Table of Contents I. Survey and Project Overview 3 II. Snapshot: Selected Items 4 III. Administration Summary 9 IV. CECE Indicator Report 10 a. Overview 11 b. Cultural Familiarity 12 c. Culturally Relevant Knowledge 13 d. Cultural Community Service 14 e. Cross Cultural Engagement 15 f. Cultural Validation 16 g. Collectivist Cultural Orientation 17 h. Humanized Education Environment 18 i. Proactive Philosophies 19 j. Holistic Support 20 V. Item Frequencies & Respondent Profile 21 2
Survey and Project Overview The Culturally Engaging Campus Environments (CECE; pronounced see-see) Survey is designed to measure the 9 CECE indicators that represent the characteristics of optimally inclusive and equitable campus environments. These indicators also denote the 9 elements of environments that allow diverse populations to thrive in college. College and university campuses can use the CECE Survey and these 9 CECE indicators to: Create dialogue that is centered on the things that matter most when serving diverse student populations. Diagnose their campus environments from an inclusion and equity perspective. Identify where these environments can be improved. Develop plans to cultivate more inclusive and equitable environments. Create environments that maximize success among all students regardless of their backgrounds and identities. The CECE Project provides a wide array of services for institutions of higher education that seek to advance their campus diversity, inclusion, and equity efforts. The CECE Project s mission is founded on four core pillars: Equity: We focus on the goal of equity, or creating systems and structures that provide equal opportunities for faculty, staff, and students to thrive regardless of their backgrounds and identities. Transformation: We believe that isolated and surface level changes are not sufficient to address the diversity problems that college campuses face. Solutions require a commitment to long-term and systemic efforts to solve systemic problems and positively transform institutions. Such systemic efforts require re-examining and re-thinking the cultures and structures of colleges and universities. Vision: We believe that diversity, inclusion, and equity efforts are more effective when communities have a common vision and are working toward the same goals. The CECE Model delineates the types of environments that all students need to access in order to thrive in college, and this model is central to our work. Inquiry: We believe that high-quality and well-executed research and assessment is integral to generating the knowledge that is needed to inform continuous improvement efforts in the areas of diversity, inclusion, and equity. 3
Snapshot The CECE Survey is designed to measure the 9 CECE indicators that represent the characteristics of optimally inclusive and equitable institutional environments. These indicators also denote the 9 elements of environments that allow diverse populations to thrive in college. This Snapshot is a concise collection of key findings from your institution s CECE Survey administration. This information can help stimulate discussion about your campus culture. CECE Indicators The CECE Survey measures student perceptions of the presence of culturally engaging campus environments. At right are summary results for your institution. Key: Cultural Familiarity 59.8 54.9 Culturally Relevant Knowledge comparison 45.8 46.9 Your students' average was significantly higher (p <.05) with an effect size at least.3 in magnitude Your students' average was significantly higher (p <.05) with an effect size less than.3 in magnitude Cultural Community Service Cross Cultural Engagement 48.8 46.5 47.9 45.1 Your students' average was significantly lower (p <.05) with an effect size less than.3 in magnitude Your students' average was significantly lower (p <.05) with an effect size at least.3 in magnitude There was no statistically significant difference between your institution s average score and the comparison group Cultural Validation 44.4 44.8 Collectivist Cultural Environment Humanized Educational Environment 63.1 62.3 54.1 63.0 Proactive Philosophies 50.7 51.0 Holistic Support 58.6 59.8 4
