NC State University


A Profile of Entering Transfer Students
1996

TABLE OF CONTENTS


Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page
Return to OIRP Home Page

A Profile of Entering Transfer Students
1996

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Overview

This report presents a profile of entering 1996 Transfer students at NC State. It is based on responses to a survey that is given during three summer and fall Transfer orientation sessions, and represents 51% of the 1996 Transfer student class. The report includes students transferring into all programs, although no one transferring into the Agricultural Institute completed a survey. No significant differences were found between the demographic characteristics of the sample and the broader population of entering Transfer students when gender, ethnicity and academic unit were considered. The results obtained from the survey, therefore, may be regarded as broadly representative of the 1996 Transfer class. Significant differences were found for many of the answers to questions, however, when gender, ethnicity and academic units were considered.

Factors rated as having the strongest influence on Transfer students' decision to transfer to NC State included: location, availability of program, and academic reputation. Females rated location as significantly more important than did males in their decision. African-American survey respondents said extracurricular opportunities were a significantly stronger factor in their decision to transfer to NC State than did Whites or Other Minorities.

Although Transfer students indicated they were moderately satisfied with their admissions, academic advising and registration experiences, only 28 percent said they were able to apply for scholarships. Most important, only 3% of African-Americans compared to 30% of Whites and 22% of Other Minorities said they were able to apply for scholarships. Seventy-one percent of Transfer students responded that the number of courses that actually transferred was either about or more than the number they were led to believe would transfer by their previous institution and by their NC State department.

Transfer students indicated that they believed the more specific job-related General Education goals were more important than either Personal Development goals or World View goals set by the university. However, they rated their current level of development for the Personal Development goals generally higher than for General Education or World View goals.

Of the Transfer students who reported that they were financially independent, 70% indicated that their 1995 pre-tax income was $20,000 for less. Forty-two percent said they would received financial aid based upon need. Seventy percent said that they planned to work during their first academic semester, with 30% indicating that they would work 20 or more hours a week.

Office of Institutional Planning and Research would like to thank the Office of New Student Orientation and First Year Experience, and especially Dr. Roger Callanan, for assistance with the administration of this survey.

The 1996 Transfer Class

Transfer Student Issues

Admissions Process

Number of Courses Transferred

Preparation for College

Marketing Research

Educational Intent

Goals for Undergraduate Preparation

Transfer students were asked to consider a list of knowledge, skills and personal development goals held by NC State. They were asked to indicate their current level of development in meeting these goals as well as the current importance they placed on them. The list was divided into twelve goals for General Education, sixteen goals related to student Personal Development and seven goals related to student World View.

General Education

Personal Development

World View

Interests and Background

Student Affairs Programs and Activities

Financial Aid

Income

Parent/Guardian Education

Employment During First Semester


Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

INTRODUCTION AND METHODOLOGY

Purpose

This report presents a profile of 1996 entering Transfer students at NC State. As in previous studies, it is based on responses to a survey that is given during summer orientation sessions for incoming students. The report looks at responses from Transfer students entering into all undergraduate programs in the fall of 1996. These programs include the two-year Agricultural Institute and the First Year College.

Description of Sample

A total of 718 Transfer students attended these orientation sessions. Of this total, 644 surveys, which represent 51.4% of the 1,254 Transfer students who registered for the fall 1996 semester, were usable for this report. Tests of statistical significance revealed no significant differences between the survey group and the broader population of registered Transfer students (gender, Chi-sq. 0.0536, df=1, p>0.01; ethnicity, Chi-sq. 0.4311, df=2, p>0.01; academic unit Chi-sq. 5.3719, df=10. p>0.01). Thus, the results obtained from analysis of the responses may be regarded as broadly representative of the entire group of entering Transfer students. Significant differences were found in answers to some questions, however, when gender, ethnicity and academic unit were considered.

Methodology

The data obtained from the Transfer orientation sessions were analyzed using standard statistical methods. Responses were tested to determine whether there were significant differences when gender or ethnicity were considered. Selected items also were analyzed for significance by academic unit.

All questions requiring categorical responses (questions 1, 3-9, 14-20, and 22-30) were analyzed using Chi-Square tests, and all questions with numerically coded responses (questions 2, 10-13, and 21) were analyzed using either T-tests or one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) with Duncan's multiple comparison procedure.

In tests of statistical significance, p values of 0.01 or less were considered to indicate significant differences. For tests that report an exact p-value (Chi-Square, T-test), the exact p-values are specified in discussions preceding tables when practical. Duncan's procedure does not report an exact p-value, so in this case it is reported as less than or equal to the specified significance level of the test (in this case, alpha = 0.01). To make identification of significant results easier, the category of significant responses as well as an approximate p-value (p<0.01) appears below the corresponding table.

Outline of the Report

Section I Demographics of the Transfer Class and Survey Respondents

Presents demographic profiles of the 1996 Transfer class and survey respondents.

Section II Transfer Student Issues

Reports responses to questions concerning student's experience with the transfer process (questions 10-20).

Section III Marketing Research

Presents those factors found to be influential in the decision to transfer to NC State (questions 2 and 3).

Section IV Educational Intent

Reports responses to several questions dealing with educational intent (questions 1, 4-9).

Section V General Education Goals

Provides ratings of current level of development and importance of 12 goals for general education (question 21).

Section VI Personal Development Goals

Provides ratings of current level of development and importance of 16 goals related to student personal development (question 21).

Section VII World View Goals

Provides ratings of current level of development and importance of seven goals related to student world view (question 21).

Section VIII Co-curricular Interests

Presents responses to questions dealing with interest in co-curricular programs and activities (question 23).

Section IX Background Information

Reports background information on areas such as financial aid received, employment plans, and other personal information (questions 22, 24-30).

Section X Academic Unit Analysis

This section provides responses to selected questions by Transfer students enrolling in nine of NC State's 11 colleges and schools.

Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION I

DEMOGRAPHICS OF THE TRANSFER CLASS AND SURVEY RESPONDENTS

This section presents the demographic breakdown for the 1996 Transfer class and for survey respondents. These categories include gender, ethnicity, and academic unit. The Transfer class of 1996 numbered 1,199 four-year students and 55 enrollees in the two-year Agricultural Institute for a total of 1,254 fall enrollees.

Of this group, 12 were international students of which three completed the survey. All three classified themselves as White. The total number of usable surveys was 664. No enrollees in the Agricultural Institute completed a usable survey.

Table 1 presents the demographics of the Transfer class. Of the total Transfer class, 42% were female and 58% were male; and by ethnicity: 85% were White, 10% were Other Minorities and 5% were African-American.

Table 1: Demographics of Transfer Class and Survey Respondents
Ethnic group
Transfer Class
Survey respondents
Female
Male
Total
Female
Male
Total

African-American
35
2.8%
25
2.0%
60
4.8%
21
3.2%
12
1.8%
33
5.0%

Asian
39
3.1%
46
3.7%
85
6.8%
13
2.0%
23
3.5%
36
5.4%

Hispanic
17
1.4%
20
1.6%
37
3.0%
6
0.9%
10
1.5%
16
2.4%

Native American
3
0.2%
6
0.5%
9
0.7%
2
0.3%
2
0.3%
4
0.6%

White
432
34.5%
631
50.3%
1,063
84.8%
244
36.8%
331
49.9%
575
86.6%

Total
526
42.0%
728
58.1%
1,254
100.0%
286
43.1%
378
56.9%
664
100.0%

Table 2 presents enrollment of Transfer students as well as survey respondents by academic unit. The eleven units of the university are: College of Agriculture and Life Sciences - Bachelor's (CALS), Agricultural Institute - Two-Year (AGIN), School of Design (Design), College of Education and Psychology (CEP), College of Engineering (COE), First Year College (FYC), College of Forest Resources (CFR), College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHASS), College of Management (COM), College of Physical and Mathematical Science (PAMS), and College of Textiles (COT). The College of Agriculture and Life Sciences is divided into those students in the Bachelor's program and those in the Agricultural Institute (Two-Year). The largest percentage of Transfer students enrolled in the Colleges of Engineering (21.0%) and Humanities and Social Sciences (21.0%). The smallest percentage of Transfer students enrolled in the First Year College (0.1%), Design (2.1%) and Physical and Mathematical Sciences (3.5%).

Table 2: Classifications - by Academic Unit
Academic unit
Transfer class
Survey respondents
Agriculture and Life Sciences (Bachelor's)
241
19.2%
150
22.6%
Design
26
2.1%
7
1.1%
Education and Psychology
48
3.8%
28
4.2%
Engineering
263
21.0%
140
21.1%
First Year College
1
0.1%
0
0.0%
Forest Resources
80
6.4%
50
7.5%
Humanities and Social Sciences
263
21.0%
126
19.0%
Management
195
15.6%
123
18.5%
Physical and Mathematical Sciences
44
3.5%
23
3.5%
Textiles
38
3.0%
17
2.6%
Subtotal
1,199
95.6%
664
100.0%
Agricultural Institute (Two-Year)
55
4.4%
0
0
Total
1,254
100.0%
664
100.0%
NOTE: Textile Engineering Undesignated is included in the College of Engineering for enrollment and in the College of Textiles for statistics.




