North Carolina State University
1999 Sophomore Student Survey:
All Respondents
(Report No. 3)

This overview presents findings from all sophomore students participating in the 1999 Sophomore Student Survey. Additional frequency distributions and tables of responses by gender, race/ethnicity, and college are available on the Web. For information about the survey methods and analysis, see "1999 Sophomore Student Survey: Introduction, Methods and Student Demographic Profile."

Table of Contents:

Background Information: Academic Environment and Faculty Contributions : Student Services : Knowledge, Skills and Personal Development 1999 Sophomore Student Survey Instrument
 

Background Information

This section presents background information provided by those who responded to the survey, including plans for degree completion, satisfaction with their choice of NC State, whether they were employed during the academic year, their impressions of the sense of community at NC State, attitudes towards diversity at NC State, and their involvement with campus activities.

Plans for Degree Completion and Satisfaction with NC State (Table 3-1)
Sophomore’s overall satisfaction with NC State is high. Over 90 percent of respondents (91.4%) said they plan to complete their degree at NC State. Only 1.9 percent do not intend to stay. The majority of respondents (73.0%) also stated that they would choose NC State again if they could start over. Most of the others (19.9%) were not sure if they would. Only 7.1 percent said they would not choose NC State again.

Table 3-1: Plans for Degree Completion

% Saying

Do you…

Yes

No

Not Sure

Plan to complete your degree at NC State?

91.4%

1.9%

6.7%

Think you would choose this campus again?

73.0%

7.1%

19.9%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Student Employment (Tables 3-2 and 3-3)
A majority of respondents (60.5%) indicated they were employed during the academic year. Almost 30 percent of the employed students (28.9%) worked an average of 20 or more hours per week. Thus, 17.5 percent of all sophomore respondents worked 20 or more hours per week during the academic year. Among employed students, 40.7 percent had jobs that were at least "somewhat related" to their academic major. More than two-thirds (67.1%) of those employed in jobs unrelated to their major said that this was "not by choice".

Table 3-2: Average Hours Worked Per Week during the Academic Year
(Among Employed Respondents; n=708)

Average hours worked per week

%

Less than 5

12.4%

5-9

17.5%

10-14

26.8%

15-19

14.4%

20-24

16.1%

25-29

6.4%

30-34

2.7%

35 or more

3.7%

Table 3-3: Job Relation to Academic Major

% Saying

Directly
Somewhat
Not Related

Was job related to major? (n=708)

14.8%
26.0%
59.2%

Yes
No

If "Not Related" was this by choice? (n=409)

   

32.5%

67.5%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Sense of Belonging at NC State (Table 3-4)
About 80 percent of respondents stated that it was "very" (40.0%) or "moderately important" (39.8%) to experience a sense of belonging at NC State. About one-fourth (25.3%) of respondents said they had that experience to a "great extent" and another 49.1 percent experienced it to "some extent".

There is a clear relationship between sophomores’ beliefs about the importance of feeling a sense of belonging at NC State and actually having that experience. In general, respondents who believed it was important to experience a sense of belonging while at NC State responded that they achieved that experience to at least some extent. Only 2.2 percent of respondents who thought it was "very important" to experience a sense of belonging did not experience it at all. Conversely, those who saw it as less important generally reported feeling less connected to NC State.

Table 3-4: Sense of Belonging at NC State

How important is it to experience a sense of belonging at NC State?

To what extent do you experience a sense of belonging at NC State?

% Saying

Very
Moderately
Slightly
Not at all

Extent

Great extent

48.5%

13.0%

3.4%

3.3%

25.3%

Some extent

39.0%

67.1%

39.7%

15.0%

49.1%

Small extent

10.3%

17.5%

50.6%

33.3%

20.4%

Not at all

2.2%

2.4%

6.3%

48.3%

5.3%

Importance

40.0%

39.8%

15.0%

5.2%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Involvement with Campus Activities (Table 3-5)
Sophomore were asked in which campus activities they were involved. Respondents were most likely to be involved in honor/service/ professional fraternities/sororities (36.3%), visual/performing arts/music groups (35.2%), and academic (Honors Program, etc.) groups (33.8%). Respondents were least likely to be active in religious/political/issue groups (4.5%) and residence hall council/IRC organizations (2.2%).

