North Carolina State University
2002 Sophomore Student Survey:
Gender and Racial/Ethnic Comparisons
of Evaluations of Student Services

This document reports survey data on gender and racial/ethnic differences in respondents� ratings of students services. Specifically, results are presented for perceptions of campus safety, and assessments of academic services outside the classroom, and assessments of non-academic services and related staff. Survey results for all respondents are provided in "2002 Sophomore Student Survey: All Respondents." For information about the survey and analysis methods see "2002 Sophomore Student Survey: Introduction, Methods, and Student Demographic Profile." Exact question wording is available on the web, or by clicking on the "Q" in the table header.

Campus Safety | Services Outside the Classroom | Non-Academic Service Areas | Financial Aid Services

 


Q Campus Safety
Campus taken sufficient steps to ensure safety  All Women Men AfAm White Other
Not sure 12.4% 13.2% 11.6% 18.7% 10.7% 23.0%
No 3.9% 5.4% 2.4% 7.3% 3.6% 3.2%
Yes 83.8% 81.4% 86.0% 74.0% 85.7% 73.8%
Back to Top

Q Rating of Services Outside of the Classroom

 

Mean Rating

(Based on scale where 4=�excellent� 3=�good� 2=�fair� and 1=�poor�)

New Student Orientation 
All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Length of orientation session 2.83 2.87 2.78 2.99 2.82 2.68
Quality of orientation programs 2.77 2.84 2.71 3.03 2.75 2.74
Helpfulness of orientation staff 3.12 3.17 3.07 3.08 3.13 2.98
Orientations accomodations 2.88 2.90 2.86 2.93 2.88 2.86
Overall effectiveness of orientation 2.91 3.00 2.82 3.13 2.89 2.86
Academic Advising  
All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Access to advisor 3.20 3.25 3.14 3.08 3.21 3.23
Sufficient time with advisor 3.05 3.12 2.99 2.91 3.06 3.07
Accurate info on degree reqs/course sequencing 3.12 3.15 3.08 2.99 3.13 3.10
Advisor knowledge of policies/procedures 3.08 3.10 3.06 2.86 3.10 3.14
Academic advising services overall 3.12 3.15 3.08 2.94 3.13 3.13
Academic Assistance/Tutoring  
All Women Men Af. Am White Other
In writing 3.11 3.25 2.98 3.32 3.11 2.77
In reading 2.94 3.10 2.83 3.07 2.97 2.63
In mathematics 3.13 3.19 3.07 3.22 3.13 2.98
In study skills 2.93 3.05 2.85 3.02 2.95 2.68
In foreign language 2.99 3.10 2.89 3.24 2.97 2.78
In computer science 2.96 3.05 2.92 2.88 2.98 2.93
In science 3.27 3.30 3.24 3.15 3.29 3.24
Academic help services overall 3.16 3.21 3.12 3.17 3.17 3.09
Library Services  
All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Library hours of operation 3.72 3.74 3.70 3.76 3.72 3.63
Access to databases and collections 3.54 3.57 3.51 3.67 3.54 3.41
Training to use library 2.89 2.93 2.84 3.19 2.85 2.94
Library services overall 3.49 3.52 3.46 3.61 3.48 3.42
Technology Services  
All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Access to the Internet 3.75 3.79 3.72 3.77 3.76 3.70
Hrs of op for comp center labs and help 3.50 3.48 3.52 3.66 3.49 3.47
Access to up-to-date facilities 3.46 3.51 3.42 3.57 3.45 3.42
Access to trained staff for help 3.02 3.06 2.97 3.03 3.01 3.02
Technology training classes 3.08 3.06 3.09 3.17 3.06 3.12
Technology services overall 3.43 3.45 3.42 3.49 3.43 3.39
Career-related Services  
All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Opportunity for career assistance 3.10 3.18 3.02 3.06 3.11 2.96
Info. on internships/co-op/other 3.08 3.14 3.02 3.04 3.09 3.02
Resources to explore career options 3.06 3.13 2.99 3.05 3.06 3.06
Info. avail through computers/Internet 3.17 3.24 3.11 3.17 3.18 3.07
Career-related services overall 3.10 3.16 3.04 3.09 3.11 3.00
Campus Bookstore 
All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Avail of books/supplies at bookstore 2.92 3.01 2.83 2.96 2.93 2.83
Frequency Distributions: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to Top


Q Evaluation of Non-Academic Service Areas

 

