fashion institute of technology

Fashion Institute of Technology

Campus Climate Assessment

Results of Report

April 22-23, 2013

1

Climate In Higher Education

Climate (Living, Working, Learning)

Creation and

Distribution of

Knowledge

Community Members

Barcelo, 2004; Bauer, 1998, Kuh & Whitt, 1998; Hurtado, 1998, 2005; Ingle, 2005; Milhem, 2005; Peterson, 1990; Rankin, 1994, 1998, 2003, 2005; Rankin & Reason, 2008; Smith, 2009; Tierney, 1990; Worthington, 2008 3

Assessing Campus Climate

Rankin & Reason, 2008

What is it?

• Campus Climate is a construct

Definition?

• Current attitudes, behaviors, and standards and practices of employees and students of an institution

How is it measured?

• Personal Experiences• Perceptions• Institutional Efforts

4

Campus Climate & Students

How students experience their

campus environment influences both learning and

developmental outcomes.1

Discriminatory environments have a negative effect on student learning.2

Research supports the pedagogical value of

a diverse student body and faculty on enhancing learning

outcomes.3

1 Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991, 20052 Cabrera, Nora, Terenzini, Pascarella, & Hagedron, 1999; Feagin, Vera & Imani, 1996; Pascarella & Terenzini, 1991. 3 Hale, 2004; Harper & Quaye , 2004; Harper, & Hurtado, 2009; Hurtado, 2003. 5

Campus Climate & Faculty/Staff

The personal and professional

development of employees including

faculty members, administrators, and staff members are impacted by campus climate.1

Faculty members who judge their campus

climate more positively are more

likely to feel personally supported and perceive their work unit as more

supportive.2

Research underscores the relationships between (1) workplace discrimination

and negative job/career attitudes and (2)

workplace encounters with prejudice and lower health/well-being..3

1Settles, Cortina, Malley, and Stewart, 20062Sears, 20023Silverschanz, Cortina, Konik, & Magley, 2007; Costello, 2012 6

Projected Outcomes

FIT will add to their knowledge base with regard to how constituent groups currently feel about their particular campus climate and how the community responds to them (e.g., pedagogy, curricular issues, professional development, inter-group/intra-group relations, respect issues).

FIT will use the results of the assessment to inform current/on-going work.

7

Examine the Research• Review work

already completed

Preparation• Readiness of

each campus

Assessment• Examine the

climate

Follow-up• Building on

the successes and addressing the challenges

Setting the Context for Beginning the Work

8

Overview of the Project

• Assessment Tool Development and Implementation

Phase I

• Data Analysis

Phase II

• Final Report and Presentation

Phase III

10

Instrument/Sample

Final instrument • 103 questions and additional space for

respondents to provide commentary• On-line or paper & pencil options

Sample = Population• All students and employees of FIT’s

community received an invitation to participate from Dr. Brown and members of the CSGW forwarded subsequent invitations.

12

http://marketfix.files.wordpress.com/2010/09/online-survey.jpg

Survey Limitations

Self-selection bias Response rates Social desirability

Caution in generalizing results

for constituent groups with

significantly lower response rates

13

Method Limitation

Data were not reported for groups of fewer than 5

individuals where identity could be compromised.

Instead, small groups were combined to eliminate possibility

of identifying individuals.

14

Results

Response Rates

17

Who are the respondents?

2,046 people responded to the call to participate (16.5% overall response rate)

1058 different respondents contributed remarks to one or more of the open-ended questions

18

Response Rates by Position

15%

•Students ( n = 1497)

49%

•Staff (n = 312)

14%

•Faculty (n = 238)

19

Student Response Rates

16%

• Undergraduate Student - Day

17%

• Undergraduate Student – Evening/Weekend

4%

• Non-Degree Student

15%

• Graduate Student

86%

• Certificate Student

20

Faculty Response Rates

42%

• Tenure/Tenure-Track Faculty

57%

• Non-Classroom Faculty

7%

• Adjunct

21

Staff Response Rates

46%

• Staff

29%

• Classroom Assistants

>100%

• Administrators

22

Results

Additional Demographic Characteristics

23

Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)(Duplicated Total)

18

111

0

203

8555

147

642

13

239

6844 34

11 12

African (n = 18)African American/Black (n = 111)Alaskan Native (n = 0)Asian (n = 203)Asian American (n = 85)Caribbean/West Indian (n - 55)European (n = 147)European American/White (n = 642)Indian subcontinent (n = 13)Latino(a)/Hispanic (n = 239)Latin American (n = 68)Middle Eastern (n = 44)Native American Indian (n = 34)Pacific Islander/Hawaiian Native (n = 11)Southeast Asian (n =12)

