[- NC State University -]

1999 Graduating Senior Survey Data Tables:
Frequency Distributions of Responses to Survey Items #10, 11, and 12
(Ratings of Academic Services)

 
This document reports the frequency distribution by gender and race/ethnicity of survey items #10, 11, and 12 of the 1999 Graduating Senior Survey. A table comparing mean ratings is available on the web.

Exact wording of question: Based on your last two years on this campus, how would you evaluate each of the following. (If you have not had enough experince with a service to evaluate it, please mark the response "Don't know/did not use" and then skip to the next service.)

Academic Advising | Research Support | Technology Services


Academic Advising

Access to advisor

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

45.2%

46.6%

44.0%

50.0%

45.1%

42.1%

Good

35.0%

31.8%

37.5%

23.1%

35.6%

38.6%

Fair

13.6%

14.8%

12.7%

17.3%

13.6%

10.5%

Poor

6.2%

6.8%

5.8%

9.6%

5.8%

8.8%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Sufficient time with advisor

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

41.1%

43.1%

40.1%

44.2%

42.0%

30.4%

Good

34.5%

31.9%

36.5%

28.8%

34.1%

44.6%

Fair

17.7%

18.3%

17.3%

21.2%

17.9%

12.5%

Poor

6.4%

6.8%

6.0%

5.8%

6.0%

12.5%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Accurate info about degree reqs

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

41.5%

41.7%

41.4%

41.8%

42.6%

26.7%

Good

35.4%

34.4%

36.2%

45.5%

34.5%

38.3%

Fair

18.1%

18.3%

18.0%

5.5%

18.5%

25.0%

Poor

4.9%

5.5%

4.4%

7.3%

4.4%

10.0%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Knowledge of campus policies/procedures

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

35.4%

35.0%

35.7%

38.9%

35.6%

28.6%

Good

41.5%

41.8%

41.2%

40.7%

41.5%

41.1%

Fair

18.2%

18.3%

18.1%

13.0%

18.3%

21.4%

Poor

4.9%

5.0%

4.9%

7.4%

4.5%

8.9%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Academic advising services overall

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

38.4%

38.7%

38.2%

40.7%

38.9%

30.0%

Good

40.5%

40.8%

40.3%

42.6%

40.4%

40.0%

Fair

15.3%

14.4%

15.9%

11.1%

15.2%

20.0%

Poor

5.8%

6.1%

5.6%

5.6%

5.5%

10.0%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top




Research Support

Access to faculty in research

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

28.2%

26.4%

29.3%

11.1

28.7%

41.4%

Good

50.2%

50.2%

50.1%

63.9%

49.5%

44.8%

Fair

15.9%

17.4%

14.9%

16.7%

16.1%

10.3%

Poor

5.8%

6.0%

5.7%

8.3%

5.7%

3.4%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Access to up-to-date facilities (rsrch)

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

36.7%

36.8%

36.6%

37.2%

36.5%

37.8%

Good

45.5%

44.6%

46.0%

41.9%

46.6%

33.3%

Fair

13.9%

14.1%

13.7%

18.6%

12.7%

24.4%

Poor

4.0%

4.5%

3.8%

2.3%

4.1%

4.4%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Research support overall

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

26.1%

26.1%

26.1%

21.4%

26.2%

29.3%

Good

56.8%

56.8%

56.7%

59.5%

57.1%

48.8%

Fair

14.0%

13.2%

14.4%

14.3%

13.5%

19.5%

Poor

3.2%

3.9%

2.7%

4.8%

3.1%

2.4%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top




Technology Services

Access to Internet

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

78.3%

78.2%

78.4%

85.7%

78.0%

75.4%

Good

19.8%

20.0%

19.5%

14.3%

19.9%

23.0%

Fair

1.8%

1.7%

1.9%

0.0%

2.0%

1.6%

Poor

0.1%

0.0%

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

0.0%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Hours for computer ctrs/labs/help desks

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

45.3%

43.3%

46.9%

54.4%

44.2%

52.5%

Good

39.7%

39.7%

39.7%

36.8%

40.4%

32.8%

Fair

11.6%

14.3%

9.5%

8.8%

12.0%

8.2%

Poor

3.4%

2.7%

4.0%

0.0%

3.4%

6.6%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Access to up-to-date facilities (tech)

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

51.7%

54.1%

49.9%

65.5%

50.4%

56.9%

Good

39.8%

38.6%

40.8%

32.7%

40.7%

34.5%

Fair

7.2%

5.8%

8.3%

1.8%

7.6%

6.9%

Poor

1.2%

1.5%

0.9%

0.0%

1.2%

1.7%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Access to trained staff for help

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

22.0%

21.5%

22.4%

36.4%

20.7%

26.4%

Good

43.3%

45.5%

41.6%

52.7%

42.4%

45.3%

Fair

26.2%

25.3%

26.9%

10.9%

27.9%

18.9%

Poor

8.5%

7.6%

9.1%

0.0%

9.0%

9.4%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Technology training classes

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

20.9%

18.8%

22.2%

22.5%

20.2%

28.6%

Good

48.5%

49.0%

48.2%

67.5%

47.5%

45.2%

Fair

21.7%

24.3%

19.9%

2.5%

23.7%

11.9%

Poor

8.9%

7.8%

9.6%

7.5%

8.6%

14.3%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top

Technology services overall

 

All

Women

Men

AfAm

White

Other

Excellent

37.3%

34.7%

39.3%

48.1%

36.4%

40.0%

Good

53.9%

56.9%

51.6%

51.9%

54.4%

48.3%

Fair

8.7%

8.4%

8.9%

0.0%

9.0%

11.7%

Poor

0.1%

0.0%

0.2%

0.0%

0.1%

0.0%

View Mean Ratings: Gender/Ethnicity
Back to top




For more information on the 1999 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: April 2000

Download a Microsoft Excel Version (Excel 5.0 or higher) of this report.

Return to 1999 Graduating Senior Survey Table of Contents Page

Return to OIRP Survey Page

Return to OIRP Home Page