2000-2001 Graduating Senior Survey Data Tables:
College Comparisons
in Academic Environment
This document reports survey data on college/school differences in the respondents' overall assessment of the academic environment at NC State, and their ratings of faculty contributions to their educational experience here. Survey results for all respondents are provided in "2000-2001 Graduating Senior Survey: All Respondents." For information about the survey and analysis methods, see " 2000-2001 Graduating Senior Survey: Introduction, Methods, and Student Demographic Profile."
Satisfaction with Education | Quality of Instruction | Intellectual Environment | Faculty Contributions
Q Choose NC State again?
| NCSU | College/School | ||||||||||
| CALS | Design | CEP | COE | CFR | CHASS | PAMS | COT | COM | |||
| 73.8 | 76.9 | 76.1 | 81.3 | 76.2 | 76.0 | 63.4 | 63.8 | 79.6 | 71.5 | ||
| Yes | % | ||||||||||
| No | % | 8.8 | 5.8 | 15.2 | 10.7 | 6.6 | 7.2 | 16.5 | 8.8 | 3.7 | 9.5 |
| Not Sure | % | 17.4 | 17.3 | 8.7 | 8.0 | 17.2 | 16.8 | 20.1 | 27.5 | 16.7 | 19.0 |
Q Choose same major again?
| NCSU | College/School | ||||||||||
| CALS | Design | CEP | COE | CFR | CHASS | PAMS | COT | COM | |||
| 66.9 | 56.6 | 84.1 | 61.3 | 77.2 | 59.8 | 58.1 | 58.8 | 37.0 | 72.4 | ||
| Yes | % | ||||||||||
| No | % | 14.4 | 20.3 | 2.3 | 17.3 | 8.5 | 19.7 | 21.4 | 15.0 | 29.6 | 11.3 |
| Not Sure | % | 18.7 | 23.1 | 13.6 | 21.3 | 14.3 | 20.5 | 20.6 | 26.3 | 33.3 | 16.4 |
Q Overall Education at NC State
| NCSU | College/School | ||||||||||
| CALS | Design | CEP | COE | CFR | CHASS | PAMS | COT | COM | |||
| Mean | 3.24 | 3.31 | 3.28 | 3.29 | 3.21 | 3.21 | 3.23 | 3.08 | 3.39 | 3.24 | |
| 0.7 | 0.3 | . | . | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 1.3 | . | 1.3 | ||
| 1: Poor | % | ||||||||||
| 2: Fair | % | 8.3 | 5.8 | 10.9 | 11.4 | 9.1 | 7.3 | 7.6 | 11.3 | 9.3 | 7.4 |
| 3: Good | % | 57.0 | 56.1 | 50.0 | 48.3 | 57.6 | 62.1 | 60.4 | 66.3 | 42.6 | 56.9 |
| 4: Excellent | % | 34.0 | 37.8 | 39.1 | 40.3 | 32.3 | 29.8 | 31.6 | 21.3 | 48.1 | 34.3 |
Q Quality of instruction in major
| NCSU | College/School | ||||||||||
| CALS | Design | CEP | COE | CFR | CHASS | PAMS | COT | COM | |||
| Mean | 3.33 | 3.40 | 3.41 | 3.41 | 3.18 | 3.42 | 3.46 | 3.25 | 3.33 | 3.37 | |
| 1.1 | 0.7 | 2.2 | 0.7 | 1.9 | 0.8 | 0.4 | 1.3 | 1.9 | 0.8 | ||
| 1: Poor | % | ||||||||||
| 2: Fair | % | 9.7 | 7.8 | 6.5 | 7.9 | 14.6 | 8.0 | 4.8 | 15.0 | 11.1 | 6.6 |
| 3: Good | % | 44.5 | 42.2 | 39.1 | 41.1 | 47.6 | 39.2 | 43.3 | 41.3 | 38.9 | 46.9 |
| 4: Excellent | % | 44.7 | 49.3 | 52.2 | 50.3 | 35.9 | 52.0 | 51.6 | 42.5 | 48.1 | 45.6 |
Q Quality of instruction overall
| NCSU | College/School | ||||||||||
| CALS | Design | CEP | COE | CFR | CHASS | PAMS | COT | COM | |||
| Mean | 2.93 | 2.92 | 2.73 | 3.07 | 2.85 | 2.95 | 3.00 | 2.94 | 2.96 | 2.99 | |
| 0.9 | 1.0 | . | 2.1 | 1.3 | . | 0.4 | 1.3 | . | 0.5 | ||
| 1: Poor | % | ||||||||||
| 2: Fair | % | 18.5 | 17.7 | 28.9 | 13.1 | 22.2 | 19.2 | 17.1 | 15.0 | 17.0 | 15.2 |
| 3: Good | % | 67.4 | 69.6 | 68.9 | 60.7 | 67.2 | 66.4 | 65.0 | 72.5 | 69.8 | 69.0 |
| 4: Excellent | % | 13.2 | 11.6 | 2.2 | 24.1 | 9.3 | 14.4 | 17.5 | 11.3 | 13.2 | 15.2 |
Q Intellectual environment on campus
| NCSU | College/School | ||||||||||
| CALS | Design | CEP | COE | CFR | CHASS | PAMS | COT | COM | |||
| Mean | 3.76 | 3.78 | 3.43 | 3.84 | 3.73 | 3.81 | 3.74 | 3.63 | 3.96 | 3.81 | |
| 0.7 | . | 2.2 | 0.7 | 0.6 | . | 0.8 | . | 1.9 | 1.1 | ||
| 1: Very weak | % | ||||||||||
| 2: Weak | % | 2.9 | 1.4 | 6.5 | 2.0 | 4.1 | 1.6 | 1.6 | 5.0 | 1.9 | 2.7 |
| 3: Average | % | 29.3 | 30.7 | 41.3 | 26.2 | 29.8 | 25.6 | 33.2 | 35.0 | 17.0 | 26.4 |
| 4: Strong | % | 54.0 | 56.9 | 45.7 | 55.0 | 52.1 | 63.2 | 51.6 | 52.5 | 56.6 | 53.9 |
| 5: Very strong | % | 13.2 | 11.0 | 4.3 | 16.1 | 13.3 | 9.6 | 12.8 | 7.5 | 22.6 | 16.0 |
For more information on the 2000-2001 Graduating Senior Survey contact:
Dr. Nancy Whelchel, Associate Director for Survey Research
Office of Institutional Planning and Research
Box 7002
NCSU
Phone: (919) 515-4184
Email: Nancy_Whelchel@ncsu.edu
Posted: October, 2001
Download an Excel version of this report.
Return to 2000-2001 Graduating Senior Survey Table of Contents Page