North Carolina State University
2002-2003 Graduating Senior Survey:
College Comparisons of
Academic Environment

This document reports survey data on college differences in the respondents' overall assessment of the academic environment at NC State. Survey results for all respondents are provided in "2002-2003 Graduating Senior Survey: All Respondents." For information about the survey and analysis methods, see "2002-2003 Graduating Senior Survey: Introduction, Methods, and Student Demographic Profile."

Satisfaction with Education | Quality of Instruction | Intellectual Environment | Faculty Contributions

Satisfaction with Education

Q Choose NC State again?

Choose NC State again? NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
    8.5 5.6 2.5 6.1 7.6 5.5 13.3 8.4 . 7.9
No %
Not sure % 16.6 13.9 32.5 16.3 15.8 15.7 19.2 17.9 10.6 15.3
Yes % 74.9 80.5 65.0 77.6 76.6 78.7 67.5 73.7 89.4 76.8

Back to Top

Q Choose same major again?

Choose same major again? NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
    14.2 14.2 7.5 11.1 11.5 16.8 17.1 17.4 16.9 13.1
No %
Not sure % 24.2 21.0 27.5 31.1 22.9 25.6 25.6 26.1 35.4 23.1
Yes % 61.6 64.8 65.0 57.8 65.5 57.6 57.4 56.5 47.7 63.8

Back to Top

Q Recommend NCSU to a friend

Recommend NCSU to a friend? NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
    3.2 2.1 7.5 4.1 4.3 0.8 3.8 2.1 . 2.4
No %
Not sure % 9.1 5.9 20.0 8.2 10.3 6.3 11.5 10.4 3.0 6.7
Yes % 87.6 92.1 72.5 87.8 85.4 92.9 84.7 87.5 97.0 90.9

Back to Top

Quality of Instruction

Q Quality of instruction in major

Quality of instruction in major NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.38 3.63 3.53 3.31 3.16 3.51 3.42 3.51 3.77 3.37
    0.9 . . . 1.9 0.8 0.5 1.1 . 0.7
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 7.5 3.5 2.5 12.2 13.2 7.1 6.2 3.2 . 5.3
3: Good % 44.2 30.0 42.5 44.9 51.9 32.5 44.1 40.0 22.7 50.4
4: Excellent % 47.5 66.5 55.0 42.9 33.0 59.5 49.2 55.8 77.3 43.6

Back to Top

Q Quality of instruction overall

Quality of instruction overall NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.12 3.30 3.10 3.08 3.00 2.99 3.18 2.95 3.26 3.13
    0.9 0.3 . 2.0 1.1 2.4 0.6 2.1 . 0.7
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 11.2 6.8 10.0 10.2 16.1 13.5 9.0 14.6 7.6 9.4
3: Good % 63.2 55.9 70.0 65.3 64.5 66.7 62.1 69.8 59.1 65.7
4: Excellent % 24.7 37.1 20.0 22.4 18.2 17.5 28.2 13.5 33.3 24.2

Back to Top

Q Overall Education at NC State

Evaluate overall educ. received NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.30 3.47 3.23 3.29 3.19 3.35 3.30 3.32 3.52 3.30
    0.8 0.3 . . 1.3 0.8 0.6 . . 1.0
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 6.6 3.0 12.5 8.2 9.5 6.3 6.9 6.3 . 4.8
3: Good % 54.6 46.2 52.5 55.1 58.4 50.0 54.3 55.2 48.5 57.7
4: Excellent % 38.0 50.6 35.0 36.7 30.9 42.9 38.2 38.5 51.5 36.6

Back to Top

Intellectual Environment

Q Intellectual environment on campus

Intellectual environment on campus NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.17 3.26 2.90 3.29 3.12 3.16 3.15 3.16 3.33 3.19
    0.6 0.3 2.6 . 0.8 0.8 0.8 . . 0.5
1: Very weak %
2: Weak % 7.3 5.6 10.3 2.0 9.2 6.3 7.2 11.6 1.5 6.4
3: Strong % 66.8 62.1 82.1 67.3 67.1 69.0 68.6 61.1 63.6 66.8
4: Very strong % 25.2 32.1 5.1 30.6 22.9 23.8 23.5 27.4 34.8 26.3

Back to Top

Q Faculty Contributions
Faculty: Set high expectations for learn NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.37 3.53 3.43 3.29 3.31 3.46 3.36 3.35 3.53 3.29
    0.2 . . 2.0 0.3 . 0.3 . . .
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 4.9 5.3 2.5 4.1 5.1 2.4 5.2 5.2 . 5.5
3: Good % 52.9 36.5 52.5 57.1 57.7 49.6 52.5 54.6 47.1 59.8
4: Excellent % 42.0 58.2 45.0 36.7 36.9 48.0 42.0 40.2 52.9 34.7