Table 3-5: Involvement with Campus Activities

School-related Group

%
N

Honor/service/professional fraternity/sorority

36.3%

425

Visual/performing arts/music groups

35.2%

412

Academic (Honors Program, etc.)

33.8%

395

Social fraternity/sorority

21.0%

246

Minority student groups

19.0%

222

Student judicial board

11.8%

138

Intramural/recreational sports, Club teams

9.7%

113

Varsity athletic teams

8.1%

95

Student government

8.0%

94

Organizations/Clubs related to major

7.8%

91

Union activities board groups, Student media

7.8%

91

Religious/political/issue groups

4.5%

53

Residence hall council, IRC

2.2%

26

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Student Assessment of Diversity at NC State (Table 3-6)
Respondents were generally satisfied with issues related to diversity at NC State. An overwhelming majority (92.6%) agreed that NC State is committed to helping minorities succeed. Three-fourths (74.2%) of the respondents disagreed that there is a lot of racial conflict on campus. Finally, about two-thirds (64.8%) agreed that there is visible leadership to help foster diversity on this campus. Respondents, however, were more evenly divided on whether people at NC State treat each other with respect. Almost half (47.2%) agreed that people at NC State don’t treat each other with enough respect.

Table 3-6: Diversity Issues

% Saying

Agree Strongly
Agree Somewhat
Disagree Somewhat
Disagree Strongly

NC State is committed to helping minorities succeed

29.6%

63.0%

5.4%

2.0%

There is visible leadership to foster diversity on campus

13.4%

51.4%

25.9%

9.2%

People at NC State don’t treat each other with enough respect

12.5%

34.7%

41.2%

11.6%

There is a lot of racial conflict on campus

3.3%

22.5%

50.0%

24.2%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

 

Academic Environment and Faculty Contributions

This section presents respondents’ evaluations of the overall learning environment at NC State. Respondents also evaluated eight areas of faculty contribution to students’ education, as well as overall.

Intellectual Environment (Table 3-7)
About two-thirds of survey respondents (65.9%) characterized the intellectual environment at NC State as above average. Almost 12 percent rated it as "very strong". The campus’s intellectual environment was rated as "weak" or "very weak" by only 4.1 percent of respondents.

Table 3-7: Intellectual Environment

% Saying

Very Strong
Strong
Average
Weak
Very Weak

How do you characterize the intellectual environment on this campus?

11.9%

54.0%

30.0%

3.7%

0.4%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Overall Instruction and Education (Table 3-8)
Respondents were very pleased with the overall quality of instruction and education NC State. Over 80 percent rated NC State as "excellent" or "good" in these two areas. More than one-fourth (27.4%) of respondents said that the overall education they were receiving was "excellent".

Table 3-8: Overall Instruction and Education

% Saying

Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor

Overall quality of instruction

14.4%

67.3%

17.2%

1.1%

Overall education that you are receiving

27.4%

60.2%

12.0%

0.3%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Classroom Environment (Table 3-9)
A majority of respondents reported that during their time at NC State they had had at least one class that was too large to learn effectively, or had had an instructor whose spoken English was difficult to understand. Over one-third of respondents (34.7%) reported having had three or more classes that were too large to learn effectively. Almost 40 percent (39.4%) reported having had two or more classes where the instructor’s English was difficult to understand.

Table 3-9: Classroom Environment

How many of your classes…

% Saying

Four or more
Three
Two
One
None

Have been too large to learn effectively?

15.7%

19.0%

24.9%

15.9%

24.4%

Have you had difficulty understanding the spoken English of the instructor?

5.8%

9.9%

23.7%

31.2%

29.4%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Faculty Contributions (Table 3-10)
A majority of respondents gave positive ratings to faculty members’ contributions to their educational experience at NC State. When asked for a general evaluation of NC State’s instructors, 82.1 percent of respondents said either "excellent" (12.3%) or "good" (69.8%). More than 80 percent of respondents gave either "excellent" or " good" ratings to instructors for setting high expectations for students to learn (91.8%) and for encouraging students to devote sufficient time and energy to their coursework (86.0%).

