North Carolina State University
2006 Faculty Well-Being Survey:

Results for the College of Education
by Number of Years Employed at NC State

To skip directly to a particular section, select the section below.

Section B: Image and Vision	Section I: Post-Tenure Review
Section C: Leadership	Section J: Pay and Compensation
Section D: Faculty-Administration Relationships	Section K: Campus Infrastructure/Physical Environment
Section E: Diversity/Multiculturalism	Section L: Recreation/Wellness
Section F: Working Relationships	Section M: Work Activities
Section G: Faculty Support & Professional Development	Section N: Conclusions/Overall Satisfaction
Section H: Performance Review, Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure

To download a Microsoft Word version of this document, click here.

A2: Ever held an administrative position	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
..... No (%)	87.0	70.0	69.2	33.3
..... Yes (%)	13.0	30.0	30.8	66.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

Section B: Image and Vision

B1a: Department doing good job of recruiting faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.0	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	13.0	10.0	8.3	50.0
3: Agree (%)	78.3	80.0	66.7	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	4.3	10.0	25.0	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

B1b: Department creating culture where faculty can develop to full potential	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.0	2.7	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	21.7	20.0	8.3	33.3
3: Agree (%)	52.2	70.0	58.3	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	17.4	.	25.0	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	8.7	10.0	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

B1c: Department retaining most effective and productive faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.8	2.7	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	14.3	10.0	7.7	33.3
3: Agree (%)	42.9	70.0	61.5	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	38.1	10.0	23.1	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.8	10.0	7.7	16.7
Total (N)	21	10	13	6

B2a: Department national reputation for undergraduate educ	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.7	3.8	3.2	4.5
5: Very strong (%)	20.0	16.7	15.4	50.0
4: Strong (%)	30.0	50.0	15.4	50.0
3: Average (%)	50.0	33.3	46.2	.
2: Weak (%)	.	.	23.1	.
Total (N)	10	6	13	4

B2b: Department national reputation for graduate education	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	4.1	3.2	4.2
5: Very strong (%)	4.3	20.0	7.7	16.7
4: Strong (%)	30.4	70.0	15.4	83.3
3: Average (%)	56.5	10.0	69.2	.
2: Weak (%)	8.7	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B2c: Department national reputation for research & scholarly activity	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	4.0	3.2	3.8
5: Very strong (%)	4.3	20.0	7.7	16.7
4: Strong (%)	26.1	60.0	23.1	50.0
3: Average (%)	60.9	20.0	53.8	33.3
2: Weak (%)	8.7	.	15.4	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B2d: Department national reputation for creative artistry and literature	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.3	2.5	4.0
4: Strong (%)	22.2	33.3	.	100.0
3: Average (%)	44.4	66.7	50.0	.
2: Weak (%)	33.3	.	50.0	.
Total (N)	9	6	4	1

B2e: Department national reputation for tech & managerial innovation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	4.1	3.2	3.7
5: Very strong (%)	11.8	37.5	.	.
4: Strong (%)	35.3	50.0	44.4	66.7
3: Average (%)	23.5	.	33.3	33.3
2: Weak (%)	23.5	12.5	22.2	.
1: Very weak (%)	5.9	.	.	.
Total (N)	17	8	9	3

B2f: Department national reputation for extension & engagement	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.6	3.8	3.3	4.0
5: Very strong (%)	9.5	11.1	.	33.3
4: Strong (%)	47.6	55.6	33.3	33.3
3: Average (%)	33.3	33.3	66.7	33.3
2: Weak (%)	9.5	.	.	.
Total (N)	21	9	12	6

B2g: Department national reputation for contrib to econ Development	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	3.3	2.8	3.3
4: Strong (%)	30.8	28.6	20.0	33.3
3: Average (%)	46.2	71.4	40.0	66.7
2: Weak (%)	23.1	.	40.0	.
Total (N)	13	7	5	3

B3a: Grade undergraduate majors' ability to meet prog demands	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	4.0	4.8	4.3	4.5
A (%)	18.2	83.3	38.5	50.0
B (%)	63.6	16.7	53.8	50.0
C (%)	18.2	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	11	6	13	4

B3b: Grade graduate student ability to meet prog demands	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.8	4.4	4.3	4.7
A (%)	13.0	50.0	38.5	66.7
B (%)	60.9	40.0	53.8	33.3
C (%)	21.7	10.0	7.7	.
D (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B3c: Grade demonstrated professional ability of faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	4.0	4.6	4.4	4.8
A (%)	26.1	60.0	38.5	83.3
B (%)	47.8	40.0	61.5	16.7
C (%)	26.1	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B3d: Grade professional achievement of faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	4.0	4.5	4.2	4.3
A (%)	26.1	60.0	30.8	33.3
B (%)	52.2	30.0	61.5	66.7
C (%)	21.7	10.0	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B3e: Grade own demonstrated professional ability	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	4.3	4.8	4.4	4.8
A (%)	34.8	80.0	38.5	80.0
B (%)	56.5	20.0	61.5	20.0
C (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	5

B3f: Grade own professional achievement	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	4.3	4.8	4.3	4.4
A (%)	34.8	80.0	30.8	40.0
B (%)	56.5	20.0	69.2	60.0
C (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	5

B4: Department's vision for the future	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Clear vision; actively working toward goals (%)	21.7	30.0	15.4	33.3
Vision with slow progress (%)	43.5	60.0	46.2	33.3
No clear vision (%)	34.8	10.0	38.5	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B5: Agreement with department vision for future	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.3	3.1	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	26.7	33.3	12.5	75.0
3: Agree (%)	73.3	66.7	87.5	25.0
Total (N)	15	9	8	4

B6: College's vision for the future	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Clear vision; actively working toward goals (%)	56.5	50.0	46.2	16.7
Vision with slow progress (%)	34.8	50.0	53.8	33.3
No clear vision (%)	8.7	.	.	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B7a: Department change in next five years	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Change for the better (%)	73.9	90.0	69.2	83.3
Change for the worse (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
Not really change (%)	21.7	10.0	30.8	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B7b: College change in next five years	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Change for the better (%)	60.9	90.0	69.2	66.7
Change for the worse (%)	13.0	.	7.7	16.7
Not really change (%)	26.1	10.0	23.1	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

B7c: NC State change in next five years	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Change for the better (%)	69.6	70.0	53.8	50.0
Change for the worse (%)	8.7	.	15.4	.
Not really change (%)	21.7	30.0	30.8	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

Section C: Leadership

C1a: Dept admin communication with faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.0	3.0	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	40.9	40.0	53.8	66.7
3: Good (%)	27.3	30.0	7.7	16.7
2: Fair (%)	22.7	20.0	23.1	.
1: Poor (%)	9.1	10.0	15.4	16.7
Total (N)	22	10	13	6

C1b: Dept admin seek faculty input for dept vision	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	2.6	3.0	3.2
4: Excellent (%)	47.8	20.0	46.2	50.0
3: Good (%)	17.4	30.0	15.4	33.3
2: Fair (%)	34.8	40.0	30.8	.
1: Poor (%)	.	10.0	7.7	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

C1c: Dept admin use faculty ideas in decision-making	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	2.8	2.9	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	47.8	30.0	46.2	66.7
3: Good (%)	13.0	40.0	15.4	16.7
2: Fair (%)	30.4	10.0	23.1	.
1: Poor (%)	8.7	20.0	15.4	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

C1d: Dept admin delegate dept responsibility to faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.1	2.8	3.7
4: Excellent (%)	36.4	40.0	23.1	83.3
3: Good (%)	31.8	30.0	46.2	.
2: Fair (%)	13.6	30.0	15.4	16.7
1: Poor (%)	18.2	.	15.4	.
Total (N)	22	10	13	6

C1e: Dept admin grant faculty autonomy	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	2.9	3.4	3.7
4: Excellent (%)	56.5	40.0	69.2	83.3
3: Good (%)	21.7	30.0	15.4	.
2: Fair (%)	13.0	10.0	.	16.7
1: Poor (%)	8.7	20.0	15.4	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

C1f: Dept admin set clear and explicit priorities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.7	2.5	2.5
4: Excellent (%)	31.8	10.0	7.7	16.7
3: Good (%)	27.3	60.0	38.5	33.3
2: Fair (%)	36.4	20.0	46.2	33.3
1: Poor (%)	4.5	10.0	7.7	16.7
Total (N)	22	10	13	6

C1g: Dept admin appreciate your contrib to mission	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	2.7	3.2	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	56.5	20.0	50.0	66.7
3: Good (%)	30.4	40.0	33.3	16.7
2: Fair (%)	8.7	30.0	.	.
1: Poor (%)	4.3	10.0	16.7	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

C1h: Dept admin conflict resolution	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.7	2.2	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	28.6	20.0	10.0	66.7
3: Good (%)	23.8	40.0	20.0	16.7
2: Fair (%)	23.8	30.0	50.0	.
1: Poor (%)	23.8	10.0	20.0	16.7
Total (N)	21	10	10	6

C1i: Dept admin provide necessary resources	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.0	3.2	3.2
4: Excellent (%)	52.2	30.0	33.3	16.7
3: Good (%)	30.4	50.0	50.0	83.3
2: Fair (%)	8.7	10.0	16.7	.
1: Poor (%)	8.7	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

C1j: Dept admin allocate resources fairly	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.2	3.0	3.7
4: Excellent (%)	59.1	40.0	40.0	83.3
3: Good (%)	31.8	40.0	30.0	.
2: Fair (%)	.	20.0	20.0	16.7
1: Poor (%)	9.1	.	10.0	.
Total (N)	22	10	10	6

C1k: Dept admin serve as advocate for dept to college	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.3	3.2	3.2
4: Excellent (%)	65.2	60.0	54.5	50.0
3: Good (%)	17.4	20.0	27.3	33.3
2: Fair (%)	13.0	10.0	.	.
1: Poor (%)	4.3	10.0	18.2	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	11	6

C1l: Dept admin support academic freedom	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.2	3.4	3.8
4: Excellent (%)	52.2	50.0	72.7	83.3
3: Good (%)	34.8	30.0	9.1	16.7
2: Fair (%)	13.0	10.0	.	.
1: Poor (%)	.	10.0	18.2	.
Total (N)	23	10	11	6

C1m: Dept admin make rational decisions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.1	3.3	3.5
4: Excellent (%)	39.1	40.0	50.0	83.3
3: Good (%)	26.1	40.0	33.3	.
2: Fair (%)	26.1	10.0	8.3	.
1: Poor (%)	8.7	10.0	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

