[- NC State University -]
1997 Transfer Students' Profile

Table of Contents

Tables for NC State Respondents

Tables for College Summaries

Return to OIRP Survey Page
Return to OIRP Home Page

Office of Institutional Planning and Research, January 1998
Philip Handwerk, Graduate Research Assistant
Denise Gardner, Coordinator of Survey Research


North Carolina State University
1997 Transfer Students' Profile

Summary
This report presents information regarding the demographics, background, marketing information, educational interests, and educational goals of the 1997 entering transfer students at NC State. No significant differences were found between the survey group and the broader population of registered students; thus, the results may be regarded as representative of the entire transfer class.

Marketing Research

Background and Interests

Goals for Undergraduate Education

The remainder of this report is organized into the following categories: introduction and methodology, demographics, background information, marketing research, educational intent and interests, and goals for undergraduate education.



Introduction and Methodology

Purpose

This report presents a profile of the 1997 entering transfer students at NC State. As in previous studies, it is based on responses to a survey that is given during the summer and fall orientation sessions. This report includes students entering into nine undergraduate academic units.

Description of Sample

A total of 880 transfer students attended these orientation sessions. Of this total, 764 surveys, which represent 66.7% of the 1,145 transfer students who registered for the fall 1997 semester, were usable for this report. Tests of statistical significance revealed no significant differences between the survey group and the broader population of registered students (gender, Chi-sq. 3.56, df=1, p>0.01; ethnicity, Chi-sq. 1.65, df=2, p>0.01; academic unit Chi-sq. 13.20, df=8. 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. Analysis was also done across baccalaureate academic units; however, only those differences regarding influential factors and developmental goals are addressed in this report.

All questions requiring categorical responses were analyzed using chi-square tests, and all questions with numerically coded responses 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 the discussions 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 or chart.

Demographics Of The Transfer Class And Survey Respondents

The transfer class of 1997 numbered 1,092 four-year enrollees plus 53 enrollees in the Agricultural Institute (two-year program) for a total of 1,145 fall enrollees. The total number of usable surveys from the orientation sessions was 764 (66.7% of total). The breakdown of the transfer class by gender was: 41.7% female and 58.3% male; and by ethnicity: 86.6% white, 5.2% African-American, and 8.2% other minorities. Demographics by gender and ethnic group are found in Table 1.

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

African-American
32

6.7%
28

4.2%
60

5.2%
18

5.2%
17

4.1%
35

4.6%

Asian
27

5.7%
34

5.1%
61

5.3%
16

4.7%
21

5.0%
37

4.8%

Hispanic
11

2.3%
17

2.5%
28

2.5%
6

1.7%
10

2.4%
16

2.1%

Native American
1

0.2%
3

0.5%
4

0.4%
0

0.0%
2

0.5%
2

0.3%

White
406

85.1%
586

87.7%
992

86.6%
304

88.4%
370

88.1%
674

88.2%

Total
477

41.7%
668

58.3%
1,145

100.0%
344

45.0%
420

55.0%
764

100.0%

Table 2 presents enrollment of transfer students as well as survey respondents by academic unit. The largest percentage of transfer students enrolled in the College of Engineering (25.1%) and the College of Humanities and Social Sciences (21.4%). The smallest percentage of transfer students enrolled in the College of Education and Psychology (4.1%) and School of Design (2.5%).

Table 2: Classifications by Academic Unit
Academic Unit
Transfer Class
Survey Respondents
Agriculture and Life Sciences (Bachelor's)
208
18.2%
162
21.2%
Design
28
2.5%
15
2.0%
Education and Psychology
47
4.1%
33
4.3%
Engineering
287
25.1%
213
27.9
Forest Resources
70
6.1%
45
5.9%
Humanities and Social Sciences
245
21.4%
161
21.1%
Management
134
11.7%
97
12.7%
Physical and Mathematical Sciences
40
3.5%
27
3.5%
Textiles
33
2.9%
11
1.4%
Subtotal
1,092
95.4%
764
100.0%
Agricultural Institute (Two-Year)
53
4.6%
0
0.0%
Total
1,145
100.0%
764
100.0%

NOTE: Textile Engineering Undesignated is included in the College of Engineering for enrollment and in the College of Textiles for statistics.