Respondents were less positive about faculty-student interaction and teaching methods. More than one-third of respondents rated faculty members’ efforts to encourage student-faculty interaction (34.0%), to develop opportunities for cooperative learning (34.6%) and to respect diverse talents and ways of learning (33.4%) as either "poor" or "fair". The lowest ratings were given to how well faculty members care about [students’] academic success, with 37.5 percent of respondents giving a rating of "fair" or "poor".

Table 3-10: Faculty Contributions

How well do faculty members….

Mean

% Saying
4:Excellent
3:Good
2:Fair
1:Poor

Set high expectations for you to learn

3.16

24.4%

67.4%

7.8%

0.3%

Encourage you to devote time to coursework

3.15

29.9%

56.1%

13.1%

0.9%

Give you frequent and prompt feedback

2.85

15.8%

55.9%

25.9%

2.4%

Encourage you to be an actively involved learner

2.84

15.8%

55.6%

25.6%

3.0%

Encourage student – faculty interaction

2.79

17.0%

49.0%

30.1%

3.9%

Develop opportunities to cooperatively learn with other students

2.76

14.8%

50.6%

30.7%

3.9%

Respect diverse talents and ways of learning

2.74

11.3%

55.3%

29.6%

3.8%

Care about your academic success

2.69

12.7%

49.7%

31.4%

6.1%

General evaluation of instructors

2.94

12.3%

69.8%

17.3%

0.6%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Student Services

This section first examines respondents’ perceptions of campus safety. This is followed by a discussion of respondents’ ratings of services available outside of the classroom and satisfaction with offices that serve students. Ratings ranged from 1 ("poor") to 4 ("excellent"). ‘Don’t know" and "did not use" responses are excluded from the analyses.

Campus Safety (Table 3-11)
About two-thirds of respondents (65.5%) felt that the campus had taken sufficient steps to ensure their safety. A sizeable number, however, stated that they do not believe that the campus has done so (11.7%).

Table 3-11: Campus Safety

% Saying

Yes
No
Not Sure

Has this campus taken sufficient steps to ensure your physical safety?

65.5%

11.7%

22.7%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Services Outside of the Classroom (Table 3-12)
Respondents were asked to rate 31 specific services, divided into 7 categories: library, technology, career-related, academic advising, help labs and tutoring, new student orientation, and the campus bookstore. On average, the highest ratings were given to the library’s hours of operation (3.8), access to the internet (3.6), and access to databases and collections at the library (3.5). Lowest average ratings were given to services related to new student orientation, to the bookstore, and to those involving training (e.g., training to use the library, technology training classes, and access to trained staff for help with technology).

Library: Overall, respondents were most satisfied with library services. Average ratings were particularly high for hours of operation (3.8) with 79.4 percent rating them as "excellent". Ratings were lowest for training to use the library (2.8), with more than 10 percent of students saying such training was "poor".

Technology: Respondents also gave high ratings to technology services available on campus. Access to the Internet received the highest average rating (3.6) with 69.9 percent rating it as "excellent". Again students gave the lowest rating to areas related to training. Access to trained staff for help and technology training classes both received an average rating of 2.8.

Career-related Services: Various aspects of career-related services were consistently rated positively by respondents. Each of the five aspects asked about received an average rating between 3.2 and 3.3.

Academic Advising: Respondents also gave positive ratings to most aspects of academic advising. Each area received an average rating of near 3.0. The lowest average rating (2.97) went to sufficient time with advisor.

Tutoring and Help Labs: Respondents also rated the tutoring and help labs for different skill areas positively, with averages between 2.9 and 3.1. Labs and tutoring for math were most likely to be rated as "excellent" (30.0%) while those for reading were least likely to be rated as "excellent" (18.9%).

New Student Orientation: While still generally positive, respondents gave some of the lowest average ratings to various aspects of orientation for new students. Only one aspect, helpfulness of staff (3.1), had an average rating above 2.9. Only 16 percent or fewer rated the other aspects of new student orientation as "excellent".