C1n: Dept admin make equitable decisions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.1	3.2	3.5
4: Excellent (%)	47.8	40.0	41.7	83.3
3: Good (%)	39.1	40.0	41.7	.
2: Fair (%)	13.0	10.0	8.3	.
1: Poor (%)	.	10.0	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

C1o: Dept admin promote diversity within dept	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.1	3.3	2.7
4: Excellent (%)	31.8	40.0	50.0	33.3
3: Good (%)	45.5	30.0	41.7	16.7
2: Fair (%)	18.2	30.0	.	33.3
1: Poor (%)	4.5	.	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	22	10	12	6

C2a: College admin communication with faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.8	2.4	2.3
4: Excellent (%)	8.7	.	.	.
3: Good (%)	60.9	77.8	50.0	50.0
2: Fair (%)	26.1	22.2	41.7	33.3
1: Poor (%)	4.3	.	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	9	12	6

C2b: College admin seek faculty input for vision	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.7	2.8	2.6
4: Excellent (%)	13.6	.	25.0	20.0
3: Good (%)	45.5	70.0	41.7	40.0
2: Fair (%)	27.3	30.0	25.0	20.0
1: Poor (%)	13.6	.	8.3	20.0
Total (N)	22	10	12	5

C2c: College admin use faculty ideas in decision-making	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.6	2.3	2.0
4: Excellent (%)	9.5	10.0	8.3	.
3: Good (%)	28.6	40.0	33.3	50.0
2: Fair (%)	42.9	50.0	41.7	.
1: Poor (%)	19.0	.	16.7	50.0
Total (N)	21	10	12	6

C2d: College admin grant departmental autonomy	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.7	2.5	2.3
4: Excellent (%)	22.7	20.0	9.1	33.3
3: Good (%)	54.5	40.0	45.5	16.7
2: Fair (%)	13.6	30.0	27.3	.
1: Poor (%)	9.1	10.0	18.2	50.0
Total (N)	22	10	11	6

C2e: College admin set clear and explicit priorities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.3	2.9	2.7
4: Excellent (%)	40.9	40.0	18.2	33.3
3: Good (%)	50.0	50.0	63.6	16.7
2: Fair (%)	.	10.0	9.1	33.3
1: Poor (%)	9.1	.	9.1	16.7
Total (N)	22	10	11	6

C2f: College admin appreciate your contrib to mission	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.7	2.5	2.5
4: Excellent (%)	36.4	20.0	16.7	33.3
3: Good (%)	27.3	50.0	25.0	16.7
2: Fair (%)	22.7	10.0	50.0	16.7
1: Poor (%)	13.6	20.0	8.3	33.3
Total (N)	22	10	12	6

C2g: College admin conflict resolution	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.4	2.1	2.4
4: Excellent (%)	20.0	.	.	.
3: Good (%)	33.3	55.6	33.3	60.0
2: Fair (%)	33.3	33.3	44.4	20.0
1: Poor (%)	13.3	11.1	22.2	20.0
Total (N)	15	9	9	5

C2h: College admin provide necessary resources	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.8	2.9	2.2
4: Excellent (%)	17.4	10.0	16.7	.
3: Good (%)	56.5	60.0	58.3	33.3
2: Fair (%)	21.7	30.0	25.0	50.0
1: Poor (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

C2i: College admin allocate resources fairly	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.8	2.6	2.3
4: Excellent (%)	27.8	20.0	11.1	33.3
3: Good (%)	50.0	40.0	44.4	.
2: Fair (%)	5.6	40.0	33.3	33.3
1: Poor (%)	16.7	.	11.1	33.3
Total (N)	18	10	9	6

C2j: College admin serve as advocate for college to univ	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.3	3.7	2.8
4: Excellent (%)	59.1	40.0	88.9	16.7
3: Good (%)	31.8	50.0	.	50.0
2: Fair (%)	9.1	10.0	.	33.3
1: Poor (%)	.	.	11.1	.
Total (N)	22	10	9	6

C2k: College admin support academic freedom	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	2.8	3.1	2.8
4: Excellent (%)	27.3	20.0	45.5	40.0
3: Good (%)	45.5	50.0	36.4	20.0
2: Fair (%)	22.7	20.0	.	20.0
1: Poor (%)	4.5	10.0	18.2	20.0
Total (N)	22	10	11	5

C2l: College admin make rational decisions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.9	2.8	2.5
4: Excellent (%)	28.6	20.0	25.0	.
3: Good (%)	38.1	50.0	33.3	66.7
2: Fair (%)	23.8	30.0	33.3	16.7
1: Poor (%)	9.5	.	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	21	10	12	6

C2m: College admin make equitable decisions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.8	2.6	2.2
4: Excellent (%)	16.7	11.1	16.7	20.0
3: Good (%)	38.9	55.6	33.3	20.0
2: Fair (%)	27.8	33.3	41.7	20.0
1: Poor (%)	16.7	.	8.3	40.0
Total (N)	18	9	12	5

C2n: College admin promote diversity within college	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.8	2.8	2.3
4: Excellent (%)	27.3	22.2	33.3	33.3
3: Good (%)	27.3	33.3	33.3	16.7
2: Fair (%)	31.8	44.4	16.7	.
1: Poor (%)	13.6	.	16.7	50.0
Total (N)	22	9	12	6

C3a: Univ admin communication with faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.2	2.6	2.7	3.0
4: Excellent (%)	.	.	18.2	.
3: Good (%)	47.6	55.6	45.5	100.0
2: Fair (%)	28.6	44.4	27.3	.
1: Poor (%)	23.8	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	21	9	11	5

C3b: Univ admin use faculty ideas in decision-making	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.3	2.2	2.8
4: Excellent (%)	9.1	.	11.1	.
3: Good (%)	27.3	25.0	33.3	80.0
2: Fair (%)	54.5	75.0	22.2	20.0
1: Poor (%)	9.1	.	33.3	.
Total (N)	11	8	9	5

C3c: Univ admin set clear and explicit priorities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.8	3.0	2.8
4: Excellent (%)	10.0	.	33.3	.
3: Good (%)	45.0	80.0	33.3	83.3
2: Fair (%)	45.0	20.0	33.3	16.7
Total (N)	20	10	12	6

C3d: Univ admin serves as advocate for univ to constituents	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.3	3.2	3.2
4: Excellent (%)	26.3	44.4	45.5	33.3
3: Good (%)	68.4	44.4	36.4	50.0
2: Fair (%)	5.3	11.1	9.1	16.7
1: Poor (%)	.	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	19	9	11	6

C3e: Univ admin support academic freedom	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.8	3.0	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	36.8	20.0	36.4	33.3
3: Good (%)	31.6	40.0	27.3	66.7
2: Fair (%)	21.1	40.0	36.4	.
1: Poor (%)	10.5	.	.	.
Total (N)	19	10	11	6

C3f: Univ admin make rational decisions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.7	2.9	2.8
4: Excellent (%)	5.9	.	27.3	.
3: Good (%)	82.4	66.7	36.4	83.3
2: Fair (%)	11.8	33.3	36.4	16.7
Total (N)	17	9	11	6

C3g: Univ admin make equitable decisions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.6	2.7	2.8
4: Excellent (%)	6.7	.	22.2	.
3: Good (%)	73.3	55.6	33.3	80.0
2: Fair (%)	20.0	44.4	33.3	20.0
1: Poor (%)	.	.	11.1	.
Total (N)	15	9	9	5

C3h: Univ admin promote diversity within university	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.5	2.9	3.0
4: Excellent (%)	15.8	.	36.4	33.3
3: Good (%)	42.1	62.5	27.3	33.3
2: Fair (%)	36.8	25.0	27.3	33.3
1: Poor (%)	5.3	12.5	9.1	.
Total (N)	19	8	11	6

Section D: Faculty-Administration Relationships

D1a: I am encouraged to give input on curricular issues	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.6	3.7	3.7	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	60.9	70.0	84.6	100.0
3: Agree (%)	34.8	30.0	7.7	.
2: Disagree (%)	4.3	.	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D1b: I am encouraged to give input on prog assessment	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.5	3.8	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	52.2	70.0	76.9	100.0
3: Agree (%)	43.5	20.0	23.1	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D1c: I am encouraged to give input on dept hiring	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.4	3.5	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	60.9	50.0	69.2	83.3
3: Agree (%)	21.7	40.0	23.1	.
2: Disagree (%)	17.4	10.0	.	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D1d: I am encouraged to give input on college admin appointments	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.8	2.5	2.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	21.7	22.2	15.4	33.3
3: Agree (%)	26.1	55.6	30.8	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	43.5	.	38.5	33.3
1: Strongly disagree (%)	8.7	22.2	15.4	16.7
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

D1e: I am encouraged to give input on university admin appointments	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.6	2.2	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	18.2	10.0	23.1	33.3
3: Agree (%)	22.7	60.0	15.4	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	45.5	10.0	23.1	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	13.6	20.0	38.5	16.7
Total (N)	22	10	13	6

D2: Familiarity with academic program assessment in dept	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.7	3.3	4.0
4: Very familiar (%)	56.5	70.0	46.2	100.0
3: Somewhat familiar (%)	30.4	30.0	38.5	.
2: Not very familiar (%)	13.0	.	15.4	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D3a: Understanding of resource allocation to university	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.4	2.2	2.8
4: Very well (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
3: Fairly well (%)	21.7	40.0	38.5	50.0
2: Not very well (%)	69.6	60.0	38.5	33.3
1: Not at all (%)	4.3	.	23.1	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D3b: Understanding of resource allocation to college	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.5	2.3	2.7
4: Very well (%)	4.3	10.0	.	.
3: Fairly well (%)	21.7	30.0	38.5	66.7
2: Not very well (%)	69.6	60.0	53.8	33.3
1: Not at all (%)	4.3	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D3c: Understanding of resource allocation to department	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.7	2.4	3.3
4: Very well (%)	4.3	20.0	.	50.0
3: Fairly well (%)	34.8	40.0	46.2	33.3
2: Not very well (%)	60.9	30.0	46.2	16.7
1: Not at all (%)	.	10.0	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D3d: Understanding of resource allocation within department	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.8	2.5	3.8
4: Very well (%)	4.3	30.0	.	83.3
3: Fairly well (%)	52.2	30.0	61.5	16.7
2: Not very well (%)	39.1	30.0	30.8	.
1: Not at all (%)	4.3	10.0	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D4: Faculty have sufficient input on dept resource allocation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.9	2.4	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	4.3	22.2	.	16.7
3: Agree (%)	47.8	55.6	61.5	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	43.5	11.1	15.4	33.3
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	11.1	23.1	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

