NC State logo

North Carolina State University
2011 First-Year Student Survey:
College Comparisons
Applying to NC State


This document reports college differences in respondents' experiences with the application process and factors influencing their decision to attend NC State. For information about the survey and analysis methods see "2011 First-Year Student Survey: Introduction, Methods, and Student Demographic Profile". Exact question wording is available on the web or by clicking on the "Q" next to the table heading.

Number of Schools Applied To | Contacts During the Admissions Process | Factors Influencing Attendance Decision | Most Influential Factor | NC State as First Choice |
Satisfaction with Admissions | Virtual Advising Center Rating


Q Number of Schools to Which Respondents Applied
Number of colleges applied to NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
One 13.3% 15.0% 9.5% 6.8% 20.5% 17.6% 9.2% 11.5% 4.2% 10.7% 12.4%
Two 20.1% 21.1% 15.5% 17.9% 9.6% 22.4% 18.3% 21.2% 23.9% 19.4% 15.7%
Three 22.5% 21.9% 31.0% 25.1% 21.9% 19.5% 22.7% 21.2% 21.1% 26.1% 21.5%
Four 19.3% 18.7% 19.0% 22.7% 20.5% 16.4% 24.5% 23.0% 26.8% 18.3% 19.8%
Five or more 24.9% 23.4% 25.0% 27.5% 27.4% 24.0% 25.3% 23.0% 23.9% 25.5% 30.6%
Total (N) 2,743 508 84 251 73 834 229 113 71 459 121
Back to Top

Q Contacts during admissions process
Call from faculty/staff NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Yes 15.9% 14.2% 33.7% 13.7% 30.0% 13.3% 22.7% 15.9% 22.9% 14.0% 16.1%
No 58.9% 63.9% 38.6% 65.3% 51.4% 60.9% 46.8% 61.9% 44.3% 58.5% 58.5%
Don't know/Don't remember 25.2% 21.8% 27.7% 21.0% 18.6% 25.8% 30.6% 22.1% 32.9% 27.5% 25.4%
Total (N) 2,696 499 83 248 70 828 216 113 70 451 118


Call from current student NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Yes 24.2% 21.4% 61.0% 22.2% 32.4% 20.3% 50.2% 11.7% 10.1% 19.6% 24.2%
No 57.9% 62.2% 25.6% 61.7% 54.9% 61.3% 31.8% 62.2% 72.5% 60.8% 58.3%
Don't know/Don't remember 17.9% 16.4% 13.4% 16.1% 12.7% 18.4% 17.9% 26.1% 17.4% 19.6% 17.5%
Total (N) 2,694 495 82 248 71 826 223 111 69 449 120


Call from graduate of NC State NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Yes 8.8% 9.5% 10.3% 7.7% 7.0% 9.3% 9.6% 10.7% 5.7% 8.2% 5.1%
No 67.9% 69.8% 55.1% 70.4% 64.8% 69.3% 57.9% 67.9% 72.9% 68.7% 67.5%
Don't know/Don't remember 23.3% 20.7% 34.6% 21.9% 28.2% 21.4% 32.5% 21.4% 21.4% 23.1% 27.4%
Total (N) 2,662 493 78 247 71 824 209 112 70 441 117


Letter from outside Admissions Office NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Yes 53.6% 57.5% 80.7% 48.4% 58.9% 52.8% 57.9% 53.2% 54.9% 43.6% 61.0%
No 17.9% 17.6% 7.2% 21.4% 12.3% 16.9% 15.4% 18.0% 16.9% 23.5% 12.7%
Don't know/Don't remember 28.5% 24.9% 12.0% 30.2% 28.8% 30.3% 26.8% 28.8% 28.2% 32.9% 26.3%
Total (N) 2,724 506 83 252 73 826 228 111 71 456 118
Back to Top

