PBA Home > Institutional Research & Analysis > Surveys > Campus Climate Survey 2006 >Over-Time Comparisons

CU-Boulder Campus Climate Survey, Fall 2006

Over-Time Comparisons of Prior Climate and Community Surveys

Fall 2006 marked the second administration of the CU-Boulder campus climate survey. The first was in fall 2001. In 1994 and 1998 a community survey was administered to assess the campus climate. The community survey differs from the climate survey in that it focused primarily on race/ethnicity.

A subset of the 1994 and 1998 community survey items were included in the 2001 and 2006 campus climate surveys. We analyzed the common items across the four years to identify changes over time from 1994-2006.  Since the racial/ethnic make-up of the respondents varies across years, we analyzed the data for each racial/ethnic group separately. Because international and graduate students were not included in the 1994 and 1998 community surveys, their data were excluded from the analyses.

The number of undergraduate students in each racial/ethnic group by year is:

We also analyzed common items across the two administrations of the Climate Survey. International and graduate students were included in these surveys, and their data have been included in the analyses. Analyses were carried out separately for undergraduates and graduate students. The number of students in each racial/ethnic group by year is:

As can be seen in the table, the number of graduate students in the four minority race/ethnicity groups is relatively small. To allow for more reliable cross-group comparisons, and to maintain consistency with analyses from the 2001 Climate Survey, data for African-American, Hispanic, and Native-American graduate students have been pooled together, and results are reported for this combined group of racial/ethnic minorities.

Highlights 1994-2006: Undergraduate Students Only

Overall, there are few changes in undergraduates' climate ratings over time. Students in all four survey administrations give substantially similar ratings of the campus environment, the extent to which they feel welcome and comfortable, and the situation for themselves and for all students.

Though there is little change overall, among all the racial/ethnic groups, African-American undergraduates showed the greatest change, most of which is in a positive direction. African-American students report feeling more accepted in 2001 and 2006, compared with 1994 and 1998. They also report being more comfortable in 2001 and 2006 being in class and interacting with faculty outside of class, as well as hanging out on the Hill (a residential/commercial area adjacent to campus and at the UMC) and in hypothetical interactions with CU police and Boulder city police.  Many more African-American students in 2001 and 2006 than in 1998 report that both faculty and student government value diversity (data on this topic were not collected in 1994). 

Over time, however, African-American students and, to a lesser extent, other students of color, demonstrated a modest decline in their rating of UCB as a place to be for all students and for themselves.

Generally, climate ratings for groups other than African-Americans showed little change over time. Positive changes related to diversity are noteworthy. Among white, Asian-American, Hispanic/Latino, and Native-American students, there is a steady increase over time in students' ratings of the extent to which both faculty and student government value diversity. There is also a steady increase over time in white students' reported level of comfort participating in ethnic/cultural activities on campus.

Highlights 2001-2006: Undergraduate Students

In general, undergraduates' rating of the campus climate showed little change from 2001 to 2006. Students perceive the campus as welcoming; they report that they feel valued, supported, and intellectually stimulated; and they report that they would feel comfortable in many campus settings--including the recreation center, the UMC, and class--and taking advantage of various campus opportunities--including interacting with faculty outside of class, participating in campus social life, and taking part in campus ethnic/cultural activities.

Change in ratings over time appears to be more characteristic of African-American and international students than of students in the other groups. Among African-American students, ratings of "UCB as a place to be" noticeably declined between 2001 and 2006, as did their perceptions of the social climate both inside and outside the classroom. Similar but more modest declines occurred among international students. In 2006, compared with 2001, African-Americans were also somewhat more likely to report that they felt different and overwhelmed. Over time, international students' ratings of how comfortable they would feel expressing views in class, participating in campus ethnic/cultural activities, living in the residence halls, and challenging derogatory remarks noticeably declined, as did their ratings of how comfortable they would feel hanging out on the Hill.  Among other racial/ethnic groups, there were modest decreases in Native American students' ratings of how comfortable they would feel participating in campus social life and hanging out on the Hill, and a modest increase in their ratings of how comfortable they would feel getting counseling or support. Asian-American students' ratings of how comfortable they would feel participating in campus ethnic/cultural activities increased somewhat.

There were both positive and negative cross-time changes in students' ratings of the extent to which they think various campus groups value diversity. For all groups but international students there were modest increases from 2001 to 2006 in students' ratings of the extent to which they think diversity is valued by student government. International students' ratings of the extent to which they think diversity is valued by the Boulder community also increased somewhat. Compared with 2001, students in one or more of the racial/ethnic groups reported lower ratings in 2006 of the extent to which they think diversity is valued by students (reported by Hispanic/Latino, international, and, to a lesser extent, African-American, students), by faculty (reported by African-American and international students), by the Boulder community (reported by Hispanic/Latino students), and by administration/staff (reported by international students and, to a lesser extent, African-American students).