Fifteen percent (15.3%) of the transfer class began their tenure at NC State as first year students, 47.2% transferred in as Sophomores, 32.9% began as third-through fifth-year students and 4.6% transferred into the Agricultural Institute.

The last institution attended by more than three-fourths (78.9%) of transfer students was another North Carolina institution (see Table 3). The majority of students who transferred (54.2%) are of the typical college-age (18-21), and nearly one-quarter (23.4%) are 26 years old or older (see Table 4).


Table 3: Location of Last Institution Attended
State
Number
Percent
North Carolina
872
78.9
New York
26
2.4
Florida
22
2.0
Virginia
22
2.0
South Carolina
16
1.4
All others (<15 in each)
147
13.8


Table 4: Ages of Transfer Students
Ages
Number
Percent
16-17
2
0.2
18-21
620
54.2
22-25
257
22.4
26-29
113
9.9
30+
153
13.5


Background Information

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

Financial Aid

Transfer students indicated whether or not they are receiving any type of financial aid including work study, grants, loans, and scholarships. Nearly half (47.7%) denoted that they are receiving some sort of financial aid. Table 5 below examines the various types of financial aid given across gender and ethnicity. Note that only in the athletic-based category did there exist a significant difference among ethnic groups.

Table 5: Financial Aid

Basis of aid (%)
African-American

White
Other Minorities

All
Financial need 34.331.9 47.333.1
Academic 11.410.1 12.710.3
Other than listed 11.49.9 12.710.2
Athletic-based++ 5.70.7 0.00.9
Other (dance, music, etc.) 0.0 0.00.0 0.0

++ Ethnicity: p < 0.01

Income

Financially independent transfer students were evenly divided among 3 broad categories regarding their personal incomes. As shown in Chart 1, about one-third recorded that their income for last year was $10,000 or less; $10,001 to $20,000; or above $20,000.

Dependent students indicated the combined pre-tax income of their parents/guardians for 1996. Most students denoted that they come from middle to upper-middle class families. The plurality of students (38.6%) marked their family's income to be between $40,001 and $75,000. Nearly equal percentages came from households with incomes greater than $75,000 (30.5%) or incomes of $40,000 or below (30.9%). When viewing income across ethnicity, significant differences occurred (p=0.001). Most African-American (62.5%) and other minority students (62.5%) marked their parent/guardian incomes to be $40,000 or below, while the plurality of white students (40.5%) indicated the $40,001-$75,000 grouping (see Chart 2).

Chart 1: Independent Student Pre-tax Income



Chart 2: Parent/Guardian Pre-tax Income by Ethnicity


Parent/Guardian Education

Two in ten transfer students surveyed (22.6%) reported that both of their parents/guardians graduated from college, and half (55.4%) said both have at least some college education. Eighteen percent (18.2%) of the transfer students are first-generation college-students. Fathers/male guardians (42.7%) were more likely than mothers/female guardians (32.3%) to have earned a bachelor's degree or higher (see Chart 3).

Chart 3: Education of Both Parents/Guardians by Ethnicity


Prepared for College

Most transfer students (74.2%) indicated that they believed their high schools at least "adequately" prepared them for college. One-third (31.5%) reported that they felt they were "well prepared" by their high schools.

Over half of the students (55.0%) recorded that their previous institution had prepared them "well" for further study. Only 4.2% marked that they believe they were "poorly prepared" by their earlier institution.

Half of the respondents (50.8%) also denoted that they thought they had "adequately" prepared themselves for college. Four in ten (44.8%) thought they had prepared themselves "well."

Personal Information

Half of the transfer students (49.4%) reported having dependent children. One-third of the respondents (34.6%) indicated having one child, while 14.8% have two or more children. Of those students with children, none had children beyond secondary school age; children of students were relatively evenly distributed across the remaining age groups.

Intended Work Community

Transfer students marked with the greatest frequency (39.8%) that when they graduate they will seek employment anywhere, that location was not an important factor to them. One-third (31.9%) said they would seek employment anywhere within the United States. One-quarter (23.7%) planned to limit their job search to North Carolina only.

Link to NC State Tables




Marketing Research

Marketing research concerns the experiences new students had with the application process, and also examines those factors students considered influential in their decision to attend NC State.