Q Factors influencing decision to attend NC State
Academic reputation NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 4.28 4.29 4.27 4.17 4.26 4.42 4.20 4.14 4.15 4.17 4.26
5: Very strong influence 44.2% 45.6% 44.0% 40.4% 44.4% 52.2% 35.4% 36.9% 42.3% 37.1% 41.3%
4: Strong influence 41.5% 38.1% 40.5% 39.6% 38.9% 38.9% 51.3% 43.2% 35.2% 46.1% 46.3%
3: Moderate influence 12.7% 15.5% 14.3% 17.2% 15.3% 7.8% 11.9% 17.1% 19.7% 14.3% 10.7%
2: Weak influence 1.2% 0.8% 1.2% 2.4% 1.4% 1.0% 0.9% 1.8% 1.4% 1.3% 0.8%
1: Very weak influence 0.4% . . 0.4% . 0.1% 0.4% 0.9% 1.4% 1.1% 0.8%
Total (N) 2,723 504 84 250 72 831 226 111 71 453 121


Cost NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.54 3.49 3.27 3.64 3.43 3.66 3.49 3.53 3.42 3.42 3.55
5: Very strong influence 23.3% 22.4% 19.3% 24.9% 23.9% 28.1% 18.1% 22.5% 16.9% 18.6% 25.8%
4: Strong influence 28.8% 28.9% 19.3% 31.3% 20.9% 28.5% 33.2% 27.0% 30.8% 29.0% 28.3%
3: Moderate influence 31.7% 31.2% 38.6% 30.1% 38.8% 29.1% 33.6% 36.0% 35.4% 34.4% 26.7%
2: Weak influence 10.6% 10.6% 14.5% 10.4% 7.5% 9.7% 9.3% 9.9% 10.8% 12.4% 13.3%
1: Very weak influence 5.5% 6.9% 8.4% 3.2% 9.0% 4.7% 5.8% 4.5% 6.2% 5.7% 5.8%
Total (N) 2,662 491 83 249 67 808 226 111 65 442 120


Location NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.88 3.83 4.19 4.09 3.97 3.77 4.07 3.84 3.69 3.96 3.71
5: Very strong influence 31.3% 30.9% 45.2% 39.8% 33.3% 26.9% 38.2% 26.3% 25.4% 31.5% 28.8%
4: Strong influence 36.4% 34.3% 32.1% 36.5% 40.3% 35.0% 37.7% 41.2% 33.8% 39.9% 35.6%
3: Moderate influence 24.1% 24.4% 19.0% 18.5% 20.8% 28.6% 18.0% 24.6% 28.2% 23.6% 20.3%
2: Weak influence 5.7% 7.2% 3.6% 3.6% 1.4% 7.0% 4.8% 6.1% 9.9% 2.9% 8.5%
1: Very weak influence 2.5% 3.2% . 1.6% 4.2% 2.4% 1.3% 1.8% 2.8% 2.2% 6.8%
Total (N) 2,716 501 84 249 72 825 228 114 71 454 118


Size NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.28 3.21 3.82 3.55 3.39 3.04 3.43 3.29 3.09 3.52 3.11
5: Very strong influence 17.0% 16.5% 32.1% 25.0% 20.3% 11.5% 19.3% 14.3% 11.4% 20.8% 13.0%
4: Strong influence 26.1% 23.6% 26.2% 30.2% 27.5% 21.6% 30.7% 29.5% 22.9% 31.8% 27.0%
3: Moderate influence 32.5% 31.9% 33.3% 26.2% 33.3% 36.1% 29.8% 33.0% 37.1% 30.9% 32.2%
2: Weak influence 16.7% 20.2% 8.3% 12.1% 8.7% 21.1% 14.0% 17.0% 20.0% 12.1% 13.9%
1: Very weak influence 7.6% 7.9% . 6.5% 10.1% 9.7% 6.1% 6.3% 8.6% 4.5% 13.9%
Total (N) 2,670 496 84 248 69 801 228 112 70 447 115


Availability of program NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 4.07 4.26 3.92 3.81 4.25 4.23 3.80 4.47 4.47 3.68 4.16
5: Very strong influence 43.5% 52.3% 34.5% 31.2% 47.9% 50.7% 27.4% 59.6% 65.7% 26.6% 50.8%
4: Strong influence 30.0% 26.7% 31.0% 32.4% 34.2% 28.2% 37.6% 28.9% 24.3% 33.6% 24.6%
3: Moderate influence 19.1% 16.0% 27.4% 26.3% 12.3% 16.1% 25.7% 10.5% 2.9% 25.5% 16.9%
2: Weak influence 5.4% 4.4% 6.0% 6.1% 5.5% 3.8% 6.2% 0.9% 5.7% 9.6% 5.1%
1: Very weak influence 2.1% 0.6% 1.2% 4.0% . 1.2% 3.1% . 1.4% 4.7% 2.5%
Total (N) 2,696 495 84 247 73 822 226 114 70 447 118