D5: Dept faculty searches/appointments are collegial and inclusive	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.6	3.4	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	34.8	60.0	61.5	83.3
3: Agree (%)	52.2	40.0	23.1	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	8.7	.	7.7	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D6a: Relations between faculty in dept and dept admin	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.0	3.2	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	43.5	40.0	53.8	50.0
3: Good (%)	30.4	30.0	23.1	33.3
2: Fair (%)	26.1	20.0	15.4	16.7
1: Poor (%)	.	10.0	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D6b: Relations between faculty in dept and college admin	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.6	2.5	2.7
4: Excellent (%)	26.1	.	15.4	33.3
3: Good (%)	21.7	60.0	38.5	16.7
2: Fair (%)	39.1	40.0	30.8	33.3
1: Poor (%)	13.0	.	15.4	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

D6c: Relations between faculty in dept and univ admin	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	3.0	2.9	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	.	.	25.0	33.3
3: Good (%)	37.5	100.0	50.0	66.7
2: Fair (%)	50.0	.	12.5	.
1: Poor (%)	12.5	.	12.5	.
Total (N)	16	6	8	3

D6d: Relations between all faculty and univ admin	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.6	2.9	3.3
4: Excellent (%)	.	12.5	12.5	25.0
3: Good (%)	46.7	50.0	62.5	75.0
2: Fair (%)	33.3	25.0	25.0	.
1: Poor (%)	20.0	12.5	.	.
Total (N)	15	8	8	4

D7a: Faculty Senate effective commun between faculty and univ admin	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	3.0	3.0	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	.	16.7	18.2	.
3: Agree (%)	60.0	66.7	63.6	100.0
2: Disagree (%)	26.7	16.7	18.2	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	13.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	15	6	11	5

D7b: Faculty Senate advocates for faculty in general	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	3.2	2.9	2.6
4: Strongly agree (%)	.	33.3	18.2	.
3: Agree (%)	50.0	50.0	63.6	60.0
2: Disagree (%)	42.9	16.7	9.1	40.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	7.1	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	14	6	11	5

D7c: Faculty Senate advocates for faculty like me	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.8	2.8	2.4
4: Strongly agree (%)	.	25.0	10.0	.
3: Agree (%)	41.7	50.0	70.0	40.0
2: Disagree (%)	50.0	.	10.0	60.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	8.3	25.0	10.0	.
Total (N)	12	4	10	5

D8: Effectiveness of university grievance procedures	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.8	2.5	2.8	2.7
4: Very effective (%)	.	.	33.3	.
3: Somewhat effective (%)	.	50.0	33.3	66.7
2: Not very effective (%)	75.0	50.0	16.7	33.3
1: Not at all effective (%)	25.0	.	16.7	.
Total (N)	4	6	6	3

D9: Importance of "ombuds" for informal conflict resolution	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.5	3.5	3.7
4: Very important (%)	52.2	60.0	53.8	66.7
3: Somewhat important (%)	43.5	30.0	46.2	33.3
2: Not very important (%)	4.3	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

Section E: Diversity/Multiculturalism

E1: Importance of institutional emphasis on diversity/multiculturalism	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.4	3.6	3.5
4: Very important (%)	56.5	50.0	76.9	50.0
3: Somewhat important (%)	34.8	40.0	15.4	50.0
2: Not very important (%)	8.7	10.0	.	.
1: Not at all important (%)	.	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E2: Importance of diversity to enhanced learning in own classroom	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.5	3.5	3.3
4: Very important (%)	65.2	50.0	69.2	66.7
3: Somewhat important (%)	21.7	50.0	23.1	16.7
2: Not very important (%)	13.0	.	.	.
1: Not at all important (%)	.	.	7.7	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E3: NCSU prepares students to live and work in diverse society	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.9	2.7	3.2
4: Strongly agree (%)	22.7	20.0	8.3	60.0
3: Agree (%)	54.5	50.0	50.0	.
2: Disagree (%)	13.6	30.0	41.7	40.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.1	.	.	.
Total (N)	22	10	12	5

E4a: My dept recruits historically underrepresented students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	3.3	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	25.0	44.4	15.4	16.7
3: Agree (%)	55.0	44.4	53.8	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	20.0	11.1	23.1	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	20	9	13	6

E4b: My dept retains historically underrepresented students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.3	3.0	3.2
4: Strongly agree (%)	19.0	44.4	16.7	33.3
3: Agree (%)	61.9	44.4	66.7	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	14.3	11.1	16.7	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.8	.	.	.
Total (N)	21	9	12	6

E4c: My dept supports historically underrepresented students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.5	3.0	3.3
4: Strongly agree (%)	14.3	62.5	25.0	33.3
3: Agree (%)	76.2	25.0	50.0	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	4.8	12.5	25.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.8	.	.	.
Total (N)	21	8	12	6

E4d: My dept recruits historically underrepresented faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.6	3.1	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	18.2	62.5	46.2	33.3
3: Agree (%)	50.0	37.5	30.8	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	31.8	.	7.7	33.3
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	15.4	.
Total (N)	22	8	13	6

E4e: My dept retains historically underrepresented faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	3.0	3.1	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	19.0	44.4	30.8	40.0
3: Agree (%)	33.3	22.2	46.2	20.0
2: Disagree (%)	38.1	22.2	23.1	40.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.5	11.1	.	.
Total (N)	21	9	13	5

E4f: My dept supports historically underrepresented faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.4	3.2	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	25.0	57.1	30.8	40.0
3: Agree (%)	50.0	28.6	53.8	20.0
2: Disagree (%)	20.0	14.3	15.4	40.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	5.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	20	7	13	5

E5a: Dept environ accepting/respectful of age	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.4	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	52.2	60.0	53.8	66.7
3: Agree (%)	43.5	40.0	38.5	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	4.3	.	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E5b: Dept environ accepting/respectful of disability status	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.6	3.7	3.5	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	64.7	71.4	54.5	66.7
3: Agree (%)	29.4	28.6	45.5	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	5.9	.	.	.
Total (N)	17	7	11	6

E5c: Dept environ accepting/respectful of gender	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.5	3.5	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	39.1	50.0	53.8	83.3
3: Agree (%)	47.8	50.0	38.5	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	4.3	.	7.7	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E5d: Dept environ accepting/respectful of military status	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.6	3.8	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	57.1	62.5	80.0	100.0
3: Agree (%)	28.6	37.5	20.0	.
2: Disagree (%)	14.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	14	8	5	3

E5e: Dept environ accepting/respectful of nationality/ethnic origin	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.6	3.5	3.6
4: Strongly agree (%)	45.5	62.5	54.5	60.0
3: Agree (%)	45.5	37.5	45.5	40.0
2: Disagree (%)	9.1	.	.	.
Total (N)	22	8	11	5

E5f: Dept environ accepting/respectful of race and color	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.6	3.5	3.3
4: Strongly agree (%)	40.9	60.0	61.5	66.7
3: Agree (%)	50.0	40.0	23.1	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	9.1	.	15.4	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	22	10	13	6

E5g: Dept environ accepting/respectful of religion	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.4	3.7	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	42.9	55.6	70.0	66.7
3: Agree (%)	42.9	33.3	30.0	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	4.8	11.1	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.5	.	.	.
Total (N)	21	9	10	6

E5h: Dept environ accepting/respectful of sexual orientation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.6	3.5	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	45.0	55.6	50.0	80.0
3: Agree (%)	45.0	44.4	50.0	20.0
2: Disagree (%)	10.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	20	9	8	5

E6a: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of age	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.7	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	54.5	62.5	81.8	83.3
3: Agree (%)	45.5	37.5	9.1	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	.	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	22	8	11	6

E6b: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of disability status	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.7	3.6	3.7	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	70.6	62.5	70.0	83.3
3: Agree (%)	29.4	37.5	30.0	16.7
Total (N)	17	8	10	6

E6c: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of gender	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.8	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	54.5	55.6	75.0	83.3
3: Agree (%)	45.5	44.4	25.0	16.7
Total (N)	22	9	12	6

E6d: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of military status	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.7	3.6	3.8	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	71.4	57.1	80.0	100.0
3: Agree (%)	28.6	42.9	20.0	.
Total (N)	14	7	5	3

E6e: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of national/ethnic origin	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.7	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	54.5	62.5	66.7	83.3
3: Agree (%)	40.9	37.5	33.3	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	4.5	.	.	.
Total (N)	22	8	12	6

E6f: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of race and color	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.7	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	54.5	55.6	66.7	83.3
3: Agree (%)	45.5	44.4	33.3	16.7
Total (N)	22	9	12	6

E6g: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of religion	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.8	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	55.0	57.1	77.8	83.3
3: Agree (%)	40.0	42.9	22.2	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	5.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	20	7	9	6

E6h: Faculty welcomed at dept social events regardless of sexual orientation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.7	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	58.8	62.5	66.7	100.0
3: Agree (%)	29.4	37.5	33.3	.
2: Disagree (%)	11.8	.	.	.
Total (N)	17	8	9	4

E7: Faculty diversity/multiculturalism enhancement of intellectual diversity in dept	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.4	2.9	3.6
4: A great deal (%)	22.7	50.0	15.4	60.0
3: Some (%)	50.0	40.0	69.2	40.0
2: A little (%)	22.7	10.0	7.7	.
1: Not at all (%)	4.5	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	22	10	13	5

E8: Inclusion of diversity-related topics, scholarship, etc in your courses	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.2	3.2	3.2
4: A great deal (%)	47.8	22.2	30.8	50.0
3: Some (%)	39.1	77.8	61.5	33.3
2: A little (%)	8.7	.	7.7	.
1: Not at all (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

E9a: Interest in research, extension, art endeavors outside U.S.	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	3.1	3.2	2.5
4: A great deal (%)	39.1	50.0	30.8	16.7
3: Some (%)	39.1	20.0	53.8	50.0
2: A little (%)	13.0	20.0	15.4	.
1: None (%)	8.7	10.0	.	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E9b: Interest in teaching study abroad	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	2.6	3.2	1.7
4: A great deal (%)	34.8	40.0	30.8	.
3: Some (%)	26.1	10.0	53.8	16.7
2: A little (%)	21.7	20.0	15.4	33.3
1: None (%)	17.4	30.0	.	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E9c: Interest in participating in spring break service learning	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.2	2.0	1.9	1.7
4: A great deal (%)	17.4	10.0	.	.
3: Some (%)	21.7	20.0	23.1	16.7
2: A little (%)	26.1	30.0	46.2	33.3
1: None (%)	34.8	40.0	30.8	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E9d: Interest in participating in international service projects	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.7	2.9	2.0
4: A great deal (%)	30.4	20.0	30.8	.
3: Some (%)	17.4	50.0	38.5	33.3
2: A little (%)	34.8	10.0	23.1	33.3
1: None (%)	17.4	20.0	7.7	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E9e: Interest in teaching in international studies major	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.9	2.1	1.7	1.2
4: A great deal (%)	17.4	20.0	.	.
3: Some (%)	8.7	10.0	30.8	.
2: A little (%)	17.4	30.0	7.7	16.7
1: None (%)	56.5	40.0	61.5	83.3
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