24

Respondents by Racial/Ethnic Identity (n)(Unduplicated Total)

967918

People of ColorWhite People

25

Respondents by Gender Identity and Position Status (n)

4 respondents identified as transgender, but given the small “n” are not included in subsequent gender analyses26

Respondents by Sexual Identity and Position Status (n)

27

Respondents with Conditions that Substantially Affect Major Life Activities

n %

No disability 1711 83.5ADD/ADHD 91 4.4Asperger’s/ High Functioning Autism 2 0.1Chronic Illness 26 1.3Emotional/Psychological 85 4.2Hearing 13 0.6Learning disabled 33 1.6Medical/health 45 2.2Physical/mobility ambulatory 9 0.4Physical/mobility non-ambulatory 3 0.1Visual 17 0.8Other 15 0.7

28

Respondents by Spiritual Affiliation

957

144195 158

243 265

Christian

Other than Christian

Agnostic

Atheist

Spiritual, no affiliation

No affiliation

31

Students by Class Standing (n)

34

Students’ Family Income by Dependency Status (n)

35

Students’ Primary Methods for Paying for FIT

36

n %

Family contribution 761 51.1Loans (private and federal) 705 47.4Pell grant 378 25.4Personal contribution/job 333 22.4Credit card 281 18.9Academic scholarship 198 13.3Need based grant 165 11.1Other 82 5.5Employer sponsored support 11 0.7Tuition remission through FIT employee 11 0.7

Manners in Which Students Experienced Financial Hardship

n %

Difficulty purchasing my books/equipment/supplies 622 79.2Difficulty affording tuition 534 68.0Difficulty in affording transportation costs 411 52.4Difficulty in affording housing 388 49.4Difficulty affording fees 385 49.0Difficulty participating in co-curricular events or activities (alternative spring breaks, class trips, etc.) 240 30.6Difficulty traveling home during college breaks 224 28.5Difficulty in affording health insurance 169 21.5Difficulty affording FIT meal plan/food 144 18.3Other 48 6.1

37

Students’ Residence

Residencen %

On campus residence halls 518 34.8

Off campus Commuter 966 64.9

Living independently or with roommates in apartment/house

480 49.7

Living with family member/guardian 412 42.7

Missing 74 7.7

39

Time Students Expect to Spend at FIT to Complete Degrees (n)

40

Findings

42

“Comfortable”/ “Very Comfortable” with:

Classroom Climate for Faculty (78%)

Classroom Climate for Students (82%)

Department/Work Unit Climate (77%)

Overall Campus Climate (81%)

43

Comfort With Overall Climate and Department/Work Unit

No differences in comfort for overall campus climate and department/work unit by race, gender, sexual

identity, or religious/spiritual status

• When examining disability status, people with disabilities were less comfortable than people without disabilities

• When examining the data by position, administrators were more comfortable than faculty and staff

44

More than 80% of all students were comfortable with their classroom climate

There were no differences in

comfort by sexual identity or low-income status

When examining differences by racial identity, Students of

Color were less comfortable than White students

When examining differences by

gender identity, women students

were less comfortable than

men students

Comfort with Class Climate for Students

45

More than 85% of all faculty members were comfortable with their classroom climate

There were no differences in comfort by gender or

race

When examining differences by sexual

identity, LGBQ faculty were less comfortable than

heterosexual faculty

46

Least Comfortable with Classroom Climate for Faculty

Employees’ Overall Satisfaction

• “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their jobs/careers68%

• “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with the way their jobs/careers have progressed

57%

• “highly satisfied” or “satisfied” with their opportunities for job/career development

48% 47

Employee Overall Satisfaction

By Tenure status: Non-Tenured/Non-Tenure Track Faculty less satisfied than Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty

By Overall Position:

Staff and Non-Tenured/Non-Tenure Track Faculty less satisfied than Administrators

48

Challenges and Opportunities

55

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_f1__EIMU7zw/TSB-VOEqEkI/AAAAAAAAADE/nlXqoNzoZ-M/s1600/challenges.gif

Experiences with Harassment

• 304 respondents indicated that they had personally experienced exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored), intimidating, offensive and/or hostile conduct (harassing behavior) at FIT.