Recommended by a friend, family member, teacher, counselor, etc. NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.51 3.56 3.69 3.59 3.88 3.42 3.50 3.44 3.46 3.48 3.61
5: Very strong influence 25.3% 28.7% 32.1% 27.2% 32.3% 20.7% 25.5% 27.4% 22.4% 26.2% 27.6%
4: Strong influence 28.0% 26.3% 30.8% 29.4% 35.4% 29.7% 25.9% 21.7% 28.4% 26.2% 30.5%
3: Moderate influence 26.6% 25.5% 19.2% 26.0% 23.1% 28.3% 28.2% 27.4% 29.9% 25.7% 26.7%
2: Weak influence 12.2% 11.9% 10.3% 10.2% 6.2% 13.1% 13.4% 15.1% 11.9% 13.7% 5.7%
1: Very weak influence 7.8% 7.6% 7.7% 7.2% 3.1% 8.2% 6.9% 8.5% 7.5% 8.3% 9.5%
Total (N) 2,553 471 78 235 65 778 216 106 67 432 105


Number of hours transferred/credited NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 2.46 2.55 2.48 2.68 2.50 2.41 2.45 2.31 2.28 2.33 2.67
5: Very strong influence 7.3% 7.7% 5.6% 11.6% 7.9% 7.3% 8.4% 1.4% 5.3% 5.2% 10.0%
4: Strong influence 11.3% 14.8% 11.1% 12.2% 18.4% 9.6% 10.8% 10.8% 8.8% 9.2% 14.4%
3: Moderate influence 27.7% 25.9% 25.9% 30.2% 23.7% 28.3% 26.9% 29.7% 29.8% 27.5% 27.8%
2: Weak influence 27.3% 27.8% 40.7% 24.4% 15.8% 26.3% 25.1% 33.8% 21.1% 29.7% 27.8%
1: Very weak influence 26.4% 23.8% 16.7% 21.5% 34.2% 28.5% 28.7% 24.3% 35.1% 28.4% 20.0%
Total (N) 1,940 378 54 172 38 604 167 74 57 306 90


Level of support for my intended major NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 4.07 4.24 4.04 3.46 4.11 4.46 3.75 4.42 4.69 3.41 4.15
5: Very strong influence 45.0% 49.1% 38.6% 22.4% 43.1% 61.2% 24.0% 60.9% 77.1% 23.9% 46.6%
4: Strong influence 28.6% 30.9% 31.3% 27.0% 36.1% 26.2% 38.7% 25.5% 14.3% 26.8% 30.5%
3: Moderate influence 17.9% 15.6% 25.3% 30.7% 12.5% 10.3% 30.2% 10.0% 8.6% 25.6% 15.3%
2: Weak influence 5.4% 3.4% 4.8% 14.1% 5.6% 1.6% 2.2% 1.8% . 13.8% 6.8%
1: Very weak influence 3.1% 1.0% . 5.8% 2.8% 0.7% 4.9% 1.8% . 9.9% 0.8%
Total (N) 2,658 501 83 241 72 824 225 110 70 414 118


Facilities and resources available NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.95 4.09 4.05 3.79 4.13 4.01 3.80 4.12 4.07 3.70 3.98
5: Very strong influence 34.4% 40.6% 37.8% 27.4% 42.3% 37.9% 24.0% 45.9% 44.9% 24.3% 33.1%
4: Strong influence 35.4% 33.8% 31.7% 36.7% 32.4% 33.3% 42.7% 27.0% 24.6% 39.8% 41.5%
3: Moderate influence 22.6% 20.3% 28.0% 25.4% 22.5% 22.4% 25.8% 21.6% 24.6% 22.7% 17.8%
2: Weak influence 5.5% 4.8% 2.4% 8.1% 1.4% 4.8% 4.4% 3.6% 4.3% 8.5% 5.9%
1: Very weak influence 2.1% 0.6% . 2.4% 1.4% 1.6% 3.1% 1.8% 1.4% 4.7% 1.7%
Total (N) 2,689 503 82 248 71 817 225 111 69 445 118