E9f: Interest in advising international students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.6	2.6	2.8
4: A great deal (%)	21.7	20.0	7.7	40.0
3: Some (%)	30.4	50.0	61.5	20.0
2: A little (%)	26.1	.	15.4	20.0
1: None (%)	21.7	30.0	15.4	20.0
Total (N)	23	10	13	5

Section F: Working Relationships

F1: There is unity/cohesion among faculty in my department	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.1	2.8	3.3
4: Strongly agree (%)	26.1	10.0	15.4	50.0
3: Agree (%)	43.5	90.0	46.2	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	17.4	.	38.5	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	13.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F2a: Good communication between my students and me	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.6	3.5	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	52.2	60.0	53.8	66.7
3: Agree (%)	47.8	40.0	46.2	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F2b: Good communication between dept and our students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.3	3.3	3.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	8.7	30.0	30.8	83.3
3: Agree (%)	73.9	70.0	69.2	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	13.0	.	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F2c: Good communication between faculty in my dept	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.4	2.8	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	21.7	44.4	.	66.7
3: Agree (%)	56.5	55.6	84.6	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	13.0	.	15.4	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

F2d: Good communication between my dept and other depts	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	3.0	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	4.5	22.2	8.3	20.0
3: Agree (%)	40.9	66.7	66.7	60.0
2: Disagree (%)	45.5	.	25.0	20.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.1	11.1	.	.
Total (N)	22	9	12	5

F2e: Good communication between my college and other colleges	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.9	2.8	2.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	5.9	.	11.1	.
3: Agree (%)	41.2	85.7	55.6	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	35.3	14.3	33.3	33.3
1: Strongly disagree (%)	17.6	.	.	.
Total (N)	17	7	9	3

F3: Dept environ promotes respectful dialogue between diverse perspectives	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.5	3.0	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	17.4	50.0	15.4	66.7
3: Agree (%)	60.9	50.0	69.2	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	17.4	.	15.4	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F4a: Frequency given/recvd teaching advice in dept past few years	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.5	2.9	3.2
Frequently (%)	47.8	60.0	23.1	50.0
Sometimes (%)	30.4	30.0	53.8	33.3
Seldom (%)	13.0	10.0	15.4	.
Never (%)	8.7	.	7.7	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F4b: Frequency given/recvd research/artistic feedback in dept past few yrs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.1	3.2	3.5
Frequently (%)	30.4	40.0	38.5	50.0
Sometimes (%)	30.4	40.0	46.2	50.0
Seldom (%)	30.4	10.0	15.4	.
Never (%)	8.7	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F4c: Frequency given/recvd help with dept/college bureaucracy past few yrs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.2	3.2	3.8
Frequently (%)	43.5	50.0	46.2	83.3
Sometimes (%)	26.1	20.0	38.5	16.7
Seldom (%)	21.7	30.0	7.7	.
Never (%)	8.7	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F4d: Frequency given/recvd help undrsnd reappointment, promotion, tenure past few yrs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.1	3.1	4.0
Frequently (%)	26.1	50.0	46.2	100.0
Sometimes (%)	39.1	20.0	23.1	.
Seldom (%)	26.1	20.0	23.1	.
Never (%)	8.7	10.0	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F4e: Frequency given/recvd help with work/personal balance issues past few yrs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.5	2.5	3.2
Frequently (%)	17.4	10.0	15.4	50.0
Sometimes (%)	26.1	30.0	30.8	33.3
Seldom (%)	30.4	60.0	38.5	.
Never (%)	26.1	.	15.4	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F5a: Frequency of collab with faculty in your dept	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.0	3.5	3.5
Frequently (%)	43.5	30.0	61.5	50.0
Sometimes (%)	47.8	40.0	23.1	50.0
Seldom (%)	8.7	30.0	15.4	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F5b: Frequency of collab with faculty in other NCSU depts	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.2	2.9	3.0
Frequently (%)	8.7	30.0	38.5	16.7
Sometimes (%)	47.8	10.0	23.1	66.7
Seldom (%)	17.4	10.0	30.8	16.7
Never (%)	26.1	50.0	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F5c: Frequency of collab with faculty from other universities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	2.6	3.3	3.3
Frequently (%)	52.2	30.0	38.5	33.3
Sometimes (%)	30.4	30.0	53.8	66.7
Seldom (%)	8.7	10.0	7.7	.
Never (%)	8.7	30.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

F5d: Frequency of collab with non-faculty external to NCSU	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.7	2.8	3.3
Frequently (%)	22.7	30.0	15.4	33.3
Sometimes (%)	22.7	30.0	61.5	66.7
Seldom (%)	36.4	20.0	15.4	.
Never (%)	18.2	20.0	7.7	.
Total (N)	22	10	13	6

Section G: Faculty Support & Professional Development

G1a: Satisfaction with level of courses	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.4	3.4	3.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	39.1	44.4	46.2	80.0
3: Satisfied (%)	52.2	55.6	46.2	20.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	8.7	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	5

G1b: Satisfaction with number of courses	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.2	3.4	3.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	30.4	22.2	46.2	83.3
3: Satisfied (%)	56.5	77.8	46.2	16.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.0	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

G1c: Satisfaction with choice in courses	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.7	3.6	3.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	47.8	66.7	61.5	83.3
3: Satisfied (%)	34.8	33.3	38.5	16.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.0	.	.	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

G1d: Satisfaction with course content discretion	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.4	3.7	3.8	3.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	52.2	66.7	76.9	83.3
3: Satisfied (%)	34.8	33.3	23.1	16.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

G1e: Satisfaction with number of students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.6	3.4	3.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	43.5	55.6	38.5	83.3
3: Satisfied (%)	34.8	44.4	61.5	16.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	17.4	.	.	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

G1f: Satisfaction with quality of undergraduates	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	3.0	3.3	3.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	10.0	.	44.4	66.7
3: Satisfied (%)	40.0	100.0	44.4	33.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	50.0	.	11.1	.
Total (N)	10	5	9	3

G1g: Satisfaction with quality of graduate students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	3.4	3.2	3.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	4.5	55.6	30.8	33.3
3: Satisfied (%)	59.1	33.3	61.5	66.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	31.8	11.1	7.7	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	4.5	.	.	.
Total (N)	22	9	13	6

G1h: Satisfaction with access to grad TAs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.7	2.7	2.1	2.2
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	33.3	.	20.0
3: Satisfied (%)	10.5	16.7	27.3	.
2: Dissatisfied (%)	52.6	33.3	54.5	60.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	36.8	16.7	18.2	20.0
Total (N)	19	6	11	5

G1i: Satisfaction with access to grad RAs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.8	2.6	2.1	2.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	28.6	.	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	19.0	14.3	30.8	16.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	38.1	42.9	46.2	50.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	42.9	14.3	23.1	16.7
Total (N)	21	7	13	6

G2a: NCSU supports innovative teaching	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	3.4	3.1	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	30.4	55.6	23.1	66.7
3: Agree (%)	56.5	33.3	61.5	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	8.7	11.1	15.4	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

G2b: NCSU supports innovative research and scholarly activity	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.4	3.3	3.5
4: Strongly agree (%)	39.1	57.1	38.5	50.0
3: Agree (%)	52.2	28.6	53.8	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	4.3	14.3	7.7	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	7	13	6

G2c: NCSU supports innovative creative artistry and literature	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	2.8	2.6	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	50.0	20.0	20.0	100.0
3: Agree (%)	16.7	40.0	20.0	.
2: Disagree (%)	16.7	40.0	60.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	16.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	6	5	5	1

G2d: NCSU supports innovative extension/engagement/econ dev activity	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.6	3.0	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	26.3	57.1	16.7	66.7
3: Agree (%)	57.9	42.9	66.7	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	5.3	.	16.7	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	10.5	.	.	.
Total (N)	19	7	12	6

G3a: NCSU rewards innovative teaching	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	3.1	2.9	2.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	10.5	22.2	16.7	16.7
3: Agree (%)	42.1	66.7	66.7	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	31.6	11.1	8.3	50.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	15.8	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	19	9	12	6

G3b: NCSU rewards innovative research and scholarly activity	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.4	3.6	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	30.0	50.0	61.5	66.7
3: Agree (%)	70.0	37.5	38.5	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	.	12.5	.	.
Total (N)	20	8	13	6

G3c: NCSU rewards innovative creative artistry and literature	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	2.0	2.8	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	33.3	.	25.0	100.0
3: Agree (%)	50.0	25.0	25.0	.
2: Disagree (%)	16.7	50.0	50.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	25.0	.	.
Total (N)	6	4	4	1

G3d: NCSU rewards innovative extension/engagement/econ dev activity	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.9	2.9	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	14.3	.	11.1	33.3
3: Agree (%)	50.0	85.7	66.7	16.7
2: Disagree (%)	21.4	14.3	22.2	50.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	14.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	14	7	9	6

G4a: Satisfaction: Availability of classroom technology	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	3.4	3.0	3.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	9.1	44.4	38.5	33.3
3: Satisfied (%)	40.9	55.6	30.8	66.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	40.9	.	23.1	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	9.1	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	22	9	13	6

G4b: Satisfaction: Teaching reduction for scholarly/prof growth	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	3.1	2.2	2.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	10.0	28.6	8.3	.
3: Satisfied (%)	50.0	57.1	25.0	40.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	20.0	14.3	41.7	20.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	20.0	.	25.0	40.0
Total (N)	20	7	12	5

G4c: Satisfaction: Teaching workshop/seminar opportunities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.4	3.3	3.2
4: Very Satisfied (%)	20.0	44.4	46.2	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	65.0	55.6	46.2	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	10.0	.	.	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	5.0	.	7.7	.
Total (N)	20	9	13	6

G4d: Satisfaction: Avail of funds to attend teaching conference/wrkshp	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.0	3.1	2.1	2.4
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	37.5	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	33.3	37.5	16.7	60.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	38.1	25.0	75.0	20.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	28.6	.	8.3	20.0
Total (N)	21	8	12	5

G4e: Satisfaction: Learning technology training/support	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.3	3.3	3.2
4: Very Satisfied (%)	26.1	40.0	38.5	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	43.5	50.0	53.8	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	21.7	10.0	7.7	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