Faculty: Respect diverse talents/ways of NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.12 3.30 3.23 3.24 2.88 3.28 3.25 3.09 3.43 3.07
    1.7 0.6 2.5 . 3.9 . 0.9 . . 1.4
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 13.9 9.1 15.0 10.2 20.9 11.1 11.1 14.4 4.4 12.9
3: Good % 55.1 50.3 40.0 55.1 58.9 50.0 50.1 61.9 48.5 62.9
4: Excellent % 29.3 40.0 42.5 34.7 16.3 38.9 37.9 23.7 47.1 22.7

Faculty: Encourage actively involved lea NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.18 3.34 3.50 3.35 2.90 3.43 3.32 3.18 3.46 3.14
    1.4 0.6 . . 2.9 . 0.9 . . 1.4
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 13.8 10.9 . 6.1 23.1 6.3 9.2 12.4 4.4 13.6
3: Good % 50.4 42.9 50.0 53.1 54.7 44.9 47.4 57.7 45.6 54.3
4: Excellent % 34.5 45.6 50.0 40.8 19.3 48.8 42.5 29.9 50.0 30.6

Faculty: Encourage student-faculty inter NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.10 3.32 3.45 3.18 2.87 3.38 3.17 3.05 3.54 2.99
    2.8 1.2 . 6.1 4.3 3.1 2.4 3.1 1.5 2.4
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 18.4 12.4 7.5 12.2 26.3 10.2 16.2 18.6 5.9 19.7
3: Good % 45.1 40.0 40.0 38.8 47.6 32.3 43.6 48.5 29.4 54.2
4: Excellent % 33.6 46.5 52.5 42.9 21.9 54.3 37.8 29.9 63.2 23.7

Faculty: Give frequent and prompt feedba NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.11 3.29 3.38 3.22 2.87 3.24 3.17 3.20 3.34 3.17
    1.0 0.6 . . 2.1 0.8 0.9 . . 0.5
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 15.1 9.1 12.5 10.2 24.3 13.4 12.4 7.2 5.9 12.9
3: Good % 55.5 51.0 37.5 57.1 57.7 47.2 56.0 66.0 54.4 56.1
4: Excellent % 28.4 39.2 50.0 32.7 15.9 38.6 30.8 26.8 39.7 30.5

Faculty: Encourage devoting time/energy NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.32 3.46 3.60 3.37 3.23 3.36 3.34 3.35 3.46 3.24
    0.5 0.6 . . 1.1 . . . . 0.5
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 7.4 3.8 2.5 4.1 10.1 9.5 6.2 5.2 4.4 8.6
3: Good % 51.9 44.4 35.0 55.1 53.3 45.2 53.3 54.6 45.6 57.1
4: Excellent % 40.3 51.2 62.5 40.8 35.5 45.2 40.5 40.2 50.0 33.8

Faculty: Opp. to learn cooperatively wit NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.23 3.25 3.13 3.45 3.15 3.54 3.21 3.03 3.62 3.28
    1.4 1.5 . 2.0 2.1 . 1.3 2.1 . 1.0
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 11.8 12.4 15.0 2.0 12.7 4.7 13.5 22.7 1.5 9.1
3: Good % 48.7 45.9 57.5 44.9 53.0 36.2 48.4 45.4 35.3 50.5
4: Excellent % 38.1 40.3 27.5 51.0 32.2 59.1 36.8 29.9 63.2 39.4

Faculty: Care about your academic succes NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.06 3.32 3.30 3.29 2.75 3.42 3.17 3.15 3.50 2.97
    3.7 1.8 2.5 4.1 6.9 2.4 1.9 4.1 . 3.8
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 17.7 11.2 5.0 12.2 26.4 11.0 15.5 15.5 5.9 17.7
3: Good % 47.1 39.9 52.5 34.7 51.8 29.1 45.9 41.2 38.2 55.7
4: Excellent % 31.5 47.0 40.0 49.0 14.9 57.5 36.7 39.2 55.9 22.7

Faculty: Evaluation on all eight measure NCSU College/School
CALS Design CED COE CNR CHASS PAMS COT COM
  Mean 3.20 3.38 3.43 3.22 3.01 3.41 3.26 3.27 3.50 3.13
    0.4 0.3 . . 0.4 . 0.3 . . 1.0
1: Poor %
2: Fair % 8.8 4.7 5.0 10.2 14.7 7.9 7.6 4.1 1.5 6.5
3: Good % 61.3 51.5 47.5 57.1 68.7 42.9 57.8 64.9 47.1 70.8
4: Excellent % 29.6 43.5 47.5 32.7 16.2 49.2 34.3 30.9 51.5 21.8
Back to Top

For more information on the 2002-2003 Graduating Senior 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: September, 2003

Download a Microsoft Excel Version of this report.

Return to 2002-2003 Graduating Senior Survey Table of Contents Page

Return to OIRP Survey Page

Return to OIRP Home Page