Factors Influencing Attendance Decision

Transfer students indicated the extent that any of nineteen factors influenced their decision to attend NC State. The scale used was: 5 = Very Strong Influence, 4 = Strong Influence, 3 = Moderate Influence, 2 = Weak Influence, and 1 = Very Weak Influence. Chart 4 illustrates the mean rating for each factor as well as the percent marking that factor as "single most important factor" in their decision to attend NC State.

Respondents recorded that availability of program had the strongest influence on their decision to attend NC State. They additionally indicated that location and academic reputation had strong influences on their decision. A second tier of influence contained the factors level of support for my intended major; recommended by a friend, family member, teacher, counselor, etc.; cost; and contact with a current student (see Chart 4).

Respondents listed "other" factors that influenced their decision to attend NC State. The overall mean for this item was 4.50, which gave this item the highest mean score of all 19 factors. There were, however, no significant differences for the "other" factor when gender, academic unit, and ethnicity were considered. Factors that respondents frequently listed in the "other" category varied but included: athletics, having friends/family in area, found employment in area, and ROTC/military assignment.

When examining responses by gender, it was found that significant differences (p < 0.01) occurred only on the factors of location and contact with a current student. For both of these factors female students rated the factors as more influential than did the male students.

Students rated three factors significantly different (p < 0.01) when looking across ethnic groups. African-American students rated publications of NC State and extracurricular opportunities as significantly more influential than did white students. Other minority students regarded attendance at a College Fair as more influential than did white students.

An ANOVA was run for this question, looking for significant differences among the baccalaureate academic units. On the factors academic reputation, location, availability of program, level of support for my intended major, campus visit prior to orientation, contact with a current student, and extracurricular opportunities, students from various baccalaureate academic units significantly differed (p < 0.01) in their influence ratings.

Chart 4: Factors Influencing Decision to Attend NC State


Link to NC State Tables Link to Detailed Marketing Research Report




Educational Intent And Interests

Educational intent and interests concern students' majors, course load, and extra-curricular interests.

Plans to Work

Two-thirds of the students (66.9%) marked that they intend to work during their first semester. Over one-third of the students (36.3%) indicated they plan to be working less than 20 hours each week. Three in ten (30.6%) anticipated working more than 20 hours per week (see Chart 5).

Chart 5: Employment Plans During First Semester

Student Affairs

Transfer students indicated their interest in 26 programs and activities. The highest percentage of respondents indicated an interest in fitness. Males tended to express more interest in recreational activities while females more often pursued non-recreational activities. African-American students expressed significantly more interest than other students in Union Activities Board, and social fraternity/sorority. Other minority students indicated more interest in student leadership development program and student dance companies. White students marked more often that they were interested in intramurals.

Chart 6: Interest in Program or Activity


Link to NC State Tables Link to Detailed Educational Intent Report




Goals For Undergraduate Education

Transfer students rated their current level of development and importance of goals concerning students' general educational, personal development, and world view goals.

Weighted Gap Analysis

A weighed analysis was conducted of the gaps between students' current level of development and the importance they attributed to each of the goals. Initially, the mean score for the importance of a particular goal was subtracted from the mean of that goal's reported current level of development, resulting in the difference between where the student is now (current level) and where they hope to be (importance). The outcome of this process yielded negative scores for each goal. Therefore, for each goal the transfer students hoped to develop beyond their current levels.

Next, the gap was multiplied by the mean importance score given the particular goal, creating a weighted gap score. This weighted gap score not only took into account how far apart present development and desired development were, but also how meaningful that gap was to the student. For example, consider two goals with a gap score of -1. The first goal had a current level mean of 1 and importance mean of 2. The second goal's current level was 4 with an importance of 5. Clearly, the population regarded the second goal as more important and thus should be considered over the first goal, even though they had identical gap scores.

When viewing Chart 7, the score is not important, but the focus should be given to the length of a goal's bar relative to the other goals. According to the analysis, the transfer students would place a priority on addressing the goals of: developing computer skills, managing my time, and handling stress. Three of the top four weighted gaps concern personal development education goals. Goals involving general education tended to cluster more towards the middle of the 35 issues, while the world view goals generally filtered out as the lowest priorities.

Chart 7: Weighted Gap Analysis


Link to NC State Tables Link to Detailed Goals Report



Return to top

Return to OIRP Survey Page
Return to OIRP Home Page