G4f: Satisfaction: Campus bookstore meeting course needs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.1	3.0	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	23.8	20.0	27.3	.
3: Satisfied (%)	61.9	70.0	54.5	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	4.8	10.0	9.1	16.7
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	9.5	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	21	10	11	6

G4g: Satisfaction: Availability of funds to present work	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.7	2.2	2.5
4: Very Satisfied (%)	4.3	20.0	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	43.5	50.0	30.8	66.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	30.4	10.0	61.5	16.7
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	21.7	20.0	7.7	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

G4h: Satisfaction: Opportunities for scholarly/professional leave	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	1.4	2.1	1.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	6.3	.	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	37.5	.	25.0	40.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	31.3	40.0	58.3	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	25.0	60.0	16.7	60.0
Total (N)	16	5	12	5

G4i: Satisfaction: Financial support for scholarly/professional leave	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.9	1.5	2.1	1.8
3: Satisfied (%)	27.8	.	27.3	40.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	38.9	50.0	54.5	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	33.3	50.0	18.2	60.0
Total (N)	18	4	11	5

G4j: Satisfaction: Leadership development opportunities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.9	2.7	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	6.3	.	10.0	20.0
3: Satisfied (%)	56.3	85.7	60.0	40.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	18.8	14.3	20.0	40.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	18.8	.	10.0	.
Total (N)	16	7	10	5

G4k: Satisfaction: Support for dept assessment Activities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.2	2.8	2.1	2.4
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	11.1	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	41.2	55.6	36.4	60.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	35.3	33.3	36.4	20.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	23.5	.	27.3	20.0
Total (N)	17	9	11	5

G4l: Satisfaction: Availability of/access to materials via NCSU Libraries	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.6	3.4	3.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	43.5	55.6	38.5	66.7
3: Satisfied (%)	43.5	44.4	61.5	33.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	13	6

G4m: Satisfaction: Support with dealing with student concerns	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.0	2.9	3.2
4: Very Satisfied (%)	5.0	22.2	27.3	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	80.0	55.6	45.5	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	10.0	22.2	18.2	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	5.0	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	20	9	11	6

G4n: Satisfaction: Support for technology transfer	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.4	2.5	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	9.1	40.0	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	54.5	60.0	62.5	100.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	36.4	.	25.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	.	.	12.5	.
Total (N)	11	5	8	3

G5: Assignment of formal mentor	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Yes (%)	17.4	30.0	.	.
No (%)	73.9	70.0	100.0	100.0
Don't know (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	13	6

G6: Mentor helpfulness	6 or fewer	7-15
Mean Rating	2.0	3.0
4: Very helpful (%)	.	33.3
3: Somewhat helpful (%)	.	33.3
2: Not very helpful (%)	100.0	33.3
Total (N)	4	3

G7a: Satisfaction: Pre-award support from college for grant/contract	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.5	3.2	3.4	3.4
4: Very Satisfied (%)	63.2	50.0	69.2	40.0
3: Satisfied (%)	26.3	16.7	15.4	60.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	5.3	33.3	.	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	5.3	.	15.4	.
Total (N)	19	6	13	5

G7b: Satisfaction: Post-award support from college for grant/contract	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.3	2.8	3.2
4: Very Satisfied (%)	26.7	50.0	41.7	40.0
3: Satisfied (%)	26.7	25.0	25.0	40.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	40.0	25.0	.	20.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	6.7	.	33.3	.
Total (N)	15	4	12	5

G7c: Satisfaction: Pre-award University support for grant/contract	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	2.8	2.9	3.2
4: Very Satisfied (%)	42.9	.	40.0	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	28.6	75.0	20.0	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	21.4	25.0	30.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	7.1	.	10.0	.
Total (N)	14	4	10	6

G7d: Satisfaction: Post-award University support for grant/contract	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.7	2.6	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	15.4	.	30.0	20.0
3: Satisfied (%)	30.8	66.7	20.0	60.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	46.2	33.3	30.0	20.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	7.7	.	20.0	.
Total (N)	13	3	10	5

G7e: Satisfaction: Allocation of indirect grant costs to investigator	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.8	2.3	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	6.3	.	9.1	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	37.5	75.0	27.3	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	43.8	25.0	45.5	33.3
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	12.5	.	18.2	.
Total (N)	16	4	11	6

G7f: Satisfaction: Allocation of indirect grant costs to department	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.8	2.4	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	6.7	.	9.1	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	33.3	75.0	27.3	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	46.7	25.0	54.5	33.3
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	13.3	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	15	4	11	6

G7g: Satisfaction: PI control over indirect cost allocation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.7	2.0	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	6.3	.	.	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	18.8	66.7	23.1	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	50.0	33.3	53.8	33.3
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	25.0	.	23.1	.
Total (N)	16	3	13	6

Section H: Performance Review, Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure

H1: Faculty performance review standards are clearly stated	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.4	2.8	3.3
4: Strongly agree (%)	14.3	50.0	16.7	50.0
3: Agree (%)	57.1	37.5	50.0	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	23.8	12.5	25.0	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.8	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	21	8	12	6

H2: Faculty performance review procedures are clearly stated	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.4	2.9	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	19.0	50.0	33.3	66.7
3: Agree (%)	57.1	37.5	33.3	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	14.3	12.5	25.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.5	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	21	8	12	6

H3: SME is consistent with departmental vision	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	2.8	3.2	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	35.0	20.0	25.0	25.0
3: Agree (%)	55.0	60.0	66.7	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	5.0	.	8.3	25.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	5.0	20.0	.	.
Total (N)	20	5	12	4

H4: SME is consistent with departmental promotion standards	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	2.8	3.3	3.3
4: Strongly agree (%)	26.3	20.0	30.0	33.3
3: Agree (%)	63.2	60.0	70.0	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	5.3	.	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	5.3	20.0	.	.
Total (N)	19	5	10	3

H5a: Performance Review feedback appropriately based on SME	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.7	3.1	2.5
4: Strongly agree (%)	21.1	16.7	33.3	25.0
3: Agree (%)	57.9	50.0	41.7	25.0
2: Disagree (%)	10.5	16.7	25.0	25.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	10.5	16.7	.	25.0
Total (N)	19	6	12	4

H5b: Performance Review feedback helpful for professional Development	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.8	2.8	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	9.5	12.5	25.0	20.0
3: Agree (%)	52.4	62.5	41.7	40.0
2: Disagree (%)	28.6	12.5	25.0	40.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.5	12.5	8.3	.
Total (N)	21	8	12	5

H5c: Performance Review feedback corresponds with my perceptions of own performance	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	2.9	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	19.0	25.0	16.7	20.0
3: Agree (%)	52.4	50.0	58.3	60.0
2: Disagree (%)	14.3	12.5	16.7	20.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	14.3	12.5	8.3	.
Total (N)	21	8	12	5

H5d: Performance Review feedback helps understand relation to other faculty	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.9	2.3	2.6
4: Strongly agree (%)	14.3	25.0	.	20.0
3: Agree (%)	33.3	50.0	41.7	20.0
2: Disagree (%)	33.3	12.5	50.0	60.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	19.0	12.5	8.3	.
Total (N)	21	8	12	5

H5e: Feedback given appropriate weight in merit raises	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.1	2.5	2.2
4: Strongly agree (%)	23.8	25.0	8.3	20.0
3: Agree (%)	52.4	62.5	50.0	20.0
2: Disagree (%)	9.5	12.5	25.0	20.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	14.3	.	16.7	40.0
Total (N)	21	8	12	5

H6: Understanding of current Academic Tenure Policy	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.0	2.9	3.3
4: Very well (%)	21.7	44.4	33.3	50.0
3: Fairly well (%)	39.1	11.1	25.0	33.3
2: Not very well (%)	30.4	44.4	41.7	16.7
1: Not at all (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	12	6

H7_1: Participated in RPT process as candidate	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	56.5	90.0	8.3	50.0
Yes (%)	43.5	10.0	91.7	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

H7_2: Participated in RPT process as voter	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	82.6	50.0	.	.
Yes (%)	17.4	50.0	100.0	100.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

H7_3: Participated in RPT process as review committee member	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	87.0	70.0	25.0	.
Yes (%)	13.0	30.0	75.0	100.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

H7_4: Have never participated in RPT process	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	52.2	50.0	100.0	83.3
Yes (%)	47.8	50.0	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

H8: Understand dept RPT standards	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.1	3.1	3.8
4: Very well (%)	17.4	55.6	33.3	83.3
3: Fairly well (%)	39.1	11.1	41.7	16.7
2: Not very well (%)	34.8	22.2	25.0	.
1: Not at all (%)	8.7	11.1	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	12	6

H9: Understand dept RPT procedures	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.1	3.1	3.8
4: Very well (%)	21.7	55.6	41.7	83.3
3: Fairly well (%)	47.8	11.1	25.0	16.7
2: Not very well (%)	21.7	22.2	33.3	.
1: Not at all (%)	8.7	11.1	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	12	6

H10: Departmental RPT standards applied consistently/fairly	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	3.3	2.8	3.5
4: Strongly agree (%)	18.8	57.1	20.0	50.0
3: Agree (%)	31.3	28.6	40.0	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	25.0	.	40.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	25.0	14.3	.	.
Total (N)	16	7	10	6

H11: Departmental RPT procedures applied consistently/fairly	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.1	3.3	3.2	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	33.3	57.1	30.0	66.7
3: Agree (%)	53.3	28.6	60.0	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	.	.	10.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	13.3	14.3	.	.
Total (N)	15	7	10	6

H12a: Sufficient resources for teaching/mentoring students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.1	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	8.7	12.5	.	.
3: Agree (%)	52.2	87.5	90.9	100.0
2: Disagree (%)	39.1	.	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	23	8	11	6

H12b: Sufficient resources for discovery of knowledge	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.9	2.5	2.4
4: Strongly agree (%)	5.0	.	.	.
3: Agree (%)	65.0	87.5	63.6	40.0
2: Disagree (%)	25.0	12.5	27.3	60.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	5.0	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	20	8	11	5

H12c: Sufficient resources for creative artistry and literature	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	3.0	2.0	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	12.5	16.7	.	.
3: Agree (%)	50.0	66.7	33.3	100.0
2: Disagree (%)	25.0	16.7	33.3	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	12.5	.	33.3	.
Total (N)	8	6	3	1

H12d: Sufficient resources for tech/managerial innovation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.3	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	5.9	37.5	.	.
3: Agree (%)	58.8	50.0	87.5	100.0
2: Disagree (%)	35.3	12.5	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	.	.	12.5	.
Total (N)	17	8	8	2

