agreed”
or “agreed” that the faculty, senior administration,
students, support staff, and the UW system provided
visible leadership that fosters inclusion of diverse
members of the campus community.
Campus Initiatives That Would Positively
Affect the Climate
Employees
 More than half recommended:



Training mentors and leaders within departments to model
positive climate behavior
Offering diversity training/programs as community outreach
would positively affect the climate.
Providing immersion experiences for faculty/staff/ students:



to learn a second language
in service-learning projects with lower socioeconomic populations
to work with underrepresented/underserved populations
Campus Initiatives That Would Positively
Affect the Climate
Employees
 More than half recommended:





Providing on-campus child care services
Providing gender neutral/family friendly facilities
Providing, improving, and promoting access to quality services
for those individuals who experience sexual abuse
Providing mentors for minority faculty/students/staff new to
campus
Providing a clear protocol for responding to hate/hostile
incidents at the campus level and departmental level
Summary
Strengths and Successes
Challenges and Opportunities
Context
Interpreting the Summary
Although colleges and
universities attempt to foster
welcoming and inclusive
environments, they are not
immune to negative societal
attitudes and discriminatory
behaviors.
As a microcosm of the
larger social environment,
college and university
campuses reflect the
pervasive prejudices of
society.
Classism, Racism,
Sexism, Genderism,
Heterosexism, etc.
(Eliason, 1996; Hall & Sandler, 1984; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hart & Fellabaum, 2008; Malaney, Williams, & Gellar, 1997;
Rankin, 2003; Rankin & Reason, 2008; Rankin, Weber, Blumenfeld, & Frazer, 2010; Smith, 2009; Worthington, Navarro,
Loewy & Hart, 2008)
Overall Strengths & Successes
74%
comfortable with the
overall climate, 73%
with dept/work unit
climate, and 81% with
climate in their
classes.
75% of employee
respondents were
satisfied with their
jobs at UW-Stout and
63% with how their
careers have
progressed.
84% of students were
satisfied with their
education.
The majority of
employees expressed
positive attitudes and
experiences regarding
work-life issues.
Overall Challenges & Opportunities
33% (n = 552) had
observed or
personally been made
aware of harassment.
48% (n = 888) of all
respondents have
seriously considered
leaving UW-Stout.
21% (n = 385)
believed they had
personally
experienced
harassment.
8% (n = 146)
indicated that they had
been touched in a
sexual manner that
made them feel
uncomfortable or
fearful at UW-Stout.
Other Strengths & Successes
All Respondents
• The percentage of respondents who reported
experiencing harassment at UW-Stout is lower than the
percentage of respondents who report experiences of
harassment in similar studies of postsecondary
institutions.
• Many of the quantitative results were supported by
various voices that echoed positive experiences with
the UW-Stout campus climate.
Strengths & Successes
Employees
• The majority of employees felt the workplace
climate was welcoming based on gender, race,
sexual orientation, and 14 other demographics
characteristics.
• LGBQ employees were most satisfied with
their jobs and the way their careers have
progressed.
Other Challenges & Opportunities
Racial Tension
• Respondents of Color (31%, n = 87) reported personally experiencing
harassment more often than their White counterparts (19%, n = 313).
• People of Color were more likely than White people to observe offensive,
hostile, exclusionary, or intimidating conduct.
• Of all respondents who observed harassment, 32% (n = 175) believed it was
based on race.
• People of Color were less comfortable than White respondents with the
overall climate, the climate in their departments/work units, and the climate
in their classes.
• While 72% of White students thought the classroom climate was
welcoming based on race, only 49% of Students of Color agreed.
• Employees of Color were also more likely than White employees to believe
they had observed discriminatory hiring practices, discriminatory
employment-related disciplinary actions, and discriminatory practices
related to promotion.
Challenges & Opportunities
Homophobia and Heterosexism
Gender Disparities
• LGBQ respondents were more
likely than heterosexual
respondents to experience
harassment.
• Almost twice the percentage of
sexual minority respondents
believed they had observed
harassment than did heterosexual
respondents (53% compared with
28%).
• Sexual orientation (47%, n = 259)
was identified as the primary
basis for observed harassment.
• LGBQ respondents were less
comfortable with the overall
climate, the climate in their
departments/work units, and the
climate in their classes.
• Gender was the most observed
reason for employment
discrimination.
• Gender was the second most
reported basis (23%, n = 87) for
personal experiences of
harassment.
• Slightly higher rates of women
(22%) versus men (18%) reported
personal harassment, but higher
rates of women (31%) than men
(10%) believed that the
mistreatment was based on their
gender.
• Gender was the fourth most
reported basis for those who
observed harassment (27%, n =
147).
Other Challenges & Opportunities
Differential Treatment by University Status
• Of all respondents (21%) who experienced harassment, university status (26%, n =
101) was most often cited as the basis for the mistreatment.
• Of the 36% (n = 56) classified staff respondents who reported personally
experiencing misconduct, 41% (n = 23) said the conduct was based on their status at
UW-Stout, higher than any other employee group.
• Classified staff reported observing discriminatory hiring, discriminatory
employment-related disciplinary actions, and discriminatory practices related to
promotion, more than any other employee group.
• Over 10% of all respondents indicated University status as the reason for unfair and
unjust hiring practices.
• Classified staff members were also less satisfied with their jobs and much less
satisfied than with the way their careers have progressed when compared with
academic staff.
Next Steps
Process Forward
Fall 2011
Share report results with community
 Community dialogue regarding the assessment
results
 Inclusion & Equity Advisory Board
 Community feedback on recommended actions
 Full Report available for community review
Questions and
Discussion