Scholarships/financial aid available NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.24 3.26 3.86 3.59 3.50 3.18 3.05 3.34 2.91 3.15 3.14
5: Very strong influence 25.1% 24.4% 44.9% 36.1% 30.3% 24.2% 18.0% 22.8% 15.6% 22.6% 24.3%
4: Strong influence 19.0% 20.7% 23.1% 19.8% 24.2% 15.9% 21.5% 26.7% 12.5% 18.0% 20.7%
3: Moderate influence 24.4% 24.6% 12.8% 18.5% 21.2% 26.9% 24.5% 21.8% 32.8% 26.7% 18.0%
2: Weak influence 18.0% 17.2% 11.5% 17.6% 13.6% 19.3% 19.0% 18.8% 25.0% 17.0% 18.0%
1: Very weak influence 13.5% 13.1% 7.7% 7.9% 10.6% 13.6% 17.0% 9.9% 14.1% 15.8% 18.9%
Total (N) 2,453 459 78 227 66 735 200 101 64 412 111


Pack Promise Program NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 2.59 2.64 2.69 2.80 2.83 2.40 2.66 2.74 2.02 2.68 2.49
5: Very strong influence 10.4% 10.3% 15.4% 17.2% 11.3% 7.9% 7.4% 7.9% 2.3% 13.5% 8.5%
4: Strong influence 11.7% 13.2% 7.7% 10.9% 22.6% 8.4% 14.8% 14.5% 6.8% 12.3% 15.9%
3: Moderate influence 29.2% 31.2% 30.8% 31.6% 28.3% 27.7% 34.9% 39.5% 22.7% 26.8% 18.3%
2: Weak influence 23.4% 20.9% 23.1% 15.5% 13.2% 28.1% 22.8% 19.7% 27.3% 23.5% 30.5%
1: Very weak influence 25.2% 24.4% 23.1% 24.7% 24.5% 27.9% 20.1% 18.4% 40.9% 23.9% 26.8%
Total (N) 1,771 340 52 174 53 491 149 76 44 310 82


Campus visit prior to orientation NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.71 3.75 4.04 3.81 3.94 3.54 3.70 3.73 3.62 3.81 3.81
5: Very strong influence 27.3% 28.9% 42.1% 34.4% 33.8% 20.9% 26.7% 28.7% 20.6% 29.8% 29.8%
4: Strong influence 32.3% 31.9% 28.9% 29.1% 36.8% 31.2% 34.7% 30.7% 33.8% 34.5% 35.6%
3: Moderate influence 29.0% 28.4% 22.4% 24.2% 23.5% 34.5% 25.7% 27.7% 35.3% 26.2% 25.0%
2: Weak influence 7.1% 6.8% 3.9% 7.5% 1.5% 8.1% 7.4% 10.9% 7.4% 6.4% 4.8%
1: Very weak influence 4.3% 3.9% 2.6% 4.8% 4.4% 5.3% 5.4% 2.0% 2.9% 3.2% 4.8%
Total (N) 2,463 457 76 227 68 751 202 101 68 409 104


Contact with a current student NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.41 3.51 3.68 3.60 3.63 3.23 3.39 3.42 3.50 3.47 3.31
5: Very strong influence 20.7% 21.4% 33.3% 31.1% 22.0% 15.4% 21.7% 21.2% 16.7% 21.3% 19.1%
4: Strong influence 29.9% 32.2% 27.5% 25.9% 35.6% 28.7% 25.6% 27.3% 36.7% 33.1% 28.7%
3: Moderate influence 27.8% 27.9% 18.8% 23.1% 32.2% 29.3% 31.5% 32.3% 31.7% 24.6% 27.7%
2: Weak influence 13.5% 13.0% 14.5% 11.8% 3.4% 16.3% 12.8% 11.1% 10.0% 13.3% 12.8%
1: Very weak influence 8.1% 5.5% 5.8% 8.0% 6.8% 10.2% 8.4% 8.1% 5.0% 7.7% 11.7%
Total (N) 2,270 416 69 212 59 668 203 99 60 390 94