1996 Transfer Class

Table 3: Location of Last Institution Attended
State
Number
Percent
North Carolina
946
77.5
New York
33
2.7
Virginia
30
2.5
Florida
23
1.9
South Carolina
14
1.1
All others (<15 in each)
175
14.3

Table 4: Type of Institution Last Attended

Type of institution
All transfers
Transfers from NC institutions
Doctorate
427
35.0%
322
34.0%
Intermediate
90
7.4%
71
7.5%
Master's
93
7.6%
55
5.8%
First Professional
2
0.2%
0
0.0%
4 or 5 year Bachelor's
72
5.9%
57
6.0%
2 but < 4- year degree
537
44.0%
441
46.6%


Sixty-five percent of the Transfer class began their tenure at NC State as First-Year students, 22% transferred in as Sophomores, 8% began as third-through fifth-year students and 4% transferred into the Agricultural Institute.

The last institution attended by more than three-fourths (78%) of Transfer students was another North Carolina institution (see Table 3). Of the 946 Transfer students who last attended North Carolina institutions, 442 (47%) were from two-year institutions (see Table 4). Of the 322 transferring from North Carolina doctoral-level schools, 229 (71%) were from NC State.


Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION II

TRANSFER STUDENT ISSUES

This section reports responses to questions concerning students' experience with the transfer process.

Admissions

Transfer students were asked to indicate their satisfaction with four admissions processes. The rating scale used was: 4 = Very Satisfied, 3 = Moderately Satisfied, 2 = Moderately Dissatisfied, and 1 = Dissatisfied. Results for the four questions appear in Table 5. Responses to each question ranged from 639 to 652. Respondents were moderately satisfied with their admissions, academic advising and registration experiences.

No significant differences were found when gender and ethnicity were considered. Significant differences (p<0.01) were found, however, when academic unit was considered for satisfaction with the university admissions process and satisfaction with the departmental admissions process (see Table 6).

Table 5: Satisfaction with the Quality of Admissions Process

Mean and standard deviation.
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Satisfaction with registration process
3.08
3.08
3.08
3.33
3.05
3.20
0.78
0.83
0.74
0.55
0.79
0.75
Satisfaction with university admissions process
3.14
3.19
3.09
3.38
3.12
3.17
0.81
0.80
0.81
0.79
0.80
0.84
Satisfaction with departmental admissions process
3.31
3.35
3.28
3.42
3.31
3.20
0.69
0.69
0.69
0.67
0.68
0.83
Satisfaction with academic advising
3.16
3.21
3.13
3.09
3.16
3.19
0.82
0.84
0.82
0.79
0.82
0.93

Table 6: Satisfaction with the Quality of Admissions Process - by Academic Unit

Mean and standard deviation
All

CALS

COE

CFR

PAMS

COT
Satisfaction with registration process
3.08
3.0
3.09
3.07
2.94
3.25
0.78
0.81
0.83
0.71
0.93
0.45
Satisfaction with university admissions process
+
3.14
3.05
3.16
3.18
2.95
2.69
0.81
0.90
0.75
0.81
0.83
0.79
Satisfaction with departmental admissions process
+
3.31
3.28
3.24
3.54
3.44
3.00
0.69
0.77
0.72
0.65
0.51
0.82
Satisfaction with academic advising
3.16
3.19
3.19
3.19
3.71
3.00
0.82
0.87
0.81
0.79
0.47
0.77
+ p < 0.01

Table 6 (continued)

Mean and standard deviation
All

Design

CEP

CHASS

COM
Satisfaction with registration process
3.08
3.20
3.04
3.09
3.16
0.78
0.84
0.81
0.69
0.78
Satisfaction with university admissions process
+
3.14
3.57
3.04
3.17
3.26
0.81
0.53
0.94
0.75
0.76
Satisfaction with departmental admissions process
+
3.31
3.67
3.50
3.22
3.39
0.69
0.52
0.58
0.65
0.60
Satisfaction with academic advising
3.16
3.75
3.11
3.02
3.11
0.82
0.50
0.88
0.93
0.68
+ p < 0.01


More than two-thirds of Transfer students indicated that they were able to register for the courses they needed or wanted (see Table 7 and Chart 3). Significant differences (p=0.008) were found when ethnicity was considered with 57% of African-American students saying they were not able to register for the courses they needed or wanted compare to 30% of Whites and 31% of Other Minorities. No significant differences were found when gender and academic unit were considered.

Table 7: Ability to Register for Courses Needed or Wanted (n=561)
Ability to register for courses needed/wanted %)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Yes
68.8
65.0
71.6
43.3
70.4
68.6
No
31.2
35.0
28.4
56.7
29.6
31.4
Ethnicity: p<0.01

Table 8: Ability to Register for Courses Needed/Wanted - by Academic Unit
Ability to register for courses needed/wanted (%)
All

CALS

COE

CFR

PAMS

COT
Yes
68.8
62.2
73.7
72.7
71.4
66.7
No
31.2
37.8
26.3
27.3
28.6
33.3

Table 8 (continued)
Ability to register for courses needed/wanted (%)
All

Design

CEP

CHASS

COM
Yes
68.8
57.1
79.2
74.3
59.3
No
31.2
42.9
20.8
25.7
40.7


Scholarships

Only 28 percent of all students said they were able to apply for university, college or department scholarships (see Table 9 and Chart 4). Significant differences (p=0.003) were found when ethnicity was considered with 97% of African-Americans saying they were not able to apply for scholarships, compared to 78% of Other Minorities and 70% of Whites. Significant differences (p=0.001) also were found when academic unit was considered. Larger percentages of Forest Resources (47%) and Design (43%) students indicated they were able to apply for scholarships than students in other academic units (see Table 10).

Table 9: Ability to Apply for Scholarships (N=597)
Ability to apply for scholarships (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Yes
27.8
26.5
28.8
3.1
30.0
21.6
No
72.2
73.5
71.2
96.9
70.0
78.4
Ethnicity: p<0.01

Table 10: Ability to Apply for Scholarships - According to Academic Unit
Ability to apply for scholarships (%)
All

CALS

COE

CFR

PAMS

COT
Yes
27.8
36.0
30.5
46.8
14.3
29.4
No
72.2
64.0
69.5
53.2
85.7
70.6
Academic Unit: p<0.01

Table 10 (continued)
Ability to apply for scholarships (%)
All

Design

CEP

CHASS

COM
Yes
27.8
42.9
28.6
19.8
14.1
No
72.2
57.1
71.4
80.2
85.7
Academic Unit: p<0.01


Courses Transferred

Transfer students were asked two questions about the number of courses that transferred to NC State from other institutions. The results of the first question appear in Tables 11 and 12. Sixty-three percent of all students said that the number of courses that actually transferred was about the number they were led to believe would transfer by their previous institution. Another 8% said the number transferred was more than they expected. No significant differences were found when gender, ethnicity and academic unit were considered.

Table 11: Courses Transferred vs. Previous Institution (N=617)
Number of courses actually transferred match what previous institution said (%)

All


Female


Male

African- American


White


Other Minorities
Less than expected
29.2
27.1
30.7
33.3
29.1
27.5
About expected
63.4
66.4
61.1
57.6
63.6
64.7
More than expected
7.5
6.5
8.2
9.1
7.3
7.8

Table 12: Courses Transferred vs. Previous Institution - by Academic Unit
Number of courses actually transferred match what previous institution said (%)

All


CALS


COE


CFR


PAMS


COT
Less than expected
29.2
31.9
46.9
46.9
23.8
35.3
About expected
63.4
58.7
49.0
49.0
71.4
58.5
More than expected
7.5
9.4
4.1
4.1
4.8
5.9

Table 12 (continued)
Number of courses actually transferred match what previous institution said (%)

All


Design


CEP


CHASS


COM
Less than expected
29.2
20.0
18.5
16.5
28.4
About expected
63.4
60.0
74.1
75.2
59.6
More than expected
7.5
20.0
7.4
8.3
11.9


The second question asked students whether the number of courses actually transferred matched what the NC State department had said would transfer. Table 13 shows that 73% of Transfer students said the number of courses actually transferred was about what they expected and another 8% said the number was more than they expected. No significant differences were found when gender, ethnicity and academic unit (see Table 14) were considered.