Highlights 2001-2006: Graduate Students

As was the case for undergraduates, graduate students' rating of the campus climate showed little change from 2001 to 2006. In general, students report having had quite positive experiences at UCB and in the community at large. Change in ratings over time appears to be slightly more characteristic of Asian-American students and students in the combined group than of white students and international students.

In 2006, compared with 2001, Asian-American graduate students were less likely to report that they felt different whereas students in the other groups were somewhat more likely to report that they felt different. White students were also somewhat more likely to report that they felt left out.  Compared with 2001, all students reported modest increases, in 2006, in the extent to which they would feel comfortable shopping and eating in Boulder and looking for a place to rent . In 2006, compared with 2001, international students were more likely to report that they would feel comfortable hanging out at the University student center, using the recreation center, and hanging out on the Hill, but less comfortable in the event they had to interact with Boulder city police. Students in the combined group also reported that they would feel more comfortable hanging out on the Hill. Students in all groups except the international group showed a decline, from 2001 to 2006, in the extent to which they would feel comfortable using the recreation center.  For Asian-American students, there was also a notable decline in the extent to which they would feel comfortable interacting with campus police, compared with more modest declines for students in all other groups.

With respect to students' ratings of "UCB as a place to be" there were modest declines between 2001 and 2006 in white students' ratings of UCB as a place to be "for you as a group member" and "for you"; in Asian-American students' ratings of UCB as a place to be "for you as a group member" and "for your group"; and in the combined group's ratings of UCB as a place to be "for you" and "for your group".

As was the case for undergraduate students, there were both positive and negative cross-time changes in graduate students' ratings of the extent to which they think various campus groups value diversity.  Although there were modest increases from 2001 to 2006 in Asian-American, white, and international students' ratings of the extent to which they think diversity is valued by the Boulder community, the ratings of students in the combined group showed a modest decline. Compared with 2001, white graduate students' ratings of the extent to which they think diversity is valued by University administration and staff were higher in 2006, as, to a lesser extent, were international students' ratings.  With the exception of international students, graduate students' ratings of the extent to which they think diversity is valued by students declined somewhat from 2001 to 2006. From 2001 to 2006, Asian-American students and students in the combined group also showed declines in their ratings of the extent to which they think diversity is valued by student government.

Other Strategies for Making Over-Time Comparisons of the 2001 and 2006 Data

The preceding highlights of over-time comparisons of undergraduate and graduate data focused on selected items we think are of general interest. The reported information comprises examples chosen from a large amount of available information (data from 101 items for undergraduates and graduate students in six different race/ethnic groups), and we could, of course, have taken other approaches to summarizing key findings. We will briefly mention a few of those approaches here.

Largest effect sizes, by group

In considering change, we could focus on changes of the greatest magnitude between 2001 and 2006. We have included, in a large Excel file, effect sizes, which indicate the magnitude of change in mean scores on items and scales between 2001 and 2006. The Excel file also contains means and standard deviations for each item and scale. We have categorized the effect sizes as small (.21-.49), medium (.50-.79), or large (.80 or greater). A discussion of effect sizes and their interpretation is available here.

In the Excel sheet labeled "Top 5", we present the five items and/or multiple-item scales with the largest effect sizes for each combination of racial/ethnic group and student level (undergraduate and graduate). This approach to interpreting the data offers a thumbnail impression of each of these groups. We can see, for example, that the largest effect sizes for white undergraduate students are all small in magnitude (-0.2) and that the largest effect sizes for white graduate students and for Asian-American undergraduates are all modest in size (absolute values of .4 to .6).

Among African-American undergraduate students, those surveyed in 2006 perceived the campus social climate as more racist, both inside and outside the classroom (effect size = 1.3), and they rated the campus less positively as "a place to be for you" (effect size = -1.4), compared with those surveyed in 2001. Among African-American graduate students, on the other hand, those surveyed in 2006 perceived the campus more positively than those surveyed in 2001, as reflected by higher mean scores on measures of feeling comfortable interacting with faculty/course instructors outside the classroom, feeling comfortable looking for a place to rent in Boulder, feeling accepted, and feeling intellectually stimulated. Please note, however, that the relatively small numbers of African-American graduate students who participated in the 2001 and 2006 surveys indicate that these latter findings should be interpreted with caution.

By using a data filter (illustrated on the "info" sheet of the Excel file) to display the largest effect sizes in the table (absolute values of 1.5 to 2.7), we can see that the most pronounced differences (both positive and negative in nature) between the 2001 and 2006 surveys occurred among graduate students of color (African-American, Asian-American, Hispanic/Latino) and among international and Native-American undergraduates. Overall, however, there appear to be no within-group or across-group patterns or consistencies in the items characterized by these large effect sizes.