Contact with a faculty or staff member NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 2.81 2.92 3.27 2.80 3.19 2.67 2.70 3.17 2.69 2.72 2.90
5: Very strong influence 10.9% 15.4% 20.0% 13.9% 11.1% 8.7% 6.5% 14.6% 8.2% 9.8% 6.4%
4: Strong influence 18.0% 15.0% 21.7% 13.9% 35.2% 15.1% 18.0% 26.8% 18.4% 17.4% 32.1%
3: Moderate influence 28.9% 30.4% 30.0% 30.7% 27.8% 29.1% 31.7% 29.3% 24.5% 27.2% 23.1%
2: Weak influence 25.5% 24.6% 21.7% 21.9% 13.0% 29.1% 26.6% 19.5% 32.7% 26.4% 21.8%
1: Very weak influence 16.6% 14.7% 6.7% 19.7% 13.0% 18.1% 17.3% 9.8% 16.3% 19.2% 16.7%
Total (N) 1,653 293 60 137 54 485 139 82 49 276 78


Contact with a graduate NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.05 3.13 3.35 3.04 3.27 3.02 2.98 3.16 2.66 3.05 2.90
5: Very strong influence 16.4% 17.4% 23.6% 15.3% 21.8% 15.6% 11.9% 27.6% 10.6% 16.4% 11.4%
4: Strong influence 21.8% 22.1% 23.6% 22.0% 25.5% 19.9% 26.2% 18.4% 12.8% 23.0% 22.9%
3: Moderate influence 26.8% 29.0% 23.6% 28.0% 27.3% 29.1% 24.4% 15.8% 27.7% 24.3% 25.7%
2: Weak influence 21.0% 19.3% 21.8% 20.7% 9.1% 21.1% 23.2% 18.4% 29.8% 22.3% 24.3%
1: Very weak influence 14.1% 12.1% 7.3% 14.0% 16.4% 14.3% 14.3% 19.7% 19.1% 14.1% 15.7%
Total (N) 1,779 321 55 150 55 532 168 76 47 305 70


Letter from someone other than Admissions Office NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 2.46 2.51 2.71 2.48 2.48 2.35 2.45 2.65 2.38 2.46 2.50
5: Very strong influence 6.4% 7.5% 7.6% 8.1% 5.4% 5.3% 3.2% 11.8% 5.1% 7.0% 6.6%
4: Strong influence 10.8% 8.4% 15.2% 10.1% 17.9% 8.3% 12.0% 13.2% 7.7% 13.3% 18.4%
3: Moderate influence 28.9% 35.1% 33.3% 27.7% 25.0% 28.1% 34.2% 20.6% 33.3% 24.4% 19.7%
2: Weak influence 29.6% 25.5% 28.8% 29.7% 23.2% 32.9% 27.8% 36.8% 28.2% 29.5% 28.9%
1: Very weak influence 24.2% 23.6% 15.2% 24.3% 28.6% 25.4% 22.8% 17.6% 25.6% 25.8% 26.3%
Total (N) 1,712 322 66 148 56 508 158 68 39 271 76


Attendance at a College Fair NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 2.57 2.54 2.69 2.77 2.91 2.51 2.66 2.56 2.30 2.60 2.26
5: Very strong influence 6.5% 8.7% 12.2% 6.8% 13.0% 4.6% 6.4% 11.0% 5.4% 5.4% 2.8%
4: Strong influence 14.3% 11.0% 6.1% 20.4% 19.6% 13.5% 18.4% 11.0% 10.8% 16.4% 12.5%
3: Moderate influence 31.3% 30.7% 38.8% 34.7% 30.4% 31.4% 31.2% 26.0% 24.3% 32.9% 25.0%
2: Weak influence 25.5% 25.3% 24.5% 19.0% 19.6% 29.3% 22.7% 27.4% 27.0% 23.6% 27.8%
1: Very weak influence 22.4% 24.3% 18.4% 19.0% 17.4% 21.2% 21.3% 24.7% 32.4% 21.8% 31.9%
Total (N) 1,664 300 49 147 46 519 141 73 37 280 72


