Purdue University Calumet Campus Climate Survey Results

1. Purdue University Calumet Campus Climate Survey Results Richard Day, Ph.D. Richard Day ResearchNovember 27, 2009

2. Table of Contents

3. I. Summary The overall responses indicate that full time faculty and staff generally feel: • Respected • Physically safe • Listened to This is based on ratings that are above the mid point. However, there are groups that feel less safe, respected and listened to. Any resources directed to them will produce maximum improvements in the Campus Climate. Literature Review: While it is difficult to get an “apples to apples” comparison the responses from Purdue Cal appear to be in line with their peer institutions.

4. Summary Campus Climate is important. Even more important : • Excellent instruction • Preparing students for work • Personal safety Respondents feel that career advancement is constrained by a lack of budget and openings, much more than issues of gender, race, age, etc.

5. Summary Recruiting for Diversity: Difficulty, Effort, Importance • African Americans typically give Purdue Cal lower marks for effort and higher marks for importance • Otherwise no demographic differences; all rate the importance highly • By School: • L.A.S., Nursing, and Education rate these items higher than average • Tech and Engineering typically rate them lower • Administrative Services and Service Staff give very low ratings to Purdue Cal’s efforts to recruit for more diversity

6. Summary Members of the service staff are the consistently lowest in: • Feeling respected • Feeling safe • Understanding a path to promotion • Receiving clear directions regarding their work • Being treated fairly • Feeling listened to

7. II. BackgroundPurdue Cal Statement of Principles & Values Purdue University Calumet is committed to maintaining a community which recognizes and values, the inherent worth and dignity of every person; fosters tolerance, sensitivity, understanding, and mutual respect among its members; and encourages each individual to reach his or her own potential. -Multi-Cultural Campus Council Charter, September 16, 2005.

8. Approach The questions are the product of collaboration between RDR and MCCC. As a guide for this study, we used the document from the 2008 survey that outlined four items of campus climate: • Communication (informed, listened to, etc.) • Personal Safety • Personal Treatment • Issues of Respect and Disrespect We added a section to fit Campus Climate within a context.

9. Sample and Data Collection This report is based on the responses of 262 full-time faculty and staff members. Data were collected between September 15 – October 9, 2009. Invitations were sent out three times to encourage response. The respondents were weighted to match the population of full-time faculty and staff within their employee work groups and by race within those work groups.

10. III. Campus ClimateGeneral Awareness/Opinion Campus Climate issues appeared along with issues important to every institution of higher education – to understand where and how Campus Climate fits. The responses indicate that all of the items are important. most important: Emphasizing excellent instruction and Preparing students for employment after college are the top 2 least important: Institutional prestige and Promoting gender diversity were rated. • The low importance of gender diversity could be ascribed to the fact that nearly 2/3 of full-time faculty and staff are female. Of the peer institutions (UCO and SIUE), issues of institutional prestige and national image were more highly ranked than issues of diversity.

11. Importance of Campus ClimateFrequency Q1-3. Please rank your opinion of the importance for Purdue Cal of each item (0-10); Which are the three most important items in your opinion? Of the 3 you selected which ONE is the most important? Which are the three least important items in your opinion? Of the 3 you selected which ONE is the least important?

12. Importance of Campus Climate Issues To understand to whom Campus Climate issues are more important we used a stepwise multiple regression. By far the strongest predictor is being a member of the Service Staff. The second was being African American. Q1. Please rank your opinion of the importance for Purdue University Calumet of each item below. (0-10 scale; 0=“not at all important", 10=“it couldn’t be more important“)

13. Programs that Celebrate Diversity More Well-Informed • Student Affairs • Administrative • Age 61+ • Tenured/Tenure Track Faculty • 15+ years at Purdue Cal Less Well-Informed • Service Staff • Age <30 • Non-Tenured Faculty • Administrative Services • At Purdue Cal <15 years Q8. How well informed are you about programs that promote and celebrate diversity at Purdue Cal? (0-10; 0="not well informed", 10="extremely well informed”)

14. CommunicationOpinions Offered about Problems in Campus Life 21% offered ideas about a problem and saw them acted upon. Q9. Have you ever offered your ideas and opinions about a problem regarding life on campus to a person in authority? If yes, do you feel that you were listened to respectfully? Do you think that your ideas/opinions were acted upon?

15. Communication: Peer Institutions In the 2008 climate study, Purdue Cal is on par with its peer institutions in fostering an environment where employees feel that they are free to express themselves. • Peer institutions found that 70-80% of faculty and staff were positive about their abilities to express themselves. On a broader level, roughly 50-60% and faculty and staff felt that communication was good between departments and at the institutional level.