Bookstore: Respondents gave one of the lowest average ratings to timely availability of course materials at the bookstore (2.8). Only 15.1 percent rated this service as "excellent".

Table 3-12: Rating of Services Outside of the Classroom

% Saying

Mean
4:Excellent
3:Good
2:Fair
1:Poor

Library

         

Hours of operation

3.77

79.4%

18.8%

1.5%

0.4%

Access to databases and collections

3.50

57.5%

35.6%

6.5%

0.5%

Training to use library

2.75

22.3%

40.9%

26.0%

10.8%

Library services overall

3.45

49.6%

46.3%

3.8%

0.4%

Technology

         

Access to the Internet

3.65

69.9%

25.7%

3.6%

0.9%

Hours of operation for computer center/labs

3.38

50.7%

38.2%

9.4%

1.7%

Access to up-to-date facilities

3.34

45.5%

44.7%

8.3%

1.5%

Technology training classes

2.85

21.8%

48.0%

23.5%

6.7%

Access to trained staff for help

2.75

20.5%

42.3%

29.0%

8.2%

Technology services overall

3.29

38.4%

53.4

7.3%

1.0%

Career-related services

         

Information available through technology

3.29

40.5%

49.0%

9.0%

1.5%

Information on internships and co-ops

3.20

39.1%

44.8%

12.8%

3.2%

Opportunity for career assistance

3.19

35.8%

50.1%

11.5%

2.6%

Resources available to explore options

3.16

34.6%

49.0%

14.1%

2.3%

Career related services overall

3.21

33.9%

54.3%

10.1%

1.6%

Academic Advising

         

Accurate information about requirements

3.08

37.5%

39.3%

16.5%

6.7%

Access to advisor

3.08

37.3%

39.7%

16.9%

6.1%

Knowledge of campus policies

3.04

32.7%

44.0%

17.7%

5.6%

Sufficient time with advisor

2.97

34.2%

36.8%

21.0%

8.0%

Academic advising services overall

3.03

32.9%

43.2%

18.1%

5.8%

Labs and tutoring if you needed help in...

         

Mathematics

3.10

30.0%

53.1%

13.5%

3.4%

Writing

3.00

26.4%

51.9%

16.6%

5.1%

Study Skills

2.92

23.3%

49.8%

22.9%

3.9%

Reading

2.87

18.9%

56.0%

18.3%

6.9%

Labs and tutoring services overall

3.07

24.5%

60.2%

13.1%

2.1%

Orientation for new students

         

Helpfulness of staff

3.13

30.6%

54.0%

13.5%

1.9%

Accommodations

2.88

16.3%

58.9%

21.2%

3.6%

Length of session

2.85

13.0%

62.3%

20.8%

3.9%

Quality of programs

2.77

13.0%

55.8%

26.6%

4.6%

Overall effectiveness of orientation

2.87

14.6%

61.3%

20.6%

3.5%

Campus bookstore

         

Timely availability of course materials

2.77

15.1%

53.5%

24.9%

6.5%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

Non-Academic Service Areas (Tables 3-13 and 3-14)
Respondents were asked to rate various non-academic service areas, and when relevant, the responsiveness of the staff connected with these services. Average ratings of services varied widely. Extra-curricular activities received the highest average rating (3.2). Other relatively highly rated services were campus health services (3.0), non-career counseling services (3.0), and registration (3.0). Campus food services received the lowest average rating (2.3). Almost 21 percent of respondents rated food services as "poor".

Respondents’ ratings of staff responsiveness were generally similar to the relevant service. Staff responsiveness for non-career counseling services and health services had the highest average ratings (3.0 each). Lower average ratings were given to financial aid services staff (2.7) with 12 percent of respondents saying it was "poor". Food service staff received the lowest average rating (2.5) with 18.7 percent saying it was "poor". However, unlike other service areas, ratings given to food services staff were notably higher than those given to food services.