H12e: Sufficient resources for extension/engagement	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	3.4	2.4	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	.	37.5	.	20.0
3: Agree (%)	66.7	62.5	55.6	60.0
2: Disagree (%)	27.8	.	33.3	20.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	5.6	.	11.1	.
Total (N)	18	8	9	5

H12f: Sufficient resources for professional service	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.9	2.3	2.5
4: Strongly agree (%)	4.5	12.5	.	25.0
3: Agree (%)	45.5	62.5	44.4	25.0
2: Disagree (%)	40.9	25.0	44.4	25.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.1	.	11.1	25.0
Total (N)	22	8	9	4

H13a: Department rewards teaching/mentoring of students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	3.1	2.8	3.2
4: Strongly agree (%)	10.0	22.2	8.3	33.3
3: Agree (%)	40.0	66.7	75.0	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	45.0	11.1	8.3	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	5.0	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	20	9	12	6

H13b: Department rewards discovery of knowledge	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.4	3.2	3.5
4: Strongly agree (%)	28.6	50.0	40.0	50.0
3: Agree (%)	47.6	37.5	40.0	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	19.0	12.5	20.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.8	.	.	.
Total (N)	21	8	10	6

H13c: Department rewards creative artistry and literature	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.5	2.3	4.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	16.7	.	.	100.0
3: Agree (%)	50.0	50.0	33.3	.
2: Disagree (%)	16.7	50.0	66.7	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	16.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	6	6	3	1

H13d: Department rewards tech/managerial innovation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	2.7	2.5	3.3
4: Strongly agree (%)	15.4	.	.	33.3
3: Agree (%)	38.5	71.4	50.0	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	46.2	28.6	50.0	.
Total (N)	13	7	2	3

H13e: Department rewards extension/engagement	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.8	2.4	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	10.0	.	.	20.0
3: Agree (%)	45.0	75.0	45.5	40.0
2: Disagree (%)	35.0	25.0	45.5	40.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	10.0	.	9.1	.
Total (N)	20	8	11	5

H13f: Department rewards professional service	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.9	2.4	3.4
4: Strongly agree (%)	9.5	22.2	.	40.0
3: Agree (%)	38.1	55.6	45.5	60.0
2: Disagree (%)	38.1	11.1	45.5	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	14.3	11.1	9.1	.
Total (N)	21	9	11	5

Section I: Post-Tenure Review

I1_1: No experience with PTR	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Has experience (%)	13.6	62.5	66.7	83.3
No experience (%)	86.4	37.5	33.3	16.7
Total (N)	22	8	12	6

I1_2: Have had PTR Comprehensive Review	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	100.0	75.0	58.3	50.0
Yes (%)	.	25.0	41.7	50.0
Total (N)	22	8	12	6

I1_3: Have served on PTR committee	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	86.4	75.0	50.0	33.3
Yes (%)	13.6	25.0	50.0	66.7
Total (N)	22	8	12	6

I1_4: Have been dept/college administrator in PTR process	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	95.5	62.5	100.0	66.7
Yes (%)	4.5	37.5	.	33.3
Total (N)	22	8	12	6

I1_5: Had other PTR experience	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	100.0	100.0	83.3	100.0
Yes (%)	.	.	16.7	.
Total (N)	22	8	12	6

I2a: Easy to find PTR information on NCSU website	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.0	2.2	2.6	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	.	.	.	16.7
3: Agree (%)	27.3	16.7	60.0	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	45.5	83.3	40.0	33.3
1: Strongly disagree (%)	27.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	11	6	10	6

I2b: PTR process known/understood in department	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.9	1.7	1.9	2.0
3: Agree (%)	18.2	.	9.1	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	54.5	66.7	72.7	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	27.3	33.3	18.2	50.0
Total (N)	11	6	11	4

I2c: Departmental PTR procedures are clear	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.3	2.1	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	20.0	.	.	50.0
3: Agree (%)	.	50.0	27.3	.
2: Disagree (%)	50.0	33.3	54.5	50.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	30.0	16.7	18.2	.
Total (N)	10	6	11	4

I2d: Departmental PTR standards are clear	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.2	2.1	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	18.2	.	.	50.0
3: Agree (%)	.	33.3	27.3	25.0
2: Disagree (%)	54.5	50.0	54.5	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	27.3	16.7	18.2	25.0
Total (N)	11	6	11	4

I2e: Departmental PTR procedures are followed equitably	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.5	2.7	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	25.0	.	33.3	66.7
3: Agree (%)	.	50.0	33.3	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	37.5	50.0	.	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	37.5	.	33.3	.
Total (N)	8	4	3	3

I2f: Departmental PTR standards are applied fairly	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.8	3.0	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	25.0	.	33.3	66.7
3: Agree (%)	.	80.0	33.3	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	37.5	20.0	33.3	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	37.5	.	.	.
Total (N)	8	5	3	3

I2g: Dept PTR committee members are well prepared and trained	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.3	2.3	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	14.3	.	.	66.7
3: Agree (%)	14.3	33.3	50.0	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	42.9	66.7	25.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	28.6	.	25.0	.
Total (N)	7	6	4	3

I3: Overall satisfaction with PTR process	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.0	2.2	2.1	3.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	.	.	33.3
3: Satisfied (%)	33.3	16.7	42.9	66.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	33.3	83.3	28.6	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	33.3	.	28.6	.
Total (N)	6	6	7	3

Section J: Pay and Compensation

J1a: My salary is competitive within my department	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	2.8	2.6	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	31.6	11.1	20.0	25.0
3: Agree (%)	57.9	66.7	30.0	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	5.3	11.1	40.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	5.3	11.1	10.0	25.0
Total (N)	19	9	10	4

J1b: My salary is competitive within my college	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.9	2.4	2.3
4: Strongly agree (%)	20.0	12.5	10.0	.
3: Agree (%)	53.3	62.5	30.0	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	20.0	25.0	50.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	6.7	.	10.0	33.3
Total (N)	15	8	10	3

J1c: My salary is competitive within NC State	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.8	2.0	2.0	1.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	5.9	.	.	.
3: Agree (%)	5.9	16.7	20.0	.
2: Disagree (%)	52.9	66.7	60.0	66.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	35.3	16.7	20.0	33.3
Total (N)	17	6	10	3

J1d: My salary is competitive within UNC system	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.5	2.3	2.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	7.1	.	.	.
3: Agree (%)	35.7	50.0	50.0	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	21.4	50.0	33.3	33.3
1: Strongly disagree (%)	35.7	.	16.7	33.3
Total (N)	14	6	6	3

J1e: My salary is competitive within discipline at comparable institutions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.4	2.0	1.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	10.5	.	.	.
3: Agree (%)	42.1	50.0	14.3	.
2: Disagree (%)	26.3	37.5	71.4	75.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	21.1	12.5	14.3	25.0
Total (N)	19	8	7	4

J2: Understand how faculty salaries determined	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.8	2.7	3.5
4: Very well (%)	4.3	20.0	16.7	66.7
3: Fairly well (%)	47.8	50.0	50.0	16.7
2: Not very well (%)	26.1	20.0	16.7	16.7
1: Not at all (%)	21.7	10.0	16.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J3: My department links salary increase to meritorious performance	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.4	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	28.6	37.5	16.7	50.0
3: Agree (%)	47.6	62.5	58.3	.
2: Disagree (%)	14.3	.	16.7	50.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	9.5	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	21	8	12	6

J4: I have access to benefits information	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.1	3.4	3.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	34.8	20.0	41.7	66.7
3: Agree (%)	47.8	70.0	58.3	33.3
2: Disagree (%)	17.4	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J5: Healthcare benefits are competitive with other institutions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.0	2.1	2.0	2.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	4.5	.	.	.
3: Agree (%)	22.7	42.9	40.0	40.0
2: Disagree (%)	36.4	28.6	20.0	20.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	36.4	28.6	40.0	40.0
Total (N)	22	7	10	5

J6: Retirement programs are competitive with other institutions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.1	2.7	2.4
4: Strongly agree (%)	10.5	.	11.1	.
3: Agree (%)	52.6	42.9	55.6	60.0
2: Disagree (%)	26.3	28.6	22.2	20.0
1: Strongly disagree (%)	10.5	28.6	11.1	20.0
Total (N)	19	7	9	5

J7: Voluntary benefits programs are competitive with other institutions	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.0	2.4	2.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	10.5	.	.	.
3: Agree (%)	57.9	100.0	50.0	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	21.1	.	37.5	33.3
1: Strongly disagree (%)	10.5	.	12.5	.
Total (N)	19	7	8	3

J8: I am satisfied with my compensation at NC State	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.6	2.4	2.5	2.7
4: Strongly agree (%)	8.7	.	.	16.7
3: Agree (%)	47.8	40.0	58.3	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	39.1	60.0	33.3	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J9: Departmental environment enables work/personal life balance	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.0	2.8	3.2
4: Strongly agree (%)	26.1	20.0	16.7	33.3
3: Agree (%)	52.2	70.0	58.3	50.0
2: Disagree (%)	17.4	.	16.7	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	10.0	8.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J10: NCSU environment enables work/personal life balance	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.2	2.8	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	18.2	20.0	8.3	16.7
3: Agree (%)	59.1	80.0	66.7	66.7
2: Disagree (%)	18.2	.	16.7	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.5	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	22	10	12	6

J11a: Importance of flexible work hours	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.9	3.9	4.0	4.0
4: Very important (%)	91.3	90.0	100.0	100.0
3: Somewhat important (%)	8.7	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J11b: Importance of maternity/paternity leave	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	4.0	3.4	3.8	4.0
4: Very important (%)	95.7	70.0	75.0	100.0
3: Somewhat important (%)	4.3	10.0	25.0	.
2: Not very important (%)	.	10.0	.	.
1: Not at all important (%)	.	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J11c: Importance of family leave time	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.9	3.4	3.7	3.8
4: Very important (%)	87.0	66.7	66.7	83.3
3: Somewhat important (%)	13.0	22.2	33.3	16.7
1: Not at all important (%)	.	11.1	.	.
Total (N)	23	9	12	6

J11d: Importance of altering tenure clock for family concerns	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	4.0	3.7	3.5	4.0
4: Very important (%)	95.7	70.0	58.3	100.0
3: Somewhat important (%)	4.3	30.0	33.3	.
2: Not very important (%)	.	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J11e: Importance of childcare facility on or near campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.8	3.3	3.6	3.3
4: Very important (%)	87.0	60.0	58.3	50.0
3: Somewhat important (%)	8.7	20.0	41.7	33.3
2: Not very important (%)	4.3	10.0	.	16.7
1: Not at all important (%)	.	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