Table 13: Courses Transferred vs. NC State Department (N=612)
Number of courses actually transferred match what NC State department said (%)

All


Female


Male

African- American


White

Other Minorities
Less than expected
18.5
18.3
18.6
34.4
16.8
25.5
About expected
73.4
72.5
74.0
56.3
75.0
66.7
More than expected
8.2
9.2
7.4
9.4
8.1
7.8

Table 14: Courses Transferred vs. NC State Department - by Academic Unit
Number of courses actually transferred match what NC State department said (%)

All


CALS


COE


CFR


PAMS


COT
Less than expected
18.5
20.0
26.0
24.5
9.5
31.3
About expected
73.4
71.4
70.2
69.4
85.7
56.3
More than expected
8.2
8.6
3.8
6.1
4.8
12.5

Table 14 (continued)
Number of courses actually transferred match what NC State department said (%)

All


Design


CEP


CHASS


COM
Less than expected
18.5
20.0
14.8
9.3
15.2
About expected
73.4
60.0
77.8
78.8
75.2
More than expected
8.2
20.0
7.4
11.9
9.5


Preparation for College

Transfer students were asked to respond to three questions about their preparation for college. Results appear in Tables 15 through 20. More than three-quarters of all students (78%) said that they believed that their high schools had well-prepared them or adequately prepared them for college (see Tables 15 and 16). More than 97% said that their previous institution had prepared them well or adequately for college (see Tables 17 and 18). When they were asked about self-preparation, 97% said they had prepared themselves well or adequately for college (see Tables 19 and 20).

No significant differences were found for these three questions when gender and ethnicity were considered. Significant differences (p<0.01) were found, however, for two questions when academic unit was considered. These were preparation by previous institution and self-preparation. A larger percentage of students in the College of Textiles (18%) said their previous institution poorly prepared them for further study than did students in the other colleges and schools. Similarly, a larger percentage of students in the College of Textiles (12%) indicated they believed their self-preparation was poorer than did students in the other colleges and schools.

Table 15: High School Preparation for College (n=651)
High school preparation for college (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Poorly prepared
22.1
20.1
23.6
30.3
22.1
17.0
Adequately prepared
49.5
48.4
50.3
48.5
49.4
50.9
Well prepared
28.4
31.4
26.1
21.2
28.5
32.1

Table 16: High School Preparation for College - by Academic Unit
High school preparation for college (%)
All

CALS

COE

CFR

PAMS

COT
Poorly prepared
22.1
21.6
18.8
30.0
36.4
17.7
Adequately prepared
49.5
50.7
51.9
50.0
46.4
58.8
Well prepared
28.4
27.7
29.3
20.0
27.3
23.5

Table 16 (continued)
High school preparation for college (%)
All

Design

CEP

CHASS

COM
Poorly prepared
22.1
14.3
25.0
27.4
15.6
Adequately prepared
49.5
28.6
39.3
47.6
51.6
Well prepared
28.4
57.1
35.7
25.0
32.8

Table 17: Previous Institution Preparation for College (n=649)
Preparation by previous institution (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Poorly prepared
3.2
3.2
3.3
9.4
3.0
1.9
Adequately prepared
40.8
38.7
42.5
37.5
39.9
52.8
Well prepared
55.9
58.2
54.2
53.1
57.1
45.3

Table 18: Previous Institution Preparation for College - by Academic Unit
Preparation by previous institution (%)
All

CALS

COE

CFR

PAMS

COT
Poorly prepared
3.2
1.4
2.3
4.0
9.1
17.7
Adequately prepared
40.8
44.9
34.6
40.0
31.8
41.2
Well prepared
55.9
53.7
63.2
56.0
59.1
41.2
Academic Unit: p<0.01

Table 18 (continued)
Preparation by previous institution (%)
All

Design

CEP

CHASS

COM
Poorly prepared
3.2
0.0
0.0
5.7
1.7
Adequately prepared
40.8
28.6
42.9
42.7
43.0
Well prepared
55.9
71.4
57.1
51.6
55.4
Academic Unit: p<0.01

Table 19: Self-Preparation for College (n=651)
Self preparation for college (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Poorly prepared
2.8
1.4
3.8
3.1
2.8
1.8
Adequately prepared
47.6
43.1
51.1
37.5
48.2
47.3
Well prepared
49.6
55.5
45.1
59.4
48.9
50.9

Table 20: Self-Preparation for College - by Academic Unit
Self preparation for college (%)
All

CALS

COE

CFR

PAMS

COT
Poorly prepared
2.8
3.4
3.0
4.0
0.0
11.8
Adequately prepared
47.6
49.0
39.3
52.0
50.0
47.1
Well prepared
49.6
47.6
57.8
44.0
50.0
41.2
Academic Unit: p<0.01

Table 20 (continued)
Self preparation for college (%)
All

Design

CEP

CHASS

COM
Poorly prepared
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.8
3.3
Adequately prepared
47.6
42.9
25.0
58.9
47.1
Well prepared
49.6
57.1
75.0
40.3
49.6
Academic Unit: p<0.01

Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION III

MARKETING RESEARCH

This section presents those factors found to be influential in the decision of students to transfer to NC State.

Factors Influencing Transfer Decision

Transfer students were asked to indicate the extent that any of seventeen factors influenced their decision to transfer to NC State. The scale used was: 5 = Very Strong Influence, 4 = Strong Influence, 3 = Moderate Influence, 2 = Weak Influence, and 1 = Very Weak Influence. The means and standard deviations for each factor, ranked from highest to lowest means for the total group, are listed in Table 21.

Students rated location as having the strongest influence on their decision to transfer to NC State. Other strong influences were availability of program, academic reputation, and facilities and resources available. Females rated location as having a significantly stronger (p=0.0001) influence than did males.

One factor was rated significantly different by the three ethnic groups. African-Americans believed that extracurricular activities was a significantly stronger (p<0.01) factor in their decision to transfer than did Whites and Other Minorities.

Respondents were given a choice to list any other fact that they believed influenced their decision to transfer to NC State. Forty-two students listed an other factor. These included: lifelong education (4 responses), previous NC State graduate, economical reasons, Design school (2 responses), engineering and forestry programs, study abroad program, co-op program, ROTC, and sports.

Significant differences (p<0.01) were found for three of the factors when academic units were considered (see Table 22). These were: location, availability of program and academic reputation.

The breakdown of factors having the strongest influence: location: College of Education and Psychology, College of Humanities and Social Sciences and College of Management; availability of program: College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, College of Forest Resources, College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences and School of Design; academic reputation: College of Engineering College of Textiles.



Table 21: Factors Influencing Decision to Transfer to NC State
Mean and standard deviation
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Location
+
3.98
4.19
3.81
4.21
3.98
3.81
1.15
0.96
1.25
1.22
1.14
1.18
Availability of program
3.94
3.94
3.93
3.88
3.93
4.10
1.06
1.05
1.07
1.07
1.07
0.93
Academic reputation
3.90
3.88
3.92
3.94
3.89
4.02
0.87
0.84
0.89
1.03
0.87
0.78
Facilities and resources available
3.67
3.62
3.71
3.97
3.67
3.56
1.06
1.10
1.02
1.03
1.05
1.08
Support for intended major
3.57
3.52
3.61
3.50
3.57
3.64
1.15
1.19
1.11
0.97
1.16
1.15
Cost
3.31
3.35
3.29
3.52
3.31
3.28
1.21
1.23
1.19
1.28
1.20
1.29
Recommended by friend, family, teacher, etc.
3.18
3.33
3.07
3.58
3.17
3.04
1.33
1.28
1.35
1.24
1.34
1.22
Contact with a current student
2.86
2.94
2.81
3.30
2.86
2.70
1.36
1.32
1.38
1.49
1.37
1.05
Scholarships/financial aid available
2.74
2.88
2.64
3.32
2.68
2.98
1.30
1.33
1.26
1.35
1.28
1.32
Number hours transferred or credited
2.66
2.67
2.66
2.89
2.65
2.70
1.28
1.31
1.26
1.50
1.27
1.23
Campus visit prior to orientation
2.62
2.56
2.67
2.68
2.59
2.92
1.27
1.29
1.25
1.20
1.27
1.32
Size
2.52
2.48
2.56
2.59
2.50
2.76
1.12
1.04
1.18
1.15
1.13
1.09
Contact with a school official
2.51
2.55
2.48
2.60
2.49
2.63
1.28
1.29
1.27
1.43
1.28
1.15
Extracurricular opportunities
2.48
2.51
2.46
3.13
2.45
2.44
++
1.19
1.20
1.19
1.36
1.19
1.08
Publications from NC State
2.22
2.24
2.21
2.44
2.21
2.21
1.07
1.03
1.11
1.10
1.06
1.19
Attendance at a College Fair
1.83
1.84
1.82
2.14
1.76
2.24
1.01
0.99
1.03
1.35
0.98
1.00
+ Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01

Table 22: Factors Influencing Decision to Transfer - by Academic Unit
Mean and standard deviation
All