How Students Assess Their Experience The CECE Survey included items related to sense of belonging, academic self-efficacy, academic motivation, and cultural appreciation. The charts below report the percentage of students that indicated their agreement to four of these items across groups, for your institution and for all of the institutions that administered in the CECE Survey in 2015-2016. 1 I feel like I belong on this campus Percentage who agreed or strongly agreed 56% 63% 48% 49% 88% 63% 6 7 49% 15% 1 Asian/Asian American Black/African American Hispanic/Latino Native American White Multiracial Sense of Belonging Sense of belonging refers to the degree to which students feel they belong to the campus community. 73% 54% 57% Male 57% First generation 66% Female 72% 63% 67% Not first generation 39% 64% Part time 69% 7 Full time 1 For the purposes of this report, your institution is compared with all other campuses that administered CECE in 2015-2016. However, given that 2015-2016 was a pilot year and a small number of campuses participated, we are unable to release information about the list of campuses that are included in these graphs. Please note that comparisons are not meant to be a measure of quality or performance; rather, they are included here to demonstrate how this comparison will be incorporated into future CECE reports. 5
Compared to when you first entered college, how would you describe your ability to be academically successful? Percentage who selected better or much better Asian/Asian American 86% 74% 81% 71% 71% 7 68% 7 74% 72% 58% Black/African American Hispanic/Latino Native American White Multiracial Academic Self-Efficacy Academic self-efficacy refers to students perceptions of their own abilities to do well in school. 77% 76% 79% Male Not first generation 7 Female 73% 72% First generation 68% 71% 72% 73% Part time Full time 6
Compared to when you first entered college, how would you describe your commitment to continue learning throughout your lifetime? Percentage who responded somewhat or much better 71% 73% 78% 82% 61% 64% 45% 6 73% 68% 81% 56% Asian/Asian American Black/African American Hispanic/Latino Native American White Multiracial Academic Motivation 66% 74% 72% 66% Academic motivation refers to students motivation to learn in college and beyond. Male Female 72% 77% 81% 65% Not first generation First generation 64% 79% 68% 7 Part time Full time 7
Compared to when you first entered college, how would you describe your appreciation of different cultures? Percentage who selected better or much better 76% 67% 81% 85% 51% 67% 58% 6 63% 56% 52% 52% Asian/Asian American Black/African American Hispanic/Latino Native American White Multiracial Cultural Appreciation Cultural appreciation refers to the extent to which students appreciate diverse cultures and communities. 69% Male 79% 63% 63% 58% 64% Not first generation Female 52% 58% First generation 58% 53% 77% 62% Part time Full time 8
Administration Summary This section provides an overview of your CECE administration, including details about your sample, response rates, survey customization options, and recruitment message schedule. This information can be useful for assessing data quality and planning future CECE administrations. For more respondent characteristics, see the Respondent Profile section of this report. Introduction During the 2015-2016 academic year, the Culturally Engaging University (CEU) worked with the CECE Project to conduct a school-wide assessment for its undergraduate students. The purpose of this assessment was to understand how CEU cultivates an inclusive, equitable, and supportive campus environment for diverse students. Through analyzing the data collected from the CECE undergraduate survey, this assessment produces insights regarding the undergraduate students perceptions and experiences of the CEU campus environments. This report offers a summary of the key findings to inform institutional policies and practices that aim to achieve CEU s mission and vision to examine, understand, and improve their campus environments and maximize success among diverse student populations (CEU s Mission & Vision, 2016). 2 Procedures The CECE Project administered the CECE survey to the CEU undergraduate population. The CECE undergraduate survey included 83 items. The survey was disseminated to the CEU s undergraduate students between April 18 and June 3 of 2016 using the Qualtrics online survey system. The initial email invitation was sent on April 18, and five weekly reminder emails were sent on April 25, May 9, 23, and 30 to encourage survey participation and completion. CEU s undergraduate students who were at least 18 years old and were enrolled during the time of administration were eligible survey participants and invited to participate in the survey. With regard to survey incentives, the CEU offered $15 gift cards to their campus bookstore to student participants who completed and submitted the survey before the survey closure on June 3, 2016. The survey was sent out to 6,126 undergraduate students, and there were a total of 582 recorded responses, which yielded an approximate 9.4% response rate. The survey data was analyzed to illuminate school-wide perspective and compare views and experiences across subgroups. 2 CEU is a fictional institution. Mission and vision statement is that of the Engaging Campus Environments Project (2016). Retrieved from http://cece.indiana.edu/ 9