15%

56

Form of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct

n %

Deliberately ignored or excluded 150 49.3

Intimidated/bullied 120 39.5

Isolated or left out 113 37.2

Isolated or left out when work was required in groups 65 21.4

Target of derogatory verbal remarks 50 16.4

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 304). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

57

Personally Experienced Based on…(%)

18 1817 17

Physical Appearance (n=55)Ethnicity (n=54)Age (n=52)Race (n=52)

58

Overall Personal Experiences of Perceived Offensive, Hostile, or Intimidating Conduct

Due to University Status (%)

¹ Percentages are based on total n split by group.² Percentages are based on n split by group for those who believed they had personally experienced this conduct.

(n=174)¹

(n=26)²

(n=35)¹

(n=12)²

(n=4)¹

(n=0)²

(n=48)¹

(n=22)²

(n=18)¹

(n=7)²

(n=25)¹

(n=10)²

59


Due to Gender Identity (%)


Men Women

20

131214

Overall experienced conduct¹Experienced conduct due to gender identity²

(n=81)¹

(n=10)²

(n=214)¹

(n=30)²

60


Due to Racial Identity (%)


(n=145)¹

(n=44)²

(n=122)¹

(n=5)²

61


Due to Sexual Identity (%)


(n=49)¹

(n=19)²

(n=203)¹

(n=6)²

62


Due to Disability Status (%)


No Disability Disability

12

29

17

1

12

Overall experienced conduct¹Experienced conduct due to learning disability²Experienced conduct due to medical condition³

(n=209)¹ (n=77)¹

63

Location of Perceived Harassment

Note: Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 304). Percentages do not sum to 100 due to multiple responses.

n %

In a classroom setting 106 34.9

In a campus office 65 21.4

In a public space on campus 51 16.8

In a meeting with a group of people 50 16.4

64

Source of Perceived Conduct by Position Status (n)

65

What did you do?1

Personal responses: Was angry (42%) Felt embarrassed (36%) Did nothing (36%) Told a friend (35%)

Reporting responses: Didn’t report it for fear their complaints would not be taken seriously (12%) Didn’t know who to go to (10%) Did report it but didn’t feel the complaint was taken seriously (9%) Made complaints to campus officials (5%)

1 Only answered by respondents who experienced harassment (n = 304). Respondents could mark more than one response

66

Unwanted Sexual Contact at FIT

21 respondents experienced unwanted sexual contact at FIT

More than half of respondents said it happened off-campus

67

Employee Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT

20% (n = 112)

Non-Bargaining Staff (27%)

Administrators (24%)

Bargaining Staff/Classroom Assistants (21%)

Non-Tenured/Non-Tenured Track Faculty (18%)Tenured/Tenure-Track Faculty (17%)

71

Employee Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT

• Women (19%)• Men (23%)

Gender Identity

• Employees of Color (28%)• White Employees (15%)

Racial Identity

• LGBQ (33%)• Heterosexual (17%)

SexualIdentity

72

Why employees considered leaving and why they stayed…

Employees who considered leaving did so because of age discrimination; new supervisors; an uncomfortable, stressful or hostile working environment; inequities in one’s work unit; lack of promotion opportunities or acknowledgment of contributions to the department; and, “culture of entitlement.”

Employees stayed because of the time they already put into the institution; difficulty in finding another job; the vacation offered; benefits; they liked their departments and the students with whom they work; and, they loved their profession.

74

Student Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT

14% (n = 201)

During First Year (70%)

During Second Year (36%)

During Third Year (14%)

During Fourth Year (6%)

75

Student Respondents Who Seriously Considered Leaving FIT

• Women (13%)• Men (14%)Gender

• Students of Color (13%)• White Students (15%)Race

• LGBQ (16%)• Heterosexual (13%)

Sexual Orientation

76

Why students considered leaving…

Some respondents offered that they felt ostracized because of their identity(ies); they experienced unfriendly students who are exclusive or “cliquey,” staff who are not helpful, and, “little campus enthusiasm” since everyone seems to be doing their own thing.

Others also described a racist campus; “general social discomfort;” personal psychological and medical struggles; physical disability; difficult time adjusting; hostile climate; political views; unfriendly environment for international students; and, level of high difficulty in one’s major as reasons for wanting to leave.