CALS

COE

CFR

PAMS

COT
Location
+
3.98
3.89
3.74
3.64
4.00
3.12
1.15
1.18
1.20
1.24
0.90
1.27
Availability of program
+
3.94
4.10
4.09
4.18
4.18
3.50
1.06
1.05
1.10
0.83
0.91
1.32
Academic reputation
+
3.90
3.88
4.14
3.94
3.68
3.88
0.87
0.81
0.86
0.84
0.95
1.02
Facilities and resources available
3.67
3.62
3.85
3.94
3.65
3.67
1.06
1.16
0.99
0.84
1.07
1.35
Support for intended major
3.57
3.65
3.92
3.96
3.65
3.56
1.15
1.15
1.11
0.96
1.07
1.21
Cost
3.31
3.24
3.39
3.15
2.87
3.12
1.21
1.27
1.20
1.15
1.18
1.41
Recommended by friend, family, teacher, etc.
3.18
3.09
2.98
3.62
2.72
3.00
1.33
1.38
1.29
1.30
1.36
1.31
Contact with a current student
2.86
2.87
2.70
2.97
3.08
2.58
1.36
1.37
1.28
1.25
1.24
1.38
Scholarships/financial aid available
2.74
2.62
2.57
3.24
2.65
2.14
1.30
1.36
1.27
1.13
1.11
0.95
Number hours transferred or credited
2.66
2.56
2.67
2.82
2.42
2.67
1.28
1.28
1.36
1.17
1.12
1.29
Campus visit prior to orientation
2.62
2.44
2.57
3.00
2.40
3.00
1.27
1.21
1.24
1.41
1.12
1.49
Size
2.52
2.50
2.42
2.48
2.62
2.47
1.12
1.13
1.18
0.97
1.16
1.13
Contact with a school official
2.51
2.39
2.39
2.85
3.08
2.33
1.28
1.31
1.23
1.25
1.44
1.07
Extracurricular opportunities
2.48
2.37
2.10
2.84
2.18
2.33
1.19
1.18
1.06
1.13
1.07
1.23
Publications from NC State
2.22
2.12
2.18
2.44
2.38
2.25
1.07
1.10
1.04
1.11
0.87
0.87
Attendance at a College Fair
1.83
1.80
1.91
1.94
2.17
2.13
1.01
0.95
1.18
1.00
0.75
1.36
+ Academic unit: p<0.01


Table 22 (continued)
Mean and standard deviation
All

Design

CEP

CHASS

COM
Location
+
3.98
3.57
4.31
4.26
4.27
1.15
1.51
1.19
1.01
0.96
Availability of program
+
3.94
4.71
3.82
3.71
3.67
1.06
0.49
0.94
1.11
0.99
Academic reputation
+
3.90
4.14
3.41
3.88
3.79
0.87
0.90
0.89
0.90
0.85
Facilities and resources available
3.67
4.00
3.54
3.63
3.49
1.06
0.82
0.92
1.06
1.06
Support for intended major
3.57
3.86
3.11
3.36
3.19
1.15
1.46
1.34
1.14
1.03
Cost
3.31
3.43
3.80
3.38
3.33
1.21
0.53
1.41
1.21
1.08
Recommended by friend, family, teacher, etc.
3.18
3.67
3.30
3.34
3.21
1.33
1.21
1.49
1.28
1.32
Contact with a current student
2.86
3.00
2.56
2.90
3.01
1.36
1.00
1.38
1.41
1.45
Scholarships/financial aid available
2.74
3.00
2.82
3.01
2.65
1.30
1.58
1.37
1.35
1.24
Number hours transferred or credited
2.66
2.29
2.60
2.85
2.61
1.28
1.11
1.44
1.27
1.24
Campus visit prior to orientation
2.62
3.00
1.92
2.60
2.87
1.27
1.58
1.19
1.21
1.29
Size
2.52
2.17
2.58
2.64
2.57
1.12
0.75
1.17
1.18
1.07
Contact with a school official
2.51
2.67
2.00
2.53
2.66
1.28
1.21
1.28
1.24
1.33
Extracurricular opportunities
2.48
2.00
2.43
2.81
2.64
1.19
1.00
1.28
1.23
1.23
Publications from NC State
2.22
2.40
2.19
2.17
2.32
1.07
1.14
1.19
1.17
1.05
Attendance at a College Fair
1.83
1.50
1.86
1.73
1.74
1.01
0.71
1.46
0.93
0.94
+ Academic unit: p<0.01

Single Most-Influential Factor

After rating the importance of individual factors affecting their decision to transfer to NC State, Transfer students were asked to pick the single most-influential factor in their decision. Table 23 lists the factors according to decreasing percentages. The highest percentage chose location (27%) followed by availability of program (24%) and academic reputation (19%).

No significant differences were found when gender and ethnicity were considered. Nevertheless, females chose location (33%) as the single most-influential factor while Males chose availability of program (25%). Among ethnic groups, 34% of African-Americans chose location as did 27% of Whites and 25% of Other Minorities.

Table 23: Single Most Influential Factor in Decision to Transfer (n=646)
Most influential factor (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Location
27.1
32.7
22.8
34.4
26.9
25.0
Availability of program
23.5
21.9
24.7
12.5
25.1
13.5
Academic reputation
18.9
14.0
22.6
18.8
19.0
17.3
Cost
7.3
7.2
7.3
9.4
6.4
15.4
Level of support for my intended major

7.1
6.5

7.6

3.1

6.4

17.3
Recommended
3.4
3.6
3.3
3.1
3.7
0.0
Facilities and resources available

3.1

3.2

3.0

6.3

3.2

0.0
Other
2.6
3.2
2.2
0.0
2.7
3.8
Contact with a current student

1.9

1.8

1.9

3.1

2.0

0.0
Scholarships/financial aid available

1.7

2.5

1.1

6.3

1.4

1.9
Contact with a school official
0.9
0.7
1.1
3.1
0.7
1.9
Number of hours transferred/credited

0.8

0.7

0.8

0.0

0.9

0.0
Campus visit prior to orientation

0.8

0.7

0.8

0.0

0.7

1.9
Size
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.0
0.2
1.9
Attendance at a College Fair
0.3
0.4
0.3
0.0
0.4
0.0
Publications from NC State
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
Extracurricular opportunities
0.2
0.4
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0

Table 24 lists the percentages of the top two single most-influential factors chosen by respondents in each academic unit. Location and availability of program were one of the top two influential factors for seven of the nine colleges/schools in the decision of transfer students to attend NC State. Significant differences (p<0.01) were found when academic units were considered.

Table 24: Top Two Factors Influencing Decision to Transfer - by Academic Unit
Single most influential factor (%)
All
CALS
COE
CFR
PAMS
COT
Availability of program
23.5
33.6
29.4
28.0
26.1
31.3
Location
27.1
25.3
18.0
21.7
Academic reputation
18.9
25.7
31.3
Cost
7.3
Academic Unit: p<0.01

Table 24 (continued)
Single most influential factor (%)
All
Design
CEP
CHASS
COM
Availability of program
23.5
42.9
17.9
Location
27.1
28.6
32.1
35.5
42.9
Academic reputation
18.9
21.5
18.5
Cost
7.3
17.9
Academic Unit: p<0.01


Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page


SECTION IV

EDUCATIONAL INTENT

This section reports responses to several questions about the educational intent of Transfer students.

Previous Institutions

Nearly two-thirds (62%) of Transfer students indicated that they had attended only one institution before enrolling at NC State (see Table 25). One-quarter (26%) had attended two institutions before enrolling. No significant differences were found when gender and ethnicity were considered.

Table 25: Number of Institutions Attended Before Enrolling (n=645)
Institutions attended before enrolling at NC States (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
One
61.6
61.9
61.3
56.3
62.7
52.8
Two
25.6
25.3
25.8
25.0
25.0
32.1
Three
9.8
11.0
8.8
12.5
9.8
7.5
Four
1.4
1.1
1.6
3.1
1.3
1.9
Five or more
1.7
0.7
2.5
3.1
1.3
5.7


College Major

Ninety-one percent of Transfer students reported they were either certain or very certain of their college major (see Table 26). No significant differences were found when gender and ethnicity were considered.

Table 26: Certainty of College Major (n=658)
Certainty of college major (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Very uncertain
0.9
1.4
0.5
0.0
0.9
1.8
Uncertain
7.9
5.3
9.9
9.1
7.7
9.1
Certain
35.7
34.3
36.8
21.2
36.7
34.5
Very certain
55.5
59.0
52.8
69.7
54.7
54.5

Intent

Table 27 indicates that the primary goal or objective of Transfer students attending NC State is to obtain a bachelor's degree as preparation for further schooling (46%) or to obtain a bachelor's degree as preparation for a career (38%). No significant differences were found when gender and ethnicity were considered. Students were given a chance to list any other goal or object that they believed was their primary reason for attending NC State. Very few students specified a separate goal.