Publications from NC State NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 2.55 2.64 2.79 2.80 2.70 2.42 2.61 2.47 2.29 2.58 2.35
5: Very strong influence 5.5% 8.4% 8.6% 7.4% 1.8% 2.9% 4.0% 7.9% 3.6% 6.0% 6.4%
4: Strong influence 13.8% 12.7% 17.1% 19.4% 26.3% 11.1% 15.3% 12.4% 10.7% 15.4% 10.6%
3: Moderate influence 33.4% 33.4% 37.1% 37.1% 31.6% 33.8% 37.9% 25.8% 30.4% 32.3% 26.6%
2: Weak influence 25.3% 26.1% 18.6% 17.7% 21.1% 29.9% 23.7% 27.0% 21.4% 23.3% 24.5%
1: Very weak influence 22.0% 19.4% 18.6% 18.3% 19.3% 22.3% 19.2% 27.0% 33.9% 23.0% 31.9%
Total (N) 2,033 371 70 175 57 613 177 89 56 331 94


Extracurricular opportunities NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.32 3.30 3.67 3.41 3.58 3.19 3.44 3.12 3.09 3.46 3.38
5: Very strong influence 16.5% 15.4% 22.2% 19.5% 23.1% 11.2% 17.2% 18.4% 15.4% 21.7% 21.1%
4: Strong influence 29.4% 29.8% 42.0% 30.5% 38.5% 28.7% 34.3% 16.5% 13.8% 30.2% 24.8%
3: Moderate influence 32.3% 32.5% 18.5% 30.1% 20.0% 36.2% 31.4% 32.0% 47.7% 29.3% 32.1%
2: Weak influence 13.4% 13.8% 14.8% 11.4% 10.8% 15.3% 9.8% 24.3% 10.8% 9.8% 14.7%
1: Very weak influence 8.4% 8.6% 2.5% 8.5% 7.7% 8.6% 7.4% 8.7% 12.3% 9.0% 7.3%
Total (N) 2,498 456 81 236 65 759 204 103 65 420 109


Acceptance into the First Year College Program NCSU College/School
DUAP
Mean Rating 3.85 3.85
5: Very strong influence 36.6% 36.6%
4: Strong influence 31.2% 31.2%
3: Moderate influence 19.1% 19.1%
2: Weak influence 7.0% 7.0%
1: Very weak influence 6.1% 6.1%
Total (N) 413 413


Campus Recreation programs NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.11 3.05 3.34 3.14 3.33 3.04 3.20 2.89 2.82 3.28 2.94
5: Very strong influence 12.8% 10.7% 18.2% 16.2% 15.9% 11.1% 12.0% 16.7% 9.7% 14.4% 14.6%
4: Strong influence 25.1% 24.7% 28.6% 25.3% 33.3% 23.1% 27.4% 12.5% 14.5% 30.6% 23.3%
3: Moderate influence 34.6% 35.6% 27.3% 29.3% 28.6% 36.7% 39.4% 33.3% 41.9% 34.5% 22.3%
2: Weak influence 15.3% 17.1% 20.8% 15.3% 12.7% 16.7% 10.6% 17.7% 16.1% 10.4% 21.4%
1: Very weak influence 12.3% 11.9% 5.2% 14.0% 9.5% 12.3% 10.6% 19.8% 17.7% 10.2% 18.4%
Total (N) 2,462 438 77 229 63 754 208 96 62 432 103


Carmichael Complex Recreational facilities (e.g., gym, pool, fitness center, fields) NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.16 3.16 3.19 3.19 3.51 3.04 3.34 2.98 2.76 3.34 3.02
5: Very strong influence 15.5% 15.5% 15.6% 17.2% 24.6% 13.3% 16.4% 18.6% 10.4% 16.6% 15.5%
4: Strong influence 25.4% 21.9% 27.3% 29.3% 30.8% 22.5% 30.9% 11.8% 14.9% 33.9% 21.8%
3: Moderate influence 31.2% 37.3% 27.3% 22.0% 24.6% 32.9% 31.4% 37.3% 29.9% 27.1% 30.9%
2: Weak influence 15.7% 14.3% 20.8% 18.5% 10.8% 18.0% 13.0% 13.7% 29.9% 11.8% 12.7%
1: Very weak influence 12.3% 11.0% 9.1% 12.9% 9.2% 13.4% 8.2% 18.6% 14.9% 10.5% 19.1%
Total (N) 2,513 453 77 232 65 761 207 102 67 439 110