Table 3-13: Evaluation of Non-Academic Service Areas

% Saying

Mean
4:Excellent
3:Good
2:Fair
1:Poor

Extra-curricular activities

3.19

37.0%

47.5%

13.0%

2.5%

Campus health services

3.00

28.7%

48.4%

17.5%

5.4%

Campus counseling (not career) services

3.00

26.4%

51.7%

17.0%

4.9%

Registration process

2.98

24.5%

52.3%

19.5%

3.7%

Leadership skills

2.95

26.5%

46.2%

23.4%

3.8%

Business services/ cashier/ student accounts

2.84

16.4%

55.9%

23.0%

4.6%

Financial aid services

2.83

20.6%

48.7%

23.2%

7.4%

Community service

2.71

18.4%

43.3%

29.3%

9.0%

Residence life programs

2.66

12.5%

48.0%

32.0%

7.5%

Campus food services

2.26

6.4%

34.4%

38.3%

20.9%

Table 3-14: Evaluation of Non-Academic Services’ Staff Responsiveness

% Saying

Mean
4:Excellent
3:Good
2:Fair
1:Poor

Campus counseling (not career) services

3.04

33.3%

42.8%

18.5%

5.4%

Campus health services

2.99

30.9%

43.8%

18.4%

6.9%

Registration process

2.91

21.8%

51.8%

22.2%

4.2%

Business services/ cashier/ student accounts

2.78

17.4%

51.1%

23.5%

8.0%

Residence life programs

2.77

18.8%

47.4%

25.2%

8.5%

Financial aid services

2.74

20.5%

45.4%

22.1%

12.0%

Campus food services

2.47

12.8%

40.6%

28.0%

18.7%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

 

Knowledge, Skills, and Personal Development

This final section of the overview report focuses on respondents’ perceptions of how well NC State has contributed to their academic and personal development. First, it explores beliefs about the extent to which the university met their needs in general. This is followed by a discussion of how well respondents thought NC State contributed to their knowledge, skill, and personal development of general education, personal development, and world view goals.

NC State Meeting Student Needs (Table 3-15)
A majority of respondents were satisfied with how well NC State met their needs in general. Over 75 percent of the respondents reported that their needs for intellectual growth (88.3%), personal growth (75.9%), and career training (75.2%) had been met "very well" or "adequately" by NC State.

Table 3-15: Student Needs

How have your needs been met for…

% Saying

Very Well
Adequately
Somewhat Adequately
Poorly

Intellectual growth

40.3%

48.0%

10.4%

1.3%

Personal growth

34.8%

41.1%

19.9%

4.2%

Career training

32.9%

42.3%

20.4%

4.4%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

 

Knowledge, Skills, and Personal Development (Table 3-16)
Respondents were asked to rate the extent to which their college had contributed to their development of various educational goals. The 35 goals listed related to either personal development, general education, or world views. The colleges’ contribution was rated on a scale of 1 ("not at all") to 4 ("very much"). "Don’t know" responses were excluded from the analyses.

General Education Goals:
Overall, respondents were satisfied with the extent to which NC State colleges met their general education goals. All 12 questions in this category received an average rating of 3.0 or higher. Colleges fared better, however, on ratings of its contribution to the development of goals related to more technical or analytic skills than to skills related to communication (e.g., listening, writing, and speaking). Average ratings were highest for the extent to which Colleges met respondents’ needs to develop computer skills (3.6) with 66.4 percent giving a rating of "very much". Ratings were lowest for speaking skills (3.0). More than one-fourth of respondents said NC State had contributed "very little" (20.9%) or "not at all" (5.6%) to the development of their speaking skills.

Personal Development Goals:
Respondents also gave high ratings to the extent to which NC State met their personal development goals. All but one aspect, exercising public responsibility and community service, received an average rating above 3.1. Average ratings were highest for independence and self-reliance (3.5), with 63.4 percent saying NC State had contributed "very much" to their development of this goal. In addition to exercising public responsibility and community service (2.8), respondents also gave lower average ratings to NC State’s contribution to the development of various self-management skills, such as time management (3.3), the ability to handle stress (3.2), self-confidence (3.1), and commitment to personal health and fitness (3.1).