Table 27: Primary Goal/Objective for Attending NC State (n=659)
Primary goal or objective for attending NC State (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Bachelor's degree as preparation for school
45.7

53.5

39.7

51.5

45.0

49.1
Bachelor's degree as preparation for career
38.1

33.5

41.6

36.4

38.2

38.2
Other
2.6
2.5
2.7
6.1
2.6
0.0
Bachelor's degree or certificate only
1.8
8.8

14.1

0.0

12.6

10.9
Improve for current profession
1.4
1.4
1.3
6.1
1.2
0.0
Courses for personal interest
0.5
0.4
0.5
0.0
0.4
1.8

Educational Aspirations

Transfer students were asked to indicate the highest level of education they planned to complete. Table 28 shows that about one-third (31%) plan to complete only a bachelor's degree, while 44 percent plan to complete a master's degree. Significant differences (p=0.001) were found when gender was considered. A larger percentage of males (35%) indicated that they intend to complete only a bachelor's degree compared to females (27%). A larger percentage of females (10%) than males (2%) said that they plan to seek a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine degree.

Table 28: Highest Level of Education Planned (n=658)
Highest level of education planned (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Certificate
0.2
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.2
0.0
Bachelor's degree
31.3
26.5
34.9
9.1
33.9
18.2
Master's degree
43.5
41.3
45.1
48.5
42.3
52.7
Doctoral degree
12.0
12.7
11.5
18.2
10.9
20.0
Doctor of Veterinary Medicine
5.3

9.9

1.9

6.1

5.6

1.8
Other professional degree
7.8

9.5

6.4

18.2

7.2

7.3
Gender: p<0.01

Time to Degree Completion

The data in Table 29 show that most Transfer students plan to complete their bachelor's degree in either two years (44%) or three years (40%). No significant differences were found when gender and ethnicity were considered.

Table 29: Intended Length of Time to Completion of Degree (n=661)
Time to complete bachelor's degree (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
1 year
1.5
2.1
1.1
0.0
1.2
5.4
2 years
44.2
47.2
41.9
42.4
44.8
39.3
3 years
39.6
39.4
39.8
48.5
39.2
39.3
4 years
10.1
7.4
12.2
9.1
9.8
14.3
More than 4 years
2.7
2.1
3.2
0.0
3.0
1.8
Do not intend to complete bachelor's
1.8

1.8

1.9

0.0

2.1

0.0

Enrollment

The responses of Transfer students to two questions concerning their enrollment plans appear in Tables 30 and 31. About one-half (52%) of Transfer students said that they planned to enroll in 15 or more credit hours of classes, and 38 percent said that they planned to enroll in 12-14 hours of classes.

Only 11% of Transfer students said they would take the majority of their courses in the late afternoon and evening hours. Significant differences (p=0.01) were found among ethnic groups. A larger percentage of African-Americans (26%) said they planned to take courses during this time of the day compared to 22% of Other Minorities and 9% of Whites.

Table 30: First Semester Enrollment Plans (n=638)
First semester enrollment status (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
15 hours or more
52.0
52.6
51.6
46.9
53.8
37.0
12-14 hours of classes
38.1
38.0
38.2
40.6
37.7
40.7
Less than 12 hours
9.9
9.5
10.2
12.5
8.5
22.2

Table 31: Taking Courses in Late Afternoon/Evening (n=632)
Most courses in afternoon/evening (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Yes
10.9
11.2
10.7
25.8
9.1
22.0
No
89.1
88.8
89.3
74.2
90.9
78.0
Ethnicity: p<0.01


Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION V

GENERAL EDUCATION GOALS

This section provides Transfer students' ratings of twelve goals for general education specified by NC State. Respondents were asked their current level of development toward these goals as well as the importance of each goal to them at the time of the survey.

Level of Development

The means and standard deviations for level of development of general education goals, ranked from highest to lowest means for the group, appear in Table 32. The rating scale used was: 5 = Very High, 4 = High, 3 = Average, 2 = Low, and 1 = Very Low. Responses to each goal ranged from 574 to 654. The four general education goals in which Transfer students indicated their highest current level of development were: ability to plan and carry out projects independently, developing good listening skills, acquiring a broad general education and developing good reading comprehension skills.

Significant differences (p<0.01) were found for two goals when gender was considered. Males rated their development significantly higher than did females in their ability to understand how science and technology influence life and in their ability to apply scientific principles.

Significant differences (p<0.01) also were found for seven goals when ethnicity was considered. African-Americans rated their development higher than did Whites and Other Minorities for six of the goals. These were: Developing good listening skills, developing good reading comprehension skills, ability to communicate ideas in writing, understanding diverse cultures and values and developing computer skills.

Importance of Goals

The means and standard deviations for goal importance, ranked from highest to lowest according to means for survey respondents, appear in Table 33. The rating scale used was: 5 = Very High, 4 = High, 3 = Average, 2 = Low, and 1 = Very Low. Responses to each item ranged from 651 to 655. The four general education goals that Transfer students indicated were most important to them were: Developing computer skills, ability to plan/carry out projects independently, developing good listening skills, and ability communicate ideas orally and.

Significant differences (p<0.01) between males and females were found for three items. Females placed significantly greater importance than males on developing good listening skills and ability to communicate ideas in writing and understanding diverse cultures and values.

Significant difference (p<0.01) also were found for two goals when ethnicity was considered. African-Americans placed greater importance than did Whites and Other Minorities on ability to communicate ideas orally and understanding diverse cultures and values.

Table 32: Current Level of Development of General Education Goals
Mean and standard deviation
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Ability to plan/carry out projects independently
3.88
3.90
3.86
3.94
3.89
3.70
0.79
0.82
0.77
0.91
0.77
0.89
Developing good listening skills
3.72
3.78
3.68
4.09
3.73
3.39
++
0.80
0.79
0.80
0.73
0.79
0.85
Acquiring a broad general education
3.70
3.74
3.67
3.74
3.71
3.56
0.75
0.79
0.72
0.77
0.75
0.79
Developing good reading comprehension skills
3.67
3.72
3.63
3.94
3.69
3.27
++
0.86
0.89
0.84
0.85
0.85
0.87
Ability to critically analyze events/information/ideas
3.67
3.59
3.72
3.72
3.69
3.43
0.77
0.78
0.77
0.77
0.75
0.97
Understand how science, technology influence life
+
3.66
3.53
3.75
3.75
3.63
3.84
0.90
0.91
0.87
0.92
0.90
0.85
Ability to communicate ideas in writing
3.59
3.67
3.53
3.66
3.63
3.16
++
0.82
0.83
0.81
1.00
0.78
0.97
Ability to apply mathematics skills
3.55
3.46
3.62
3.53
3.51
3.95
0.95
1.00
0.91
0.98
0.95
0.84
Understanding diverse cultures and values
3.50
3.55
3.46
4.16
3.43
3.85
++
0.90
0.91
0.89
0.72
0.89
0.91
Ability to communicate ideas orally
3.42
3.46
3.38
3.81
3.43
3.02
++
0.93
0.91
0.94
0.97
0.91
0.98
Ability to apply scientific principles
+
3.32
3.10
3.49
3.06
3.33
3.36
0.95
0.91
0.94
0.84
0.94
1.09
Developing computer skills
3.26
3.22
3.30
3.77
3.23
3.25
++
1.00
0.97
1.02
1.02
0.99
1.07
+Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01

Table 33: Importance of General Education Goals
Mean and standard deviation
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Developing computer skills
4.50
4.52
4.48
4.73
4.49
4.42
0.73
0.71
0.75
0.57
0.72
0.85
Ability to plan/carry out projects independently
4.47
4.51
4.45
4.58
4.48
4.41
0.71
0.68
0.73
0.71
0.72
0.65
Developing good listening skills
+
4.42
4.50
4.35
4.70
4.40
4.36
0.75
0.73
0.77
0.53
0.76
0.75
Ability to communicate ideas orally
4.41
4.50
4.34
4.82
4.39
4.41
++
0.82
0.77
0.85
0.39
0.82
0.91
Developing good reading comprehension skills
4.38
4.43
4.35
4.64
4.36
4.51
0.79
0.78
0.81
0.60
0.81
0.69
Ability to critically analyze events/information/ideas
4.26
4.28
4.25
4.52
4.25
4.23
0.79
0.79
0.80
0.87
0.79
0.83
Ability to communicate ideas in writing
+
4.25
4.35
4.17
4.52
4.23
4.27
0.84
0.78
0.88
0.71
0.83
0.98
Ability to apply mathematics skills
4.19
4.13
4.23
4.21
4.16
4.46
0.93
0.92
0.94
0.93
0.94
0.79
Understand how science, technology influence life
4.13
4.09
4.17
4.00
4.12
4.35
0.91
0.91
0.91
0.97
0.91
0.89
Acquiring a broad general education
4.04
4.08
4.01
4.39
4.03
4.02
1.03
0.96
1.09
0.90
1.04
1.05
Ability to apply scientific principles
3.94
3.84
4.02
3.73
3.94
4.13
1.03
1.02
1.03
1.13
1.02
1.05
Understanding diverse cultures and values
+
3.84
3.96
3.74
4.58
3.77
4.13
++
1.02
0.95
1.06
0.61
1.03
0.94
+Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01

Comparison of Importance and Level of Development

Chart 5 compares the importance that respondents placed on these goals and their perceived current level of development in each area. Transfer students rated developing computer skills as highest in importance, but ranked it lowest in their current level of development.



Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION VI

PERSONAL DEVELOPMENT GOALS

This section provides Transfer students' ratings of sixteen goals related to student personal development. Respondents were asked their current level of development toward these goals as well as the importance of each goal at the time of the survey.

Level of Development

The means and standard deviations for level of development of personal development goals, ranked from highest to lowest according to means for the group, appear in Table 34. The rating scale used was: 5 = Very High, 4 = High, 3 = Average, 2 = Low, and 1 = Very Low. Responses to each item ranged from 648 to 653. The personal development goals in which Transfer students indicated their highest current level of development were: taking responsibility for my own behavior, viewing learning as a lifelong process, recognizing and acting upon ethical principles and being independent and self-reliant.

Significant differences (p<0.01) were found for three of the sixteen items when gender was considered. Females rated their development in two of the three items significantly higher than did males. These included: taking responsibility for my own behavior and viewing learning as a lifelong process. Males rated their development significantly higher than did females in one area: handling stress.

When ethnicity was considered, significant differences were found for development in eight of the goals. African-Americans rated their development significantly higher than did Whites and Other Minorities in these goals: taking responsibility for my own behavior, viewing learning as a lifelong process, recognizing and acting upon ethical principles, being independent and self reliant, ability to function as part of a team, coping with change, having self-discipline, and improving leadership and management skills.

Importance of Goals

The means and standard deviations for goal importance, ranked from highest to lowest according to means for survey respondents, appear in Table 35. The rating scale used was: 5 = Very High, 4 = High, 3 = Average, 2 = Low, and 1 = Very Low. Responses for each item ranged from 651 to 655. The four personal development goals that Transfer students indicated were most important to them were: Taking responsibility for my own behavior, having self confidence, having self-discipline and managing my own time.

Significant differences (p<0.01) between males and females were found when respondents were asked to rate the importance of the sixteen goals. Females rated the importance of nine goals significantly higher than did males. These included: having self-confidence, having self-discipline, managing my time, realizing my potential for success, being independent and self-reliant, handling stress, coping with change, clarifying personal identity and being involved with public and community affairs. Significant differences also were found for three of the goals when ethnicity was considered. African-Americans placed greater importance than did Whites and Other Minorities on all three, which included: realizing my potential for success, understanding my own abilities and interests and clarifying personal identity.

Table 34: Current Level of Development of Personal Development Goals
Mean and standard deviation
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Taking responsibility for own behavior
+
4.53
4.63
4.46
4.75
4.54
4.34
++
0.63
0.55
0.68
0.51
0.63
0.69
Viewing learning as a lifelong process
+
4.35
4.52
4.22
4.63
4.35
4.20
++
0.74
0.66
0.77
0.66
0.74
0.77
Recognizing and acting upon ethical principles
4.17
4.26
4.10
4.44
4.18
3.93
++
0.78
0.75
0.80
0.56
0.78
0.83
Being independent and self-reliant
4.13
4.14
4.12
4.50
4.13
3.88
++
0.84
0.83
0.85
0.80
0.83
0.95
Ability to function as part of a team
4.01
4.04
3.98
4.41
4.01
3.75
++
0.79
0.78
0.79
0.76
0.78
0.81
Understanding my own abilities and interests
3.96
4.01
3.92
4.13
3.96
3.88
0.80
0.82
0.78
0.87
0.79
0.81
Clarifying personal identity
3.84
3.84
3.84
4.00
3.84
3.79
0.83
0.85
0.82
0.95
0.82
0.87
Realizing my potential for success
3.83
3.82
3.84
4.09
3.83
3.74
0.86
0.91
0.81
1.09
0.84
0.85
Coping with change
3.81
3.79
3.82
4.31
3.79
3.75
++
0.88
0.84
0.91
0.78
0.87
0.96
Having self-discipline
3.80
3.71
3.87
4.31
3.78
3.67
++
0.93
0.95
0.92
0.93
0.93
0.86
Having self-confidence
3.74
3.64
3.82
3.97
3.74
3.68
0.89
0.91
0.88
1.00
0.89
0.90
Improving leadership and management skills
3.70
3.70
3.70
4.00
3.71
3.41
++
0.79
0.78
0.80
0.88
0.77
0.91
Developing commitment to personal health/fitness
3.64
3.56
3.70
3.63
3.65
3.50
0.98
0.96
0.99
0.91
0.98
0.95
Handling stress
+
3.54
3.38
3.67
3.84
3.52
3.57
0.93
0.93
0.92
1.17
0.92
0.88
Managing my time
3.50
3.53
3.49
3.88
3.48
3.50
0.93
0.92
0.94
1.21
0.92
0.91
Being involved with public and community affairs
3.06
3.15
3.00
3.28
3.06
2.98
0.94
0.97
0.92
1.22
0.92
1.00
+Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01

Table 35: Importance of Personal Development Goals
Mean and standard deviation
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Taking responsibility for own behavior
4.68
4.74
4.63
4.91
4.67
4.63
0.64
0.57
0.68
0.30
0.66
0.56
Having self-confidence
+
4.65
4.73
4.58
4.85
4.64
4.55
0.62
0.55
0.67
0.36
0.63
0.63
Having self-discipline
+
4.61
4.69
4.55
4.76
4.60
4.56
0.65
0.62
0.66
0.56
0.66
0.57
Managing my time
+
4.60
4.68
4.53
4.79
4.59
4.57
0.65
0.61
0.67
0.48
0.66
0.60
Realizing my potential for success
+
4.57
4.69
4.47
4.79
4.57
4.42
++
0.67
0.57
0.72
0.55
0.68
0.63
Being independent and self-reliant
+
4.51
4.64
4.42
4.79
4.50
4.43
0.77
0.70
0.81
0.42
0.79
0.74
Handling stress
+
4.50
4.64
4.39
4.70
4.50
4.35
0.71
0.64
0.75
0.68
0.70
0.85
Viewing learning as a lifelong process
4.46
4.54
4.39
4.63
4.46
4.38
0.78
0.76
0.79
0.75
0.78
0.80
Improving leadership and management skills
4.45
4.43
4.46
4.67
4.44
4.41
0.78
0.79
0.78
0.60
0.79
0.78
Understanding my own abilities and interests
4.45
4.52
4.39
4.70
4.46
4.21
++
0.73
0.69
0.75
0.53
0.73
0.71
Ability to function as part of a team
4.43
4.45
4.43
4.58
4.43
4.41
0.76
0.78
0.75
0.79
0.77
0.68
Recognizing and acting upon ethical principles
4.39
4.44
4.35
4.56
4.39
4.25
0.80
0.76
0.82
0.67
0.80
0.81
Developing commitment to personal health/fitness
4.39
4.48
4.32
4.48
4.40
4.18
0.81
0.72
0.87
0.71
0.80
0.88
Coping with change
+
4.28
4.40
4.19
4.45
4.30
4.05
0.83
0.76
0.86
0.75
0.82
0.86
Clarifying personal identity
+
4.27
4.45
4.13
4.73
4.25
4.20
++
0.89
0.78
0.94
0.45
0.91
0.75
Being involved with public and community affairs
+
3.81
3.98
3.68
4.00
3.80
3.82
0.98
0.95
0.97
1.03
0.98
0.92
+Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01


Comparison of Importance and Level of Development

Chart 6 compares the importance students placed on these goals and their perceived current level of development in these areas. Transfer students rated taking responsibility for my own behavior highest in both importance as well as current level of development.



Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page


SECTION VII

WORLD VIEW GOALS

This section provides Transfer students' ratings of seven goals related to student world view. Respondents were asked their current level of development in these goals as well as the importance they placed on each goal at the time of the survey.

Level of Development

Table 36 displays the means and standard deviations for level of development of world view goals, ranked from highest to lowest according to means for the total group of respondents. The rating scale used was: 5 = Very High, 4 = High, 3 = Average, 2 = Low, and 1 = Very Low. Responses to each item ranged from 645 to 649. The four world view goals in which Transfer students indicated their highest current level of development were: valuing gender equity, valuing racial equity, being able to interact and work with people from diverse backgrounds and having a tolerance for different points of view.

Significant differences (p<0.01) between males and females were found for four of the seven goals. Females rated their level of development significantly higher than did males in two of the categories. These included valuing gender equity and valuing racial equity. Males rated their level of development significantly higher in understanding issues and problems facing the world and understanding the present as it relates to history.

When ethnicity was considered, significant differences were found for development toward four of the goals. African-Americans rated their level of development higher than did Whites and Other Minorities for all four. These included valuing gender equity, valuing racial equity, being able to interact and work with people from diverse backgrounds and having a tolerance for different points of view.

Importance of Goals

The means and standard deviations for goal importance, ranked from highest to lowest according to means for survey respondents, appear in Table 37. The rating scale used was: 5 = Very High, 4 = High, 3 = Average, 2 = Low, and 1 = Very Low. Responses to each item ranged from 645 to 649. The four general education goals that Transfer students indicated were most important to them were: valuing racial equity, valuing gender equity, being able to interact and work with people from diverse backgrounds and having a tolerance for different points of view.