16. TRIO Program In 2009: • 55% correctly identified the TRIO Program. • 45% were either incorrect or did not know. In 2008: • Nearly 63% of respondents identified the TRIO programs by agreeing with the statement that “TRIO programs were primarily for minorities.” 55% correctly identified the TRIO program; 45 % were either incorrect or did not know. Q4. With which statement do you agree most?

17. IV. Personal Safety The importance of personal safety was established in Question 1, where it was ranked near the top of all issues (8.4 on a 0-10 scale). The best demographic predictors of feeling unsafe: By far the strongest predictor was being a service staff member Secondary predictors are: • Tech. faculty • female, • Ed. Faculty. Q11. Overall, how personally safe do you feel when doing your work at Purdue Cal? (0-10; 0=“extremely unsafe”, 10=“extremely safe”)

18. Incidence of Physical AssaultRespondent Victims Of the 262 respondents, 3 indicated that they had ever been physically assaulted while on Purdue Cal grounds. Summary of three assaults: • The incidents occurred in 2006, 1997 and 1982 • None of the assaults were sexual • All 3 victims were white and heterosexual • 2 of the victims were female, one was male Q15-16. Have you ever been physically assaulted while on Purdue Cal grounds? Further details (When did the assault occur? Where?, etc.)

19. Incidence of Physical AssaultKnows a Victim Of the 262 respondents, 34 (13%) indicated they know someone who has been assaulted at least once on Purdue Cal grounds. 6 individuals know someone who was sexually assaulted on campus. Victims were mostly • Students • Males • White • Young • Heterosexual Q17COMB. Do you personally know someone who has been physically assaulted while on Purdue Cal grounds? Describe the person you know who most recently suffered the assault.

20. Knows a Victim of Physical Assault 12 people reported assaults that occurred in 2009.* Campus Public Safety reports 13 physical assaults on record for 2009. Safety on campus is a top-of-mind concern for Purdue Cal faculty and staff. NOTE: The numbers on this slide report the number of individuals who know a person who was assaulted, NOT the number of assaults. Counts may be inflated as multiple respondents may report the same assault, and information about an assault may be hearsay. * Includes all of October, survey data collected only through October 9. Q17d. When did the most recent event occur? Q18. Was the most recent incident reported to the proper authorities?

21. Personal Safety: Peer Institutions The Univ. Michigan-Dearborn was the only peer institution with available data about personal safety. • 97% of UMD faculty have neither witnessed nor directly experienced a threat of physical safety • 95% of UMD faculty have neither witnessed nor directly experienced an assignment to an unsafe work environment

22. V. Personal Treatment/Fairness: CareerConstraints to Advancement by Demographics and Work Career advancement is most constrained by the lack of openings and budget, not demographics (race, gender, age, etc.). In the 2008 survey, the 4 most frequently identified reasons with regard to unfair treatment were: • Employee category (42%) • Gender (37%) • Age (26%) • Race/ethnicity (21%) Q21-22. In your opinion, how much of your advancement at Purdue Cal is constrained by the following: (0-10; 0="extremely constrained”, 10="not at all constrained”)

23. Feel most Constrained in Advancement Step wise regression indicates: By far, those who feel the most constrained Service staff Secondary Predictors: African American non heterosexuals Professional Staff females Tech. faculty Q21. In your opinion, how much of your advancement at Purdue Cal is constrained by the following: (0-10; 0="extremely constrained”, 10="not at all constrained”)

24. Recruiting Difficulty Recruiting racial minorities is seen as more difficult by: • School of Nursing (0.7) • School of Technology (1.5) • African Americans (3.0) • Tenure/Tenure Track (3.5) • Service Staff (3.8) Generally, ratings hover around neutral (5.0) for the difficulty in recruiting for diversity . Q23. Please rank the difficulty you perceive in recruiting the following people for open positions in your department-work group. (0-10; 0="extremely difficult", 10="not at all difficult")

25. Recruiting Effort/Importance • Generally, the ratings for overall effort to recruit minorities hover around the middle ground. • Higher effort: whites, administrative staff, professionals (females), student affairs, L.A.S. • Lower effort: African Americans, service staff, Administrative Services, School of Technology • Generally, the ratings for the importance hover around the middle ground, so recruiting diverse personnel is of average importance. • Higher importance: Administrative, student affairs, School of Education, School of Technology (females), School of Nursing • Lower Importance: Professional staff, Academic Affairs, School of Engineering Q24. Please rank your opinion of Purdue Cal's efforts to recruit the following for open positions in your department/work group. (0-10; 0="no effort", 10="maximum effort") Q25. Please rank the importance to you of Purdue Cal recruiting the following for open positions in your department/work group (0-10; 0=“extremely unimportant", 10=“extremely important")

26. Fairness and Discrimination: Peer Institutions While the questions in the other studies were very different certain trends did emerge: • Problems were most common regarding gender, race and job category; gender was the most common source of discrimination, with race and job category varying across the studies. • Feelings of discrimination were related to employment and career development. At UMD, female faculty reported inequity in access to resources and support.