Other NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 4.11 4.35 4.30 4.17 3.80 4.01 4.00 4.60 4.42 4.00 3.63
5: Very strong influence 55.3% 64.0% 70.0% 50.0% 40.0% 49.5% 48.1% 80.0% 75.0% 56.5% 43.8%
4: Strong influence 19.7% 17.3% 10.0% 30.6% 33.3% 22.6% 22.2% 10.0% 8.3% 10.9% 18.8%
3: Moderate influence 12.4% 13.3% . 11.1% 6.7% 11.8% 18.5% . 8.3% 17.4% 12.5%
2: Weak influence 6.2% . 20.0% 2.8% 6.7% 11.8% 3.7% 10.0% . 6.5% 6.3%
1: Very weak influence 6.5% 5.3% . 5.6% 13.3% 4.3% 7.4% . 8.3% 8.7% 18.8%
Total (N) 340 75 10 36 15 93 27 10 12 46 16
Back to Top

Q Most influential factor in decision to attend NC State
Most influential factor NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Academic reputation 23.0% 17.6% 17.9% 26.3% 15.3% 26.2% 27.8% 14.9% 17.1% 23.5% 24.0%
Cost 8.0% 6.7% 2.4% 9.2% 6.9% 10.1% 9.7% 3.5% 4.3% 7.0% 9.1%
Location 7.9% 7.5% 15.5% 15.9% 11.1% 2.8% 13.7% 3.5% . 11.5% 5.0%
Size 1.0% 1.6% 1.2% 1.6% 2.8% 0.2% 2.2% . . 0.9% 1.7%
Availability of program 12.9% 18.5% 4.8% 5.6% 18.1% 14.3% 7.5% 32.5% 27.1% 5.4% 8.3%
Recommended by a friend, family member, teacher, counselor, etc. 4.2% 3.6% 4.8% 6.0% 8.3% 2.8% 7.0% 3.5% . 5.7% 2.5%
Number of hours transferred/credited 0.5% 0.4% 1.2% 0.4% 1.4% 0.5% 0.9% . . 0.2% 0.8%
Level of support for my intended major 19.1% 22.5% 13.1% 2.0% 16.7% 28.2% 7.9% 27.2% 40.0% 9.4% 21.5%
Facilities and resources available 2.0% 2.8% 1.2% 2.0% 1.4% 2.2% 1.8% 1.8% . 1.3% 4.1%
Scholarships/financial aid available 6.2% 5.1% 13.1% 10.4% 5.6% 6.1% 4.4% 2.6% 1.4% 6.1% 7.4%
Pack Promise Program 0.7% 0.6% . 1.2% . 0.5% 0.4% . . 1.5% 1.7%
Campus visit prior to orientation 4.1% 3.4% 8.3% 6.8% 2.8% 1.8% 7.0% 1.8% 8.6% 4.4% 9.1%
Contact with a current student 2.4% 3.4% 6.0% 5.6% 2.8% 0.8% 3.1% 0.9% . 2.4% 2.5%
Contact with a faculty or staff member 0.3% 0.2% . . 1.4% 0.2% 0.4% 1.8% . . .
Contact with a graduate 1.1% 0.8% 3.6% 1.6% 1.4% 0.6% 1.3% 2.6% . 1.5% .
Letter from someone other than Admissions Office 0.1% . . 0.4% . . . . . . 0.8%
Attendance at a College Fair 0.1% . . . . 0.1% . . . 0.2% .
Publications from NC State 0.1% 0.2% 1.2% . . 0.1% . . . . .
Extracurricular opportunities 1.2% 0.6% 1.2% 2.0% 1.4% 0.1% 1.8% 1.8% . 3.7% .
Acceptance into the First Year College Program 1.9% . . . . . . . . 11.5% .
Campus Recreation programs 0.1% 0.4% . . . . . . . . .
Carmichael Complex Recreational facilities (e.g., gym, pool, fitness center, fields) 0.2% 0.2% . . . 0.1% 0.9% . . 0.4% .
Other 2.9% 4.1% 4.8% 3.2% 2.8% 2.2% 2.2% 1.8% 1.4% 3.3% 1.7%
Total (N) 2,736 507 84 251 72 831 227 114 70 459 121
Back to Top