World View Goals:
Respondents gave some of the lowest ratings to questions pertaining to NC State’s contribution to their world view goals. Average ratings were highest for the ability to work with people from diverse backgrounds (3.3) and developing a tolerance for divergent views (3.1). Average ratings for NC State’s contribution to all other world view goals, however, were below 3.0. Ratings were lowest for advancing appreciation of the arts (2.7) with 12.7 percent rating NC State’s contribution to this goal as "poor".

Table 3-16: Knowledge, Skills, and Personal Development

Extent of college contribution to…

% Saying

Mean

4:Very Much

3:Somewhat

2:Very Little

1:Not at All

General Education Goals

Developing computer skills

3.57

66.4%

25.9%

6.4%

1.3%

Enhancing analytical skills

3.45

53.2%

39.5%

6.4%

0.9%

Ability to plan and carry out projects

3.43

52.0%

40.1%

6.5%

1.4%

Understanding how science and technology influence everyday life

3.39

50.5%

39.5%

8.2%

1.7%

Using math skills

3.38

51.6%

36.7%

10.0%

1.8%

Ability to analyze ideas and information

3.37

47.3%

43.9%

7.4%

1.3%

Applying scientific methods of inquiry

3.32

47.0%

40.3%

10.8%

1.9%

Comprehension skills

3.29

41.1%

48.7%

8.7%

1.5%

Listening skills

3.26

40.6%

47.2%

9.7%

2.4%

Understanding diverse cultures and values

3.11

35.9%

43.8%

16.0%

4.3%

Writing skills

3.11

30.6%

52.5%

13.9%

3.0%

Speaking skills

2.98

30.0%

43.5%

20.9%

5.6%

Personal Development Goals

Independence and self-reliance

3.54

63.4%

28.9%

5.9%

1.8%

Potential for success

3.48

57.7%

34.5%

5.7%

2.1%

Personal growth

3.45

55.7%

35.7%

6.5%

2.0%

Taking responsibility for behavior

3.43

58.1%

30.0%

8.5%

3.4%

Coping with change

3.41

54.9%

33.8%

8.8%

2.5%

Self-discipline

3.39

52.7%

36.0%

8.9%

2.4%

Valuing learning as a lifelong process

3.37

49.9%

39.7%

7.9%

2.5%

Ability to function as part of a team

3.33

46.3%

42.7%

8.4%

2.6%

Time management

3.33

51.6%

33.4%

11.6%

3.4%

Self-confidence

3.26

43.5%

42.5%

10.3%

3.7%

Sense of personal identity

3.25

45.0%

39.0%

11.4%

4.5%

Ability to handle stress

3.19

42.3%

39.2%

13.3%

5.2%

Ability to lead and guide others

3.15

36.1%

46.2%

14.1%

3.6%

Commitment to personal health and fitness

3.11

37.0%

41.9%

16.1%

5.0%

Recognizing and acting on ethical principles

3.09

32.8%

48.9%

13.3%

5.0%

Exercising public responsibility

2.81

20.3%

48.8%

22.4%

8.4%

World View Goals

Ability to work with diverse people

3.26

43.9%

41.4%

11.4%

3.3%

Developing a tolerance for divergent views

3.20

40.6%

43.3%

11.8%

4.3%

Understanding issues facing the world

2.94

26.1%

47.8%

20.5%

5.6%

Appreciating gender equity

2.94

27.0%

47.2%

18.2%

7.6%

Appreciating racial equity

2.93

27.8%

44.9%

19.5%

7.8%

Understanding present as it relates to history

2.92

24.3%

48.6%

21.8%

5.2%

Advancing appreciation of the arts

2.66

19.8%

38.8%

28.6%

12.7%

Comparisons and Frequencies:
Gender/Ethnicity, College
Back to Top

 

 

 
For more information on the 1999 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: February, 2000

Download a Microsoft Word Version (Word 6.0 or higher) of this report.
We've named the file .bin so your browser gives you a download window instead of displaying the file. When you download it you can rename it to .doc to indicate that it's a Word file.

Return to 1999 Sophomore Survey Table of Contents Page

Return to OIRP Survey Page

Return to OIRP Home Page