27. VI. Issues of Respect and DisrespectOverall Respect and Disrespect Generally, staff members feel respected, as evidenced by ratings typically in the 6’s and 7’s on the 0-10 scale. However, there are some who feel less respected. The strongest demographic predictors (regression) of feeling treated disrespectfully: Service Staff (by far) Secondary Predictors: Hispanics non heterosexuals Tech Faculty females disabled Q26. Please rate your work group/department on overall respect. (0-10; 0=“complete disrespect”, 10=“complete respect”)

28. Respect and DisrespectCareer Advancement Lower scores overall from staff as opposed to faculty, especially: • Professional • Service • Administrative Most gave neutral scores, with the exception of African Americans (2.6). Service staff gave very low ratings for: • Level of support for advancement (1.9) • Clarity of procedures for advancement (2.9) • Feeling respected by the administration for their work (3.2) Q20. Please rank the existing level of support for advancement in your department/work unit. (0-10; 0="non-existent“,10="perfect“). Q19. Please rate how clear the procedures are for you to advance at Purdue Cal. (0-10; 0="very vague", 10="extremely clear”). Q27. Please rate how respected you feel for the work you do at Purdue Cal by the administration. (0-10; 0="extremely disrespected", 10="perfectly respected”).

29. Respect and DisrespectInterpersonal • Service staff feel less respected by the administration; others are neutral to higher. • All staff felt treated respectfully by colleagues, especially administrative. • In the 2008, the 4 most frequently identified reasons for harassment were: • Gender (49%) • Employment category (32%) • Age (21%) • Race/ethnicity (18%) Q27. Please rate how respected you feel for the work you do at Purdue Cal by the administration. Q10. Generally when speaking with a co-worker/colleague, how respected do you feel? (0-10; 0="extremely disrespected", 10="perfectly respected”)

30. Respect and Disrespect Those in the Schools of Engineering, Math & Science and Nursing feel the most respected (scores in the high 6s and 7s). Those in the Schools of L.A.S. and Education feel slightly less respected. Q26. Please rate your work group/department on overall respect. (0-10 scale; 0=“complete disrespect, 10=“complete respect”) Q27. Please rate how respected you feel for the work you do at Purdue Cal by the administration. (0-10 scale; 0="extremely disrespected", 10="perfectly respected“) Q7. How well does the person to whom you report keep you informed of the issues that help you do your job to the best of your abilities? (0-10 scale; 0 =“not well informed", 10="extremely well informed“)

31. Respect and Disrespect More Frequently Disrespected • Service staff • Non-Heterosexuals • Administrative Services • Less Frequently Disrespected • Student Affairs • Non-tenured faculty • Age 61+ • Administrative • Heterosexuals • Student Affairs Q28_a. If you have been treated with disrespect, how often? (0-10; 0=“very often”, 10=“hardly ever”); higher score is better (i.e. treated disrespectfully less often)

32. Respect and DisrespectKnow of Others Treated with Disrespect More Frequently Disrespected • Non-Heterosexuals • Age 31-40 • Administrative Services • Service staff • African Americans • Tenure/Tenure Track • Less Frequently Disrespected • Non-tenure faculty • Age 61+ • Whites • Heterosexuals • Academic Affairs Q29_0. How often are people treated disrespectfully at Purdue Cal? (0-10; 10=“hardly ever”, 0=“very often”). Lower score is better, i.e. treated disrespectfully less often

33. Respect and Disrespect: Peer Institutions • In its 2008 study, about 30-35% of Purdue Cal faculty and staff reported harassment or disrespectful treatment on campus. Women reported more of this than average. • At most peer institutions, about 20% of combined faculty and staff feel they are not treated with respect. • 5-15% of peer faculty and staff report instances of harassment.

34. Comments and Questions: • After the last Campus Town Hall session, the presentation will be available on the MultiCultural Campus Council’s website: http://webs.calumet.purdue.edu/mccc/ • Please direct any additional questions or comments about the Climate Assessment to the Multicultural Campus Council (MCCC) at MCCC@calumet.purdue.edu. • All questions will be collected and directed to Richard Day Research for response.