Mean Rating

(Based on scale where 4=�excellent� 3=�good� 2=�fair� and 1=�poor�
  All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Service Area: Registration Process 3.12 3.14 3.09 3.12 3.13 3.03
Service Area: Financial Aid Application/Award 2.80 2.83 2.77 2.84 2.80 2.73
Service Area: Financial Aid Disbursement 2.81 2.82 2.81 2.78 2.81 2.90
Service Area: Food Services 2.47 2.49 2.46 2.37 2.50 2.30
Service Area: Health Services 3.10 3.10 3.11 3.17 3.10 3.07
Service Area: Counseling (personal) 3.05 3.09 3.01 3.03 3.05 3.02
Service Area: Business Services/Cashier 2.90 2.94 2.86 2.87 2.92 2.78
Service Area: Residence Life Programs 2.74 2.86 2.62 2.76 2.74 2.74
Service Area: Opps. in Ex-Curric Act. 3.16 3.23 3.10 3.25 3.16 3.09
Service Area: Opps. in Commun Serv Projs 2.87 2.99 2.74 3.04 2.87 2.69
Service Area: Opps to Dev Leadership Skills 2.93 3.02 2.84 3.08 2.93 2.79
Frequency Distributions: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to Top

Q Evaluation of Non-Academic Services� Staff Responsiveness

 

Mean Rating

(Based on scale where 4=�excellent� 3=�good� 2=�fair� and 1=�poor�
  All Women Men Af. Am White Other
Staff Responsiveness: Registration Process 2.98 3.03 2.93 2.91 3.00 2.78
Staff Responsiveness: Financial Aid Application/Award 2.76 2.77 2.76 2.75 2.77 2.72
Staff Responsiveness: Financial Aid Disbursement 2.75 2.73 2.78 2.72 2.77 2.70
Staff Responsiveness: Food Services 2.65 2.64 2.66 2.68 2.65 2.55
Staff Responsiveness: Health Services 3.09 3.08 3.11 3.27 3.08 3.10
Staff Responsiveness: Counseling (personal) 2.96 3.00 2.93 2.88 2.96 2.97
Staff Responsiveness: Business Services/Cashier 2.85 2.88 2.82 2.87 2.87 2.63
Staff Responsiveness: Residence Life Programs 2.80 2.90 2.70 2.85 2.81 2.61
Frequency Distributions: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to Top



Q Received Financial Aid

Have you received financial aid at NC State?  All Women Men AfAm White Other
Yes 54.7% 56.6% 52.8% 83.2% 51.0% 65.6%
No 45.3% 43.4% 47.2% 16.8% 49.0% 34.4%
Back to Top



Q Satisfaction with Financial Aid Package
Satisfaction with financial aid package  All Women Men AfAm White Other
4: Very satisfied 31.8% 31.2% 32.4% 27.3% 33.4% 24.4%
3: Moderately satisfied 53.4% 53.2% 53.7% 58.6% 52.2% 57.3%
2: Moderately dissatisfied 11.4% 12.8% 10.0% 9.1% 11.2% 15.9%
1: Very dissatisfied 3.4% 2.8% 3.9% 5.1% 3.2% 2.4%
Back to Top


Q Customer service skills of financial aid staff

Financial aid reception staff 
All Women Men AfAm White Other
4: Excellent 24.3% 23.8% 24.9% 24.4% 24.3% 24.3%
3: Good 50.9% 49.7% 52.1% 51.2% 50.7% 51.4%
2: Fair 17.0% 20.0% 13.9% 22.0% 16.7% 12.9%
1: Poor 7.8% 6.6% 9.1% 2.4% 8.2% 11.4%
 
Financial aid phone staff 
All Women Men AfAm White Other
4: Excellent 23.4% 24.4% 22.2% 25.0% 23.7% 19.0%
3: Good 45.0% 43.5% 46.6% 45.0% 44.3% 49.2%
2: Fair 21.8% 23.4% 19.9% 20.0% 22.7% 17.5%
1: Poor 9.9% 8.7% 11.3% 10.0% 9.2% 14.3%
 
Financial aid advisor staff 
All Women Men AfAm White Other
4: Excellent 31.9% 31.7% 32.1% 30.0% 33.5% 23.4%
3: Good 44.8% 45.3% 44.3% 45.7% 43.2% 54.7%
2: Fair 17.0% 16.7% 17.3% 15.7% 17.5% 15.6%
1: Poor 6.3% 6.3% 6.3% 8.6% 5.9% 6.3%
Back to Top

 


For more information on the 2002 Sophomore 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: October, 2002

Download a Microsoft Excel Version of this report.


Return to 2002 Sophomore Survey Table of Contents Page

Return to OIRP Survey Page

Return to OIRP Home Page