Q NC State as first choice
Was NC State first choice of colleges to attend NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
It was my only choice 11.1% 13.6% 6.0% 4.8% 12.5% 15.9% 8.3% 8.0% 5.7% 7.4% 9.1%
Yes - it was my first choice 57.3% 55.4% 67.9% 52.4% 58.3% 56.2% 55.0% 74.3% 75.7% 58.9% 47.9%
No - it was my second choice 24.3% 23.8% 22.6% 34.9% 23.6% 20.3% 28.8% 12.4% 12.9% 27.4% 30.6%
No - it was my third choice or below 7.3% 7.3% 3.6% 7.9% 5.6% 7.6% 7.9% 5.3% 5.7% 6.3% 12.4%
Total (N) 2,738 509 84 252 72 831 229 113 70 457 121
Back to Top

Q Satisfaction with admissions process
Satisfaction with university admissions process NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.55 3.61 3.73 3.56 3.61 3.50 3.58 3.52 3.44 3.55 3.58
4: Very satisfied 59.2% 63.9% 72.6% 60.6% 65.3% 54.2% 61.6% 54.4% 47.1% 59.6% 63.3%
3: Moderately satisfied 37.3% 33.5% 27.4% 35.5% 30.6% 41.6% 35.4% 43.0% 50.0% 36.0% 33.3%
2: Moderately dissatisfied 3.1% 2.4% . 3.2% 4.2% 3.9% 2.2% 2.6% 2.9% 3.7% 1.7%
1: Very dissatisfied 0.5% 0.2% . 0.8% . 0.4% 0.9% . . 0.7% 1.7%
Total (N) 2,731 507 84 251 72 829 229 114 70 455 120


Satisfaction with departmental admissions process NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
Mean Rating 3.56 3.62 3.71 3.53 3.58 3.52 3.61 3.64 3.51 3.49 3.60
4: Very satisfied 60.4% 65.4% 70.7% 60.7% 61.1% 55.6% 65.8% 67.3% 53.6% 56.3% 64.7%
3: Moderately satisfied 35.8% 31.8% 29.3% 33.2% 37.5% 41.0% 29.8% 29.1% 43.5% 38.0% 31.1%
2: Moderately dissatisfied 3.2% 2.7% . 4.5% . 3.2% 4.0% 3.6% 2.9% 3.5% 3.4%
1: Very dissatisfied 0.7% 0.2% . 1.6% 1.4% 0.3% 0.4% . . 2.1% 0.8%
Total (N) 2,626 488 82 244 72 791 225 110 69 426 119
Back to Top

Q Virtual advising center website
Virtual Advising Center website rating NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
4: Excellent 18.4% 19.3% 26.2% 20.6% 32.9% 15.2% 15.2% 17.5% 12.9% 19.4% 23.3%
3: Good 41.4% 38.3% 44.0% 39.3% 38.4% 41.1% 50.0% 45.6% 41.4% 41.6% 39.2%
2: Fair 9.9% 13.0% 10.7% 8.3% 9.6% 10.1% 8.7% 8.8% 8.6% 8.5% 9.2%
1: Poor 1.5% 1.8% . 1.2% . 1.7% 2.2% . 4.3% 0.7% 2.5%
Never used 28.9% 27.7% 19.0% 30.6% 19.2% 31.9% 23.9% 28.1% 32.9% 29.8% 25.8%
Total (N) 2,745 509 84 252 73 834 230 114 70 459 120


Virtual Advising Center website rating (among those who have used the website) NCSU College/School
CALS CED CHASS CNR COE COM COT Design DUAP PAMS
4: Excellent 25.8% 26.6% 32.4% 29.7% 40.7% 22.4% 20.0% 24.4% 19.1% 27.6% 31.5%
3: Good 58.2% 53.0% 54.4% 56.6% 47.5% 60.4% 65.7% 63.4% 61.7% 59.3% 52.8%
2: Fair 14.0% 17.9% 13.2% 12.0% 11.9% 14.8% 11.4% 12.2% 12.8% 12.1% 12.4%
1: Poor 2.0% 2.4% . 1.7% . 2.5% 2.9% . 6.4% 0.9% 3.4%
Total (N) 1,953 368 68 175 59 568 175 82 47 322 89
Back to Top


For more information on the 2011 First-Year Student Survey contact:
Dr. Nancy Whelchel, Associate Director for Survey Research
Office of Institutional Planning and Research
Box 7002
NCSU
Phone: (919) 515-4184
Email: Nancy_Whelchel@ncsu.edu

Posted: May 2012

Return to 2011 First-Year Student Survey Table of Contents Page

Return to OIRP Survey Page

Return to OIRP Home Page