J11f: Importance of tuition remission for dependents	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.7	3.6	3.6	4.0
4: Very important (%)	82.6	80.0	58.3	100.0
3: Somewhat important (%)	13.0	10.0	41.7	.
1: Not at all important (%)	4.3	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

Section K: Campus Infrastructure/Physical Environment

K1: I have sufficient clerical/admin support in my dept	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.3	2.1	3.0
4: Strongly agree (%)	30.4	50.0	.	.
3: Agree (%)	21.7	30.0	50.0	100.0
2: Disagree (%)	39.1	20.0	8.3	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	8.7	.	41.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K2: I have sufficient tech assistance	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.0	3.5	2.8	3.2
4: Strongly agree (%)	26.1	50.0	25.0	16.7
3: Agree (%)	52.2	50.0	41.7	83.3
2: Disagree (%)	13.0	.	25.0	.
1: Strongly disagree (%)	8.7	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K3: There is sufficient support staff in my college	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.4	2.5	2.8
4: Strongly agree (%)	21.7	50.0	.	.
3: Agree (%)	47.8	40.0	75.0	83.3
2: Disagree (%)	26.1	10.0	.	16.7
1: Strongly disagree (%)	4.3	.	25.0	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4a: Satisfaction with office space	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	3.1	3.3	3.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	52.2	30.0	50.0	33.3
3: Satisfied (%)	39.1	50.0	41.7	66.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	.	20.0	.	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	8.7	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4b: Satisfaction with lab space	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.0	2.4	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	14.3	.	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	57.1	100.0	60.0	100.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	28.6	.	20.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	.	.	20.0	.
Total (N)	7	2	5	1

K4c: Satisfaction with classrooms in which you teach	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.2	2.8	2.4	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	4.5	.	8.3	.
3: Satisfied (%)	31.8	75.0	41.7	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	40.9	25.0	33.3	16.7
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	22.7	.	16.7	.
Total (N)	22	8	12	6

K4d: Satisfaction with labs in which you teach	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25
Mean Rating	2.8	2.7	2.6
4: Very Satisfied (%)	12.5	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	50.0	66.7	66.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	37.5	33.3	22.2
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	.	.	11.1
Total (N)	8	3	9

K4e: Satisfaction with maintenance of building in which you work	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.8	2.8	2.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	4.3	11.1	25.0	.
3: Satisfied (%)	47.8	55.6	41.7	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	26.1	33.3	25.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	21.7	.	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	9	12	6

K4f: Satisfaction with infrastructure of bldgs in which you work	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.1	2.6	2.8	2.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	10.0	16.7	.
3: Satisfied (%)	34.8	50.0	41.7	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	43.5	30.0	41.7	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	21.7	10.0	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4g: Satisfaction with availability of up-to-date equipment	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.1	3.2	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	8.7	30.0	33.3	.
3: Satisfied (%)	56.5	50.0	50.0	80.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	26.1	20.0	16.7	20.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	8.7	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	5

K4h: Satisfaction with availability of office supplies	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	3.1	3.3	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	30.4	30.0	33.3	.
3: Satisfied (%)	56.5	50.0	66.7	100.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.0	20.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4i: Satisfaction with availability of informal meeting space	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.0	2.3	2.2	2.2
4: Very Satisfied (%)	4.3	10.0	.	.
3: Satisfied (%)	17.4	20.0	41.7	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	47.8	60.0	33.3	16.7
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	30.4	10.0	25.0	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4j: Satisfaction with dining options on campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.4	2.0	3.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	.	12.5	25.0
3: Satisfied (%)	61.1	37.5	12.5	75.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	27.8	62.5	37.5	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	11.1	.	37.5	.
Total (N)	18	8	8	4

K4k: Satisfaction with availability of parking	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.3	2.5	2.3	2.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	8.7	.	.	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	34.8	60.0	50.0	16.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	30.4	30.0	33.3	50.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	26.1	10.0	16.7	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4l: Satisfaction with cost of parking	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.8	2.4	1.8	2.3
4: Very Satisfied (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	13.0	50.0	16.7	33.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	43.5	40.0	50.0	16.7
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	39.1	10.0	33.3	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4m: Satisfaction with Wolfline	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.0	3.0	3.0
3: Satisfied (%)	75.0	100.0	100.0	100.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	25.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	4	3	5	1

K4n: Satisfaction with commute between Centennial and main	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25
Mean Rating	2.6	2.8	2.1
3: Satisfied (%)	60.0	80.0	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	40.0	20.0	10.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	.	.	40.0
Total (N)	10	5	10

K4o: Satisfaction with campus safety	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.0	2.8	2.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	10.5	.	.	16.7
3: Satisfied (%)	57.9	100.0	83.3	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	26.3	.	16.7	16.7
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	5.3	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	19	9	12	6

K4p: Satisfaction with campus aesthetics	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.7	2.6	2.0
3: Satisfied (%)	52.2	80.0	66.7	33.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	39.1	10.0	25.0	33.3
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	8.7	10.0	8.3	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K4q: Satisfaction with upkeep of campus grounds	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	2.8	3.0	2.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	8.7	.	25.0	.
3: Satisfied (%)	69.6	88.9	58.3	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	17.4	.	8.3	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	4.3	11.1	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	9	12	6

K4r: Satisfaction with amount of green space	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	2.7	2.7	2.0
3: Satisfied (%)	52.2	80.0	75.0	16.7
2: Dissatisfied (%)	34.8	10.0	16.7	66.7
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	13.0	10.0	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

K5a: Satisfaction with energy conservation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.0	2.6	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	10.5	.	.	25.0
3: Satisfied (%)	68.4	100.0	57.1	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	15.8	.	42.9	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	5.3	.	.	25.0
Total (N)	19	7	7	4

K5b: Satisfaction with water conservation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.0	2.5	2.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	11.8	.	.	33.3
3: Satisfied (%)	64.7	100.0	50.0	33.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	17.6	.	50.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	5.9	.	.	33.3
Total (N)	17	6	4	3

K5c: Satisfaction with recycling efforts	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.9	3.2	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	13.6	.	50.0	20.0
3: Satisfied (%)	68.2	90.0	20.0	60.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.6	10.0	30.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	4.5	.	.	20.0
Total (N)	22	10	10	5

K5d: Satisfaction with alternative transportation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.0	2.8	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	11.1	.	11.1	25.0
3: Satisfied (%)	66.7	100.0	55.6	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	11.1	.	33.3	25.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	11.1	.	.	.
Total (N)	18	9	9	4

K5e: Satisfaction with green building practices	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	3.0	2.8	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	21.4	.	.	25.0
3: Satisfied (%)	50.0	100.0	80.0	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	14.3	.	20.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	14.3	.	.	25.0
Total (N)	14	5	5	4

K5f: Satisfaction with use of recycled-content resources	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.0	3.3	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	20.0	.	33.3	25.0
3: Satisfied (%)	60.0	100.0	66.7	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.3	.	.	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	6.7	.	.	25.0
Total (N)	15	6	3	4

K6: Interest in hotel/conference center on Centennial Campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.2	2.7	2.9	2.8
4: A lot (%)	47.8	40.0	41.7	20.0
3: Some (%)	30.4	20.0	25.0	40.0
2: A little (%)	17.4	10.0	16.7	40.0
1: None at all (%)	4.3	30.0	16.7	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	5

K7: Likelihood of using conference center on Centennial Campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	3.3	2.5	2.8	2.7
4: Very likely (%)	47.8	30.0	25.0	16.7
3: Somewhat likely (%)	30.4	20.0	41.7	33.3
2: Not very likely (%)	21.7	20.0	25.0	50.0
1: Not at all likely (%)	.	30.0	8.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

Section L: Recreation/Wellness

L1: Satisfaction with recreation activities on campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.8	2.9	3.1	2.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	.	25.0	.
3: Satisfied (%)	81.8	90.0	58.3	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	13.6	10.0	16.7	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	4.5	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	22	10	12	6

L2: Satisfaction with cultural activities on campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.7	3.2	3.0	2.7
4: Very Satisfied (%)	4.3	20.0	16.7	.
3: Satisfied (%)	56.5	80.0	66.7	83.3
2: Dissatisfied (%)	39.1	.	16.7	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	.	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

L3a: Satisfaction with Carmichael Gymnasium	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	3.0	3.1	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	.	28.6	.
3: Satisfied (%)	62.5	100.0	57.1	100.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	12.5	.	14.3	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	25.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	8	6	7	3

L3b: Satisfaction with recreation space around campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	3.0	3.1	2.8
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	.	37.5	.
3: Satisfied (%)	60.0	100.0	37.5	75.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	20.0	.	25.0	25.0
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	20.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	10	5	8	4

L3c: Satisfaction with organized Campus Recreation Activities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.4	3.0	3.0	2.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	.	.	33.3	.
3: Satisfied (%)	40.0	100.0	33.3	50.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	60.0	.	33.3	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	.	.	.	50.0
Total (N)	10	5	6	2

L3d: Satisfaction with ARTS NC State programs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.3	3.4	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	16.7	28.6	36.4	.
3: Satisfied (%)	58.3	71.4	63.6	100.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	25.0	.	.	.
Total (N)	12	7	11	3

L3e: Satisfaction with Wolfpack athletic events	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	3.1	3.1	3.0
4: Very Satisfied (%)	15.8	14.3	30.0	.
3: Satisfied (%)	68.4	85.7	50.0	100.0
2: Dissatisfied (%)	10.5	.	20.0	.
1: Very dissatisfied (%)	5.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	19	7	10	4

L4a: How often use Carmichael Gymnasium	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.7	2.7	2.8	2.2
Once a week or more (%)	4.3	10.0	25.0	16.7
A few times a month (%)	.	10.0	8.3	.
A few times a semester (%)	13.0	10.0	.	.
Once a semester (%)	.	10.0	.	.
Once a year (%)	4.3	30.0	25.0	33.3
Never (%)	78.3	30.0	41.7	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

L4b: How often use recreational space around campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.7	2.4	2.4	2.6
Once a week or more (%)	.	.	.	20.0
A few times a month (%)	4.3	.	16.7	.
A few times a semester (%)	8.7	30.0	16.7	.
Once a semester (%)	8.7	20.0	8.3	20.0
Once a year (%)	8.7	10.0	8.3	20.0
Never (%)	69.6	40.0	50.0	40.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	5

L4c: How often participate in organized Campus Recreation Activities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.4	1.9	1.8	1.0
A few times a month (%)	.	10.0	16.7	.
A few times a semester (%)	9.1	.	.	.
Once a semester (%)	.	20.0	8.3	.
Once a year (%)	9.1	10.0	.	.
Never (%)	81.8	60.0	75.0	100.0
Total (N)	22	10	12	6