Significant differences (p<0.01) between females and males were found for the four goals listed above. Females rated these goals significantly more important than did males.

Significant differences were found for one goal when ethnicity was considered. African-Americans rated valuing gender equity higher than did both Whites and Other Minorities.

Table 36: Current Level of Development of World View Goals
Mean and standard deviation
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Valuing gender equity
+
4.17
4.33
4.04
4.59
4.15
4.05
++
0.82
0.75
0.86
0.56
0.82
0.96
Valuing racial equity
+
4.15
4.28
4.04
4.69
4.12
4.07
++
0.85
0.79
0.88
0.54
0.84
1.00
Interact/work with those of diverse backgrounds
3.86
3.95
3.80
4.38
3.84
3.84
++
0.82
0.79
0.83
0.71
0.81
0.83
Having a tolerance for different points of view
3.78
3.80
3.76
4.16
3.77
3.67
++
0.84
0.83
0.86
0.85
0.84
0.84
Understanding issues and problems facing the world
+
3.48
3.34
3.59
3.50
3.49
3.39
0.85
0.83
0.85
0.95
0.84
0.89
Appreciation of the arts/music/literature
3.40
3.48
3.33
3.72
3.39
3.35
0.99
0.93
1.03
0.99
0.99
0.97
Understanding the present as it relates to history
+
3.39
3.21
3.54
3.36
3.42
3.18
0.90
0.85
0.91
0.82
0.90
0.88
+Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01

Table 37: Importance of World View Goals
Mean and standard deviation
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Valuing racial equity
+
4.36
4.53
4.23
4.76
4.34
4.35
0.86
0.74
0.93
0.44
0.89
0.73
Valuing gender equity
+
4.34
4.51
4.21
4.70
4.33
4.20
++
0.85
0.73
0.91
0.47
0.87
0.81
Interact/work with those of diverse backgrounds
+
4.30
4.42
4.20
4.67
4.28
4.27
0.82
0.73
0.87
0.54
0.83
0.77
Having a tolerance for different points of view
+
4.27
4.43
4.14
4.52
4.25
4.31
0.85
0.74
0.90
0.62
0.86
0.77
Understanding issues and problems facing the world
4.13
4.23
4.05
4.19
4.13
4.07
0.87
0.83
0.89
0.93
0.87
0.83
Understanding the present as it relates to history
3.87
3.86
3.88
3.88
3.89
3.70
0.95
0.93
0.97
1.10
0.95
0.87
Appreciation of the arts/music/literature
3.63
3.75
3.54
3.85
3.61
3.69
1.14
1.08
1.18
1.15
1.16
0.96
+Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01


Comparison of Importance and Level of Development

Chart 7 compares the level of student development toward World View Goals and the importance they placed on these goals.




Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION VIII

CO-CURRICULAR INTERESTS

This section presents responses to questions asking Transfer students about their interest in participating in co-curricular programs and activities at NC State.

Student Affairs

Transfer students were asked to indicate their interest in 26 programs and activities. Table 38 presents the percentage of respondents interested in each program or activity, in decreasing percentage order. The highest percentage of all students indicated an interest in the following programs or activities: outdoor recreation, fitness, intramurals and the co-op program.

Significant differences (p<0.01) were found when both gender and ethnicity were considered. Females were significantly more interested than males in these programs: fitness, volunteer services, theater participation as audience, healthy lifestyle issues, Leadership Development Program, gender issues, the crafts program, planning programs and services for children and families, music as a minor, theater participation as an artist and student dance companies. Males were significantly more interested than females in intramurals and club sports.

When ethnicity was considered, African-Americans indicated greater interest than did Whites and Other Minorities in these programs or activities: co-op program, social fraternity/sorority, the Leadership Development Program, student government, gender issues, music as a minor and Union Board activities. Whites indicated greater interest than Other Minorities and African-Americans in outdoor adventures.


Table 38: Interest in Program or Activity
Interest in program or activity (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Outdoor adventures
++
39.2
33.9
43.1
9.1
41.4
33.9
Fitness
+
36.6
59.1
19.6
51.5
35.3
41.1
Intramurals
+
36.1
19.9
48.4
18.2
37.6
32.1
Co-op program
++
33.4
32.2
34.4
60.6
30.6
46.4
Volunteer services
+
22.9
39.2
10.6
39.4
22.1
21.4
Theater as audience
+
19.1
26.2
13.8
12.1
19.1
23.2
Club sports
+
17.9
12.2
22.2
12.1
17.9
21.4
Healthy lifestyle issues
+
17.6
26.9
10.6
27.3
17.4
14.3
Attending art exhibitions
16.4
20.6
13.2
9.1
16.9
16.1
Study abroad
15.4
18.2
13.2
18.2
15.5
12.5
Indoor recreation
14.9
16.8
13.5
15.2
14.4
19.6
Arts selection/booking
14.5
17.5
12.2
15.2
14.1
17.9
Social fraternity/sorority
++
14.2
17.5
11.6
45.5
13.0
7.1
Leadership dev. prog.
+ ++
13.9
19.2
9.8
33.3
12.3
17.9
Student government
++
13.4
14.0
13.0
36.4
12.0
14.3
Informal recreation
10.2
8.7
11.4
3.0
10.4
12.5
Gender issues
+ ++
9.6
19.2
2.4
24.2
9.4
3.6
Student publications
9.5
11.5
7.9
9.1
9.7
7.1
Crafts program
+
9.3
16.1
4.2
9.1
9.2
10.7
Programs for children
+
8.6
16.8
2.4
15.2
8.0
10.7
Music minor
+ ++
7.8
11.2
5.3
27.3
6.8
7.1
Union Board activities
++
7.1
9.4
5.3
30.3
5.0
14.3
Theater as performer
+
7.1
10.5
4.5
18.2
7.0
1.8
Student judicial board
5.1
4.2
5.8
15.2
4.9
1.8
Performing dance
+
5.0
8.7
2.1
12.1
4.9
1.8
ROTC
3.8
2.1
5.0
12.1
3.5
1.8
+Gender: p<0.01; ++Ethnicity: p<0.01


Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION IX

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

This section presents background information about Transfer students, including whether they receive financial aid, information about their households, their employment plans, and other personal information.

Financial Aid

The percentage of respondents who indicated they will receive various types of financial aid appear in Table 39. Of those who said they would receive aid, 42% indicated that they would receive aid based upon financial need and 15% said that they would receive academic aid. A significantly larger (p=0.001) percentage of African-Americans (64%) and Other Minorities (63%) than Whites (39%) said they would receive aid based upon financial need. Of the 664 Transfer students who answered the question, 65 % indicated they would receive no aid. Of this percentage, 35% were female and 35% were male; 37% were White, 27% were Other Minorities and 12% were African-American.

Table 39: Financial Aid (n=664)

Basis of aid (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Financial need
++
41.9
44.1
40.2
63.6
38.6
62.5
Academic
15.1
18.9
12.2
18.2
14.4
19.6
Other than listed above
10.4
8.0
12.2
12.1
10.3
10.7
Athletic-based
0.6
0.3
0.8
0.0
0.5
1.8
Other (dance, etc.)
0.5
0.7
0.3
0.0
0.5
0.0
++Ethnicity: p<0.01

Income Information

Transfer students were asked to report their 1995 pre-tax income if they were financially independent. Of the 298 students who responded to this question, 38% said that they made $10,000 or less last year and 32% indicated that they made between $10,001 and $20,000 (see Table 40). There were no significant differences when gender and ethnicity were considered.

If students depended upon a parent/guardian, they were asked to report their parent's or guardian's combined 1995 pre-tax income (see Table 41). Of those who responded, 54% indicated that the income of their parents/guardians fell between $30,001 and $75,000 annually. Eighteen percent said incomes of parents/guardians were $30,000 or less while 28% indicated incomes were $75,001 or more annually. Significant differences (p=0.001) were found when ethnicity was considered. A larger percentage of African-Americans (50%) than Other Minorities (41%) and Whites (14%) indicated that the 1995 pre-tax incomes of their parents/guardians were $30,000 or less. Of those students whose family incomes exceeded $75,001, 30% were White as compared to 16% Other Minorities and 6% African-Americans.