CECE Indicator Report CECE indicators provide a useful summary of the detailed information contained in your students CECE survey responses. By combining responses to related CECE questions, each indicator offers valuable information about a distinct aspect of the campus environment. Nine indicators, each measured by three to six survey questions, are organized into two broad themes: Cultural Relevance Cultural familiarity Culturally relevant knowledge Cultural community service Meaningful cross-cultural engagement Cultural validation Cultural Responsiveness Collectivist cultural orientations Humanized educational environments Proactive philosophies Holistic Support How CECE Indicator Scores are Computed In the CECE Indicator Report, each Indicator score is expressed on an 80-point scale. Component items are converted to an 80-point scale (e.g., for positively worded items, the scale scores would be as follows: Strongly Disagree = 0, Somewhat Disagree = 20, Neither Disagree nor Agree = 40, Somewhat Agree = 60, Strongly Agree = 80), and then averaged together to compute student-level scores. Thus, a score of zero means a student responded at the bottom of the scale for every item in the CECE Indicator, while a score of 80 indicates responses at the top of the scale on every item. Institutional CECE scores are the averages of student-level scores for each group under comparison (e.g., aggregate, racial groups, gender, and enrollment status). Report Sections Overview: Displays how average CECE scores for your students compare with the students at all CECE 2016 institutions. Mean Comparisons: Straightforward comparisons of average indicator scores between your institution and all CECE 2015-2016 institutions, with tests of significance and effect size. Effect size indicates the practical importance of an observed difference. Comparisons with an effect size of at least.3 in magnitude (before rounding) are highlighted in the overview. Indicator reports: These reports include within-institution comparison of mean scores for selected groups of students (arranged by gender, enrollment status, generation status, and race). These reports also include a summary of indicator items: responses to each item in a given CECE indicator are provided (as the percent somewhat agreeing or strongly agreeing with each item). 10
Overview The chart below provides a snapshot of your student s average scores on the nine CECE indicators, and how they compare to student scores from all CECE 2016 institutions. Use the following key to interpret your indicator report charts. Your students' average was significantly higher (p <.05) with an effect size at least.3 in magnitude Your students' average was significantly higher (p <.05) with an effect size less than.3 in magnitude Your students' average was significantly lower (p <.05) with an effect size less than.3 in magnitude Your students' average was significantly lower (p <.05) with an effect size at least.3 in magnitude There was no statistically significant difference between your institution s average score and the comparison group Cultural Familiarity 59.7 54.9 comparison to Culturally Relevant Knowledge 46.1 46.9 Cultural Community Service 51.6 46.5 Cross Cultural Engagement 44.8 45.1 Cultural Validation 44.7 44.8 Collectivist Cultural Environment 62.7 62.3 Humanized Educational Environment 55.2 63.0 Proactive Philosophies 49.5 51.0 Holistic Support 58.6 59.8 In the following section, you are provided with mean comparison information, including statistical significance and effect size, for each CECE indicator across specific subgroups. You are also provided with a table displaying the percentage of students for your institution and the comparison group who selected somewhat agree or strongly agree to each of the items associated with that indicator. 11
Cultural Familiarity Campus spaces for students to connect with faculty, staff, and peers who understand their cultural backgrounds, identities, and experiences. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Cultural Familiarity indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. Asian/Asian American 59.7 54.4 Black/African American 49.3 40.0 comparison to Hispanic/Latino 51.4 44.3 Native American 40.1 43.8 White 58.8 59.0 Multiracial 55.9 42.4 Male 53.3 55.7 Female 55.7 55.1 First-generation 52.7 54.8 Not first-generation 56.0 55.9 Part-time 49.9 52.9 Full-time 56.1 55.7 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Cultural Familiarity item for your institution and the comparison group. CEU CECE 15-16 It is easy to find people on campus with similar backgrounds as me. 68% 7 I interact with people from similar backgrounds as me frequently on campus. On campus, there is sufficient space for me to connect with people from my community. 72% 66% 59% 64% 12