By using data filters, users of the Excel file can also examine whether particular items or scales are common to the "top 5" effect sizes for students at different levels and/or in different race/ethnic groups. We find, for example, that, compared with undergraduates surveyed in 2001, Hispanic undergraduates in 2006 reported more often hearing both faculty and students make disparaging remarks about men, while white undergraduates reported less often hearing such remarks.

Large effect sizes, overall

For some groups of students, the "top 5" effect sizes may include only a subset of all large effect sizes for that group. The Excel file of effect sizes also contains a sheet labeled "All". Data in this sheet include the effect sizes for all items and scales for all racial/ethnic groups at both student levels (undergraduate and graduate). Effect sizes are categorized as small, medium, or large; and users of this table may filter the data to display, for example, only those items with large effect sizes.

Using this strategy, we see, for example, that among African-American undergraduates there are large effect sizes on three dozen survey items and scales. Students in 2006, compared with those in 2001, describe CU-Boulder as less supportive of diversity, as indicated by higher mean scores on the frequency with which both students and faculty make disparaging remarks about various groups of people (racial/ethnic minorities, people with strong religious beliefs, people with disabilities, etc.) and higher mean scores on indicators of intolerance both inside and outside of the classroom (e.g., more disrespectful, homophobic, and racist) and lower mean scores on indicators of tolerance both inside and outside of the classroom (e.g., less civil, friendly, and accepting of diversity).

As another example, there are no large effect sizes in Asian-American undergraduates' perceptions of the campus social climate between 2001 and 2006. Among Asian-American graduate students, however, there are indications that those in 2006 perceived the campus climate less favorably than their peers in 2001, as reflected by higher mean scores on the frequency with which students make disparaging remarks about various groups of people and by higher mean scores on several indicators of intolerance outside of the classroom.

As a final example, among international undergraduates there are large effect sizes on 41 survey items and scales. The number of international undergraduates who completed the 2006 survey, however, is relatively small. Consequently, we would advise that these data be cautiously interpreted.

Multiple-item scales

Another approach to identifying key findings is to combine items into multiple-item scales that assess constructs of interest. These scales are described here. Examples include students' Comfort in Class, perceived Campus Value on Diversity, and students' Likelihood to Challenge Derogatory Remarks/Behavior. This strategy has the advantage of summarizing information over several multiple-item indicators but may obscure more detailed information about the nature of change.

We can take the 11-item scale of Students Disparaging Remarks as an example. This summary scale comprises items that assess frequency with which students report hearing other students make disparaging remarks about members of various groups (e.g., people with disabilities, women, people with strong religious beliefs.) Compared with undergraduate students in 2001, undergraduates in 2006:

• showed essentially no change on this measure (Asian-American and white students),
• reported hearing such remarks less frequently on average (Native Americans and international students), or
• reported hearing such remarks more frequently on average (African-American and Hispanic students).

When we examine the individual items in the scale, we find that among Hispanic undergraduate students, the greatest changes have occurred in reported frequency of student remarks about men and in-state students. Among African-American undergraduates, the greatest changes have occurred in reported frequency of student remarks about racial/ethnic minorities, whites, out-of-state students, and non-native English speakers.

This approach to the data in the Excel file of effect sizes is facilitated by first filtering the data to view mean scores on the scale of interest and then expanding the visible data in the Excel table to include the component items for race/ethnic groups of particular interest. See the info tab of the Excel for information about using data filters.

Overall, we found little consistency in scale differences across time. The exceptions are:

• Compared with 2001, international undergraduates in 2006 perceived a more negative social climate on campus, as reflected by lower mean scores on measures of comfort in class, campus diversity, campus climate for underrepresented groups, and contact with people of diverse backgrounds. These students did, however, also report lower mean scores on the measure of frequency of hearing students' disparaging remarks about others.
• Compared with 2001, Hispanic graduate students in 2006 perceived a more negative social climate on campus, as reflected by lower mean scores on measures of comfort in class, campus diversity, and campus climate for underrepresented groups, and by higher mean scores on the measure of frequency of hearing students' disparaging remarks about others.
• Compared with 2001, African-American undergraduate students in 2006 perceived a more negative social climate on campus, as reflected by lower mean scores on the measure of campus climate for underrepresented groups, and by higher mean scores on the measure of frequency of hearing students' disparaging remarks about others.

Conclusion

The examples presented above provide some ideas or strategies for making the data more manageable for users of the Excel file of effect sizes. We encourage users of this site to explore the data more fully to address topics and issues of particular interest to them.

Graphs of over time comparisons

Last revision 05/17/10