Table 40: Independent Student Income (n=298)

Student income (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
$10,000 or less
38.3
36.2
39.8
31.6
36.0
65.4
$10,001 to $15,000
19.1
19.7
18.7
21.1
19.4
15.4
$15,001 to $20,000
12.8
10.2
14.6
26.3
13.0
0.0
$20,001 to $25,000
7.7
7.1
8.2
0.0
8.3
7.7
$25,001 to $30,000
7.7
7.9
7.6
5.3
8.3
3.8
$30,001 to $35,000
2.7
3.1
2.3
5.3
2.4
3.8
$35,001 to $40,000
2.7
3.9
1.8
5.3
2.8
0.0
$40,001 to $50,000
2.7
3.1
2.3
5.3
2.8
0.0
$50,001 to $60,000
2.3
2.4
2.3
0.0
2.4
3.8
$60,001 to $75,000
1.7
3.1
0.6
0.0
2.0
0.0
$75,001 to $100,000
0.7
0.0
1.2
0.0
0.8
0.0
$100,001 to $150,000
0.7
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
$150,001 to $200,000
0.7
1.6
0.0
0.0
0.8
0.0
More than $200,000
0.3
0.0
0.6
0.0
0.4
0.0

Table 41: Parent/Guardian Income (n=373)
Parent/guardian income (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
$10,000 or less
2.9
3.1
2.8
25.0
1.9
2.7
$10,001 to $15,000
2.4
3.7
1.4
12.5
1.3
8.1
$15,001 to $20,000
2.1
2.5
1.9
0.0
2.2
2.7
$20,001 to $25,000
5.9
7.5
4.7
6.3
5.0
13.5
$25,001 to $30,000
4.6
7.5
2.4
6.3
3.4
13.5
$30,001 to $35,000
4.8
4.3
5.2
0.0
4.7
8.1
$35,001 to $40,000
10.7
11.2
10.4
6.3
10.9
10.8
$40,001 to $50,000
9.4
8.7
9.9
12.5
9.7
5.4
$50,001 to $60,000
15.5
13.7
17.0
0.0
16.3
16.2
$60,001 to $75,000
13.7
12.4
14.6
25.0
14.4
2.7
$75,001 to $100,000
13.9
13.7
14.2
6.3
15.3
5.4
$100,001 to $150,000
8.3
6.2
9.9
0.0
9.1
5.4
$150,001 to $200,000
1.6
1.2
1.9
0.0
1.9
0.0
More than $200,000
4.0
4.3
3.8
0.0
4.1
5.4
Ethnicity: p<0.01


Parent/Guardian Education

Tables 42 and 43 and Charts 8 and 9 show responses to questions about education levels for the father/male guardian and mother/female guardian of Transfer students.

Seventy-three percent of Transfer students reported that their father/male guardian had at least some college. Similarly, 70% of all Transfer students said that their mother/female guardian had at least some college. No significant differences found when both gender and ethnicity were considered.

Table 42: Father/Male Guardian Education (n=645)
Father/male guardian education (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Less than high school
5.1
7.2
3.6
10.0
4.4
9.4
High school grad
22.3
21.5
23.0
26.7
23.1
11.3
Some college/no degree
17.1
20.1
14.8
20.0
16.2
24.5
2-4 years of college
13.2
10.4
15.3
10.0
13.7
9.4
Bachelor's degree
22.0
22.6
21.6
16.7
22.8
17.0
Some graduate or prof coursework/no degree
2.8

2.9

2.7

3.3

2.3

7.5
Master's degree
12.7
10.0
14.8
13.3
12.6
13.2
Doctorate or other professional degree

4.8
5.4

4.4

0.0

4.8

7.5




Table 43: Mother/Female Guardian Education (n=655)
Mother/female guardian education (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White

Other Minorities
Less than high school 5.0
4.9
5.1
6.1
4.6
8.9
High school grad
25.0
26.9
23.7
24.2
25.6
19.6
Some college/no degree
19.1
18.0
19.9
24.2
19.1
16.1
2-4 years of college
18.6
17.3
19.6
15.2
18.4
23.2
Bachelor's degree
19.2
18.4
19.9
12.1
19.8
17.9
Some graduate or prof coursework/no degree
2.6

2.5
2.7

0.0

2.7

3.6
Master's degree
9.0
9.9
8.3
12.1
8.8
8.9
Doctorate or other professional degree

1.4

2.1

0.8

6.1

1.1
1.8



Employment Plans


Transfer students were asked about their employment plans. The data in Table 44 and Chart 10 show that about two-thirds of Transfer students planned to work while attending the university. There were no significant differences for answers to the employment question, when gender and ethnicity were considered (see Chart 11).

Table 45 shows that 24 percent of Transfer students indicated they would take fewer than 15 hours of courses in their first semester because they needed to work while attending the university. Significant differences (p=0.008) were found when ethnicity was considered for one part of the question. A larger percentage of Other Minorities (29%) than African-Americans (22%) and Whites (18%) said they would enroll for fewer than 15 hours because they wanted to make better grades. There were no significant differences found when gender was considered.

Table 44: Employment Plans During First Semester (n=649)
Employment during first semester (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
20 or more hrs/wk
29.6
27.4
31.3
42.4
28.9
29.1
Less than 20 hrs/wk
39.9
44.5
36.4
27.3
40.1
45.5
Do not plan to work
30.5
28.1
32.3
30.3
31.0
25.5



Table 45: Why Transfer Students Enroll for Less Than 15 Hours (n=664)
Why enrolling for fewer than 15 hours (%)
All
Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Will need to work
24.2
24.1
24.3
33.3
23.7
25.0
To make better grades
++
19.3
20.6
18.3
21.2
18.3
28.6
Courses not available
9.9
12.6
7.9
18.2
8.5
19.6
Advisor recommended
7.2
4.5
9.3
6.1
7.1
8.9
Family responsibilities
6.2
8.4
4.5
6.1
6.1
7.1
Heavy courses
5.1
6.3
4.2
3.0
5.6
1.8
Other
4.7
4.5
4.8
0.0
4.9
5.4
No need for courses
0.8
0.7
0.8
0.0
0.7
1.8
Internship
0.2
0.3
0.0
0.0
0.2
0.0
++Ethnicity: p<0.01

One-half of Transfer students (50%) plan to seek employment in North Carolina after graduation and 36 percent will not limit their employment location (see Table 46).

Significant differences (p=0.001) were found when both gender and ethnicity were considered. A larger percentage of males (42%) than females (28%) said that they would consider employment anywhere. Among ethnic groups, a larger percentage of Whites (53%) than Other Minorities (30%) and African-Americans (30%) said that they would seek employment in North Carolina.

Table 46: Employment After Graduation
Employment plans after graduation (%)
All

Female

Male

African-American

White
Other Minorities
In North Carolina
49.5
52.2
47.5
30.3
52.7
30.4
Outside NC but in USA
9.8
13.0
7.3
27.3
9.2
5.4
Outside the USA
1.3
2.2
0.6
0.0
0.9
5.4
Anywhere
36.2
28.3
42.4
36.4
34.4
53.6
Will not seek job
3.2
4.3
2.2
6.1
2.8
5.4
Gender: p<0.01; Ethnicity: p<0.01

Dependent Children

Sixty-one Transfer students (10%) indicated that they had dependent children (see Table 47). There were no significant differences for this item when both gender and ethnicity were considered.

Table 48 lists the ages of dependent children of Transfer students. Significant differences (p=0.01) were found when ethnicity was considered for the number of dependents in elementary school.

Table 47: Number of Dependent Children (n=644)
Number of student's dependents (%)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
None
90.5
89.7
91.2
81.8
90.8
92.6
1
5.0
5.3
4.7
6.1
4.8
5.6
2
3.9
4.3
3.6
12.1
3.6
1.9
3 or more
0.6
0.7
0.6
0.0
0.7
0.0

Table 48: Number Indicating Age of Dependent Children
Ages of dependent children (number)
All

Female

Male
African- American

White
Other Minorities
Infant
22
6
16
2
18
2
Pre-school
18
11
7
3
14
1
Elementary school
++
21
12
9
4
16
1
Secondary
13
7
6
0
13
0
18 years and older
5
2
3
0
5
0
++Ethnicity: p<0.01


Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page

SECTION X

ACADEMIC UNIT ANALYSIS

NC State's undergraduate offerings for Transfer students are divided into ten academic units: College of Agriculture and Life Sciences - Bachelor's (CALS), Agricultural Institute - Two-Year (AGIN), School of Design (Design), College of Education and Psychology (CEP), College of Engineering (COE), College of Forest Resources (CFR), College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHASS), College of Management (COM), College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences (PAMS), and College of Textiles (COT). This section provides responses to selected questions by Transfer students in the nine areas in which survey responses were available. Section II (Transfer Student Issues) and Section III (Marketing Research) also report responses by academic unit.

The percentage of respondents in each academic unit who indicated they were able to apply for university, college, or department scholarships appears in Chart 12. The breakdown of Transfer students' employment plans during their first semester, by academic unit, is shown in Chart 13.





College of Agriculture and Life Sciences - Bachelor's (CALS)


School of Design (Design)


College of Education and Psychology (CEP)


College of Engineering (COE)


College of Forest Resources (CFR)


College of Humanities and Social Sciences (CHASS)


College of Physical and Mathematical Sciences (PAMS)


College of Textiles (COT)


College of Management (COM)

Return to Table of Contents
Return to OIRP Survey Page
Return to OIRP Home Page