77

Why students stayed…

Networking opportunities; The FIT education and reputation are strong; They were already enrolled and didn’t want to fall behind or

disappoint family members; FIT had the program that they wanted; The proximity to the center of NYC; Friends and good faculty members and courses; Once they became more involved in campus they felt more

comfortable.

78

Perceptions

79

Respondents who observed conduct or communications directed towards a person/group of people that created an exclusionary, intimidating, offensive working or learning

environment…

In the last year… % n

18.0 355

80

Observed Harassment Based on…(%)

1716

1514

Position (n=75)

Ethnicity (n=65)

Physical Appearance (n=63)

Race (n=59)

82

Hiring Practices

22% n=115

Employment-Related Disciplinary

Actions

13% n=66

Employment Practices Related to

Promotion

24% n=127

Perceived DiscriminationEmployees

87

Perceived Discrimination

Position and ethnicity were cited as the most common bases for all observed

discriminatory employment practices.

88

Work-Life Issues

The majority of employee respondents expressed positive attitudes about work-life issues.

89

Welcoming Workplace Climate

More than half of all employees thought the workplace climate was welcoming for all characteristics listed

Respondents of Color and LGBQ respondents were least likely to believe the workplace climate was welcoming for employees based on gender, race, and sexual identity.

95

Welcoming Classroom Climate

More than half of all student/faculty respondents felt that the classroom climate was welcoming for students based on “difference” across all dimensions

Students of Color less comfortable than White students→ RACE

Students who identified with other than Christian less likely than Christian students → RELIGIOUS/SPIRITUAL VIEWS

Students from low income less likely than not low income → SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS

96

Student Perceptions of Campus Climate

66% of students believed the campus climate encourages free and open discussion of difficult topics.

34% of all students felt faculty pre-judge their abilities based on their identities/backgrounds

69% of all students knew faculty who they perceive as role models.

Students thought that FIT faculty (64%), staff (52%), and administrators (50%) were genuinely concerned with their welfare.

Students felt valued by faculty (72%) and other students (62%) in the classroom.

97

Institutional Actions

98

Campus Initiatives That Would Positively Affect the Climate - Employees

The majority of employees thought the following would positively affect the climate:

Access to counseling for

people who have experienced harassment

Mentorship for new faculty and

staff

Clear and fair process to resolve

conflicts

99

Campus Initiatives That Would Positively Affect the Climate - Students

The majority of students thought the following would positively affect the climate:

Person to address student

complaints of classroom inequity

Opportunities for cross-cultural

dialogue among students, and

between faculty, staff, and students

More effective faculty

mentorship of students

101

Summary

Strengths and Successes

Opportunities for Improvement

102

Context Interpreting the Summary

Although colleges and universities attempt to foster

welcoming and inclusive environments, they are not

immune to negative societal attitudes and discriminatory

behaviors.

As a microcosm of the larger social environment,

college and university campuses reflect the

pervasive prejudices of society.

Classism, Racism, Sexism, Genderism, Heterosexism, etc.

(Eliason, 1996; Hall & Sandler, 1984; Harper & Hurtado, 2007; Hart & Fellabaum, 2008; Malaney, Williams, & Gellar, 1997; Rankin, 2003; Rankin & Reason, 2008; Rankin, Weber, Blumenfeld, & Frazer, 2010; Smith, 2009; Worthington, Navarro, Loewy & Hart, 2008) 103

Overall Strengths & Successes

Students thought very positively about their academic experiences at FIT.

68% of employee respondents were satisfied with their jobs/careers at FIT.

82% of students and 78% of faculty were comfortable with the classroom climate.

81%

comfortable with the overall climate, and 77% with dept/work

unit climate.

104

Overall Opportunities for Improvement

18% (n = 355) believed that they

had observed conduct on campus

that created an exclusionary (e.g., shunned, ignored),

intimidating, offensive and/or or hostile (harassing)

working or learning environment within

the past year.

15% (n = 304) had personally

experienced exclusionary (e.g.,

stigmatized, shunned, ignored)

intimidating, offensive, and/or hostile conduct

within the past year.

105

Next Steps

113

Process Forward Sharing the Report with the Community

Spring 2013

Full Report and Power

Point will be available on FIT website

Full Report hard copies will also be

available

114

Process Forward - Fall 2013Following FIT Strategic Plan Approval

Diversity Council will sponsor a series of forums facilitated by 1-2 committee members

Purpose: To develop 2-3 actions that can be accomplished in the next year.

115

Questions and Discussion

116

fashion institute of technology

Documents