L4d: How often attend ARTS NC State programs	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.5	2.9	3.4	2.5
A few times a month (%)	8.7	.	.	.
A few times a semester (%)	17.4	30.0	66.7	16.7
Once a semester (%)	26.1	40.0	16.7	33.3
Once a year (%)	8.7	20.0	8.3	33.3
Never (%)	39.1	10.0	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

L4e: How often attend Wolfpack athletic events	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.2	3.6	2.8
Once a week or more (%)	4.3	.	8.3	16.7
A few times a month (%)	17.4	.	25.0	.
A few times a semester (%)	21.7	20.0	33.3	16.7
Once a semester (%)	8.7	20.0	8.3	.
Once a year (%)	17.4	20.0	.	50.0
Never (%)	30.4	40.0	25.0	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

L5: Interest in designated faculty-only dining facility	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	2.9	2.7	2.9	1.7
4: A great deal (%)	43.5	30.0	41.7	.
3: Some (%)	26.1	30.0	33.3	33.3
2: A little (%)	8.7	20.0	.	.
1: None at all (%)	21.7	20.0	25.0	66.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

L6: Likelihood of using gym on Centennial campus	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean Rating	1.9	2.2	2.1	1.6
4: Very likely (%)	4.3	20.0	16.7	.
3: Somewhat likely (%)	17.4	20.0	16.7	.
2: Not very likely (%)	39.1	20.0	25.0	60.0
1: Not at all likely (%)	39.1	40.0	41.7	40.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	5

Section M: Work Activities

M1: Total hours per week spent performing job-related work (collapsed)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean # Hrs Work	55.7	51.0	54.8	56.7
more than 60 hrs (%)	26.1	20.0	8.3	16.7
51 to 60 hrs (%)	26.1	.	58.3	50.0
41 to 50 hrs (%)	34.8	70.0	25.0	33.3
40 hrs or less (%)	13.0	10.0	8.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2A: Proportion of total hours spent on teaching/mentoring	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	38.9	44.6	32.1	20.8
more than 50% of time (%)	17.4	30.0	25.0	.
26% to 50% of time (%)	52.2	40.0	25.0	33.3
11% to 25% of time (%)	30.4	20.0	25.0	50.0
6% to 10% of time (%)	.	.	25.0	.
1% to 5% of time (%)	.	10.0	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2a_1r: Includes teaching (among those reporting time spent on teaching/mentoring)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	30.4	10.0	8.3	16.7
Yes (%)	69.6	90.0	91.7	83.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2a_2r: Includes professional development to improve teaching (among those reporting time spent on teaching/mentoring)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	65.2	20.0	50.0	50.0
Yes (%)	34.8	80.0	50.0	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2a_3r: Includes research projects with students (among those reporting time spent on teaching/mentoring)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	52.2	40.0	25.0	16.7
Yes (%)	47.8	60.0	75.0	83.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2a_4r: Includes supervising internships/field experiences (among those reporting time spent on teaching/mentoring)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	69.6	60.0	25.0	33.3
Yes (%)	30.4	40.0	75.0	66.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2a_5r: Includes student thesis/dissertation committee work (among those reporting time spent on teaching/mentoring)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	39.1	20.0	8.3	.
Yes (%)	60.9	80.0	91.7	100.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2B: Proportion of total hours spent advising students	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	8.8	14.0	9.6	11.7
26% to 50% of time (%)	.	10.0	.	.
11% to 25% of time (%)	17.4	40.0	16.7	50.0
6% to 10% of time (%)	43.5	.	50.0	.
1% to 5% of time (%)	39.1	50.0	33.3	33.3
0% of time (%)	.	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2b_1r: Includes formal advising (among those reporting time spent on advising)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	39.1	10.0	16.7	.
Yes (%)	60.9	90.0	83.3	100.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	5

M2b_2r: Includes informal advising (among those reporting time spent on advising)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	60.9	50.0	41.7	60.0
Yes (%)	39.1	50.0	58.3	40.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	5

M2C: Proportion of total hours spent on research/scholarly Activities	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	33.7	15.9	28.3	20.8
more than 50% of time (%)	13.0	10.0	8.3	.
26% to 50% of time (%)	52.2	.	41.7	33.3
11% to 25% of time (%)	17.4	40.0	33.3	33.3
6% to 10% of time (%)	4.3	10.0	16.7	16.7
1% to 5% of time (%)	4.3	20.0	.	.
0% of time (%)	8.7	20.0	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2D: Proportion of total hours spent on creative artistry/literature	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	0.4	0.3	0.1	0.0
6% to 10% of time (%)	4.3	.	.	.
1% to 5% of time (%)	.	20.0	8.3	.
0% of time (%)	95.7	80.0	91.7	100.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2E: Proportion of total hours spent on extension/engagement/econ dev	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	4.7	1.2	5.4	13.3
26% to 50% of time (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
11% to 25% of time (%)	4.3	.	16.7	16.7
6% to 10% of time (%)	17.4	10.0	8.3	.
1% to 5% of time (%)	21.7	20.0	25.0	66.7
0% of time (%)	52.2	70.0	50.0	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2e_1r: Includes service learning teaching/mentoring (among those reporting time spent on extension/engagement)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	90.9	66.7	100.0	50.0
Yes (%)	9.1	33.3	.	50.0
Total (N)	11	3	6	6

M2e_2r: Includes extension education/non-credit programs (among those reporting time spent on extension/engagement)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	72.7	66.7	66.7	50.0
Yes (%)	27.3	33.3	33.3	50.0
Total (N)	11	3	6	6

M2e_3r: Includes economic development training/tech assistance (among those reporting time spent on extension/engagement)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	81.8	100.0	83.3	100.0
Yes (%)	18.2	.	16.7	.
Total (N)	11	3	6	6

M2e_4r: Includes partnering with private sector - job/investment creation (among those reporting time spent on extension/engagement)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	72.7	100.0	100.0	100.0
Yes (%)	27.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	11	3	6	6

M2e_5r: Public service grants/contracts (among those reporting time spent on extension/engagement)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	81.8	66.7	50.0	66.7
Yes (%)	18.2	33.3	50.0	33.3
Total (N)	11	3	6	6

M2F: Proportion of total hours spent on service work	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	7.4	9.5	19.2	15.8
26% to 50% of time (%)	.	.	25.0	16.7
11% to 25% of time (%)	13.0	20.0	41.7	50.0
6% to 10% of time (%)	39.1	30.0	33.3	33.3
1% to 5% of time (%)	34.8	40.0	.	.
0% of time (%)	13.0	10.0	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2f_1r: Includes advising student groups (among those reporting time spent on service work)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	85.0	55.6	75.0	83.3
Yes (%)	15.0	44.4	25.0	16.7
Total (N)	20	9	12	6

M2f_2r: Includes dept/college/university committees (among those reporting time spent on service work)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	35.0	.	8.3	.
Yes (%)	65.0	100.0	91.7	100.0
Total (N)	20	9	12	6

M2f_3r: Includes professional service (among those reporting time spent on service work)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	50.0	22.2	25.0	.
Yes (%)	50.0	77.8	75.0	100.0
Total (N)	20	9	12	6

M2f_4r: Includes academic program assessment activities (among those reporting time spent on service work)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	55.0	33.3	33.3	50.0
Yes (%)	45.0	66.7	66.7	50.0
Total (N)	20	9	12	6

M2f_5r: Includes other university service (among those reporting time spent on service work)	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	55.0	33.3	50.0	50.0
Yes (%)	45.0	66.7	50.0	50.0
Total (N)	20	9	12	6

M2G: Proportion of total hours spent on tech/managerial innovation	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	0.0	0.4	0.3	1.7
6% to 10% of time (%)	.	.	.	16.7
1% to 5% of time (%)	.	20.0	8.3	.
0% of time (%)	100.0	80.0	91.7	83.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M2H: Proportion of total hours spent on dept/college admin duties	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Mean % of Time on Activity	6.1	14.1	5.0	15.8
more than 50% of time (%)	.	10.0	.	16.7
26% to 50% of time (%)	4.3	10.0	.	.
11% to 25% of time (%)	13.0	.	25.0	16.7
6% to 10% of time (%)	4.3	.	.	16.7
1% to 5% of time (%)	26.1	30.0	8.3	.
0% of time (%)	52.2	50.0	66.7	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M3_1: Worked summer at NCSU without overload pay	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	43.5	40.0	33.3	50.0
Yes (%)	56.5	60.0	66.7	50.0
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M3_2: Taught at NCSU on overload basis	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	82.6	70.0	75.0	66.7
Yes (%)	17.4	30.0	25.0	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M3_3: Taught NCSU distance education class	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	43.5	60.0	66.7	83.3
Yes (%)	56.5	40.0	33.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M3_4: Taught for another academic institution	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	95.7	100.0	100.0	100.0
Yes (%)	4.3	.	.	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M3_5: Did outside consulting/freelance for pay	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	39.1	40.0	16.7	100.0
Yes (%)	60.9	60.0	83.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M3_6: Did outside consulting/freelance without pay	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	65.2	30.0	33.3	66.7
Yes (%)	34.8	70.0	66.7	33.3
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M3_7: Had other secondary employment	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
No (%)	91.3	100.0	100.0	83.3
Yes (%)	8.7	.	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M4: Frequency of volunteer work past 2 years	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Never (%)	8.7	10.0	16.7	16.7
A few times (%)	43.5	30.0	16.7	66.7
About once per month (%)	21.7	10.0	25.0	.
Two or three times per month (%)	21.7	20.0	33.3	.
At least once per week (%)	4.3	30.0	8.3	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M5: Frequency of public policy work past 5 years	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
Never (%)	34.8	50.0	41.7	16.7
Once or twice (%)	43.5	20.0	33.3	33.3
Three to five times (%)	8.7	10.0	16.7	33.3
Six to ten times (%)	4.3	.	8.3	.
More than 10 times (%)	8.7	20.0	.	16.7
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M6: Management of work-related demands of past 2 years	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
1: Managing everything just fine (%)	.	10.0	.	33.3
2 (%)	17.4	30.0	8.3	.
3 (%)	43.5	30.0	50.0	33.3
4 (%)	39.1	30.0	33.3	33.3
5: Completely overwhelmed (%)	.	.	8.3	.
Total (N)	23	10	12	6

M7: Change how you spend your work time	6 or fewer	7-15	16-25	26 or more
I would change how I spent time (%)	95.0	66.7	90.9	66.7
I would not change a thing (%)