Culturally Relevant Knowledge Opportunities for students to learn about their own cultural communities via culturally relevant curricular and co-curricular opportunities. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Culturally Relevant Knowledge indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. UM Flint comparison to Asian/Asian American 55.2 45.4 Black/African American 34.9 31.4 Hispanic/Latino 53.3 37.2 Native American 37.2 34.0 White 50.6 50.8 Multiracial 45.0 35.5 Male 50.2 48.1 Female 51.7 46.8 First-generation 59.8 45.7 Not first-generation 52.9 50.1 Part-time 52.1 46.2 Full-time 49.6 47.5 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Culturally Relevant Knowledge item for your institution and the comparison group. CEU CECE 15-16 On campus, there are enough opportunities to learn about the culture of my own community. On campus, there are enough opportunities to learn about important issues within my own cultural community. On campus there are enough opportunities to gain knowledge about my own cultural community. Cultural Community Service 62% 71% 48% 59% 47% 13
Opportunities for students to give back to and positively transform their home communities. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Cultural Community Service indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. comparison to Asian/Asian American 49.6 43.8 Black/African American 61.2 34.6 Hispanic/Latino 47.4 37.0 Native American 57.8 31.7 White 53.1 50.6 Multiracial 42.7 37.3 Male 52.9 49.2 Female 47.7 45.5 First-generation 59.4 45.1 Not first-generation 52.8 49.9 Part-time 48.1 46.4 Full-time 47.3 46.7 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Cultural Community Service item for your institution and the comparison group. At my institution, there are enough opportunities to help improve the lives of people in my cultural community. At my institution, there are enough opportunities to give back to my cultural community. At my institution, there are enough opportunities to positively impact my cultural community. CEU CECE 15-16 59% 47% 62% 47% 66% Meaningful Cross Cultural Engagement 14
Programs and practices that facilitate educationally meaningful cross-cultural interactions among their students that focus on solving real social and political problems. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Cross Cultural Engagement indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. comparison to Asian/Asian American 48.9 46.2 Black/African American 42.8 43.6 Hispanic/Latino 45.5 44.2 Native American 41.7 45.2 White 49.9 44.9 Multiracial 40.1 40.1 Male 47.2 45.4 Female 46.1 45.1 First-generation 46.7 45.3 Not first-generation 47.3 44.9 Part-time 48.0 45.6 Full-time 48.0 45.0 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Cross Cultural Engagement item for your institution and the comparison group. UM Flint CECE 15-16 On campus, there are enough opportunities to discuss important social issues with people from different cultural backgrounds. On campus, there are enough opportunities to discuss important political issues with people from different cultural backgrounds. 68% 61% 72% 54% On campus, there are NOT enough opportunities to discuss important issues with people from different cultural backgrounds. 31% 31% Cultural Validation 15
Campus cultures that validate the cultural backgrounds, knowledge, and identities of diverse students. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Cultural Validation indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. comparison to Asian/Asian American 45.2 45.9 Black/African American 46.7 37.3 Hispanic/Latino 51.3 40.1 Native American 29.9 36.1 White 54.6 45.7 Multiracial 41.1 40.8 Male 44.5 45.2 Female 45.8 44.7 First-generation 44.1 44.3 Not first-generation 45.7 46.0 Part-time 43.9 44.5 Full-time 44.1 44.9 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Cultural Validation item for your institution and the comparison group. In general, people on campus value knowledge from my cultural community. CEU CECE 15-16 63% 6 In general, my cultural community is valued on campus. 58% 61% In general, people on campus do NOT value my cultural community. 31% 17% Collectivist Cultural Orientations 16
Campuses cultures that emphasize a collectivist, rather than individualistic, cultural orientation that is characterized by teamwork and pursuit of mutual success. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Collectivist Cultural Orientations indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. Asian/Asian American 51.2 60.0 comparison to Black/African American 55.1 54.2 Hispanic/Latino 57.3 56.5 Native American 55.8 57.0 White 69.6 66.3 Multiracial 50.5 52.1 Male 71.4 62.8 Female 59.3 62.7 First-generation 59.9 62.3 Not first-generation 60.2 63.7 Part-time 61.5 61.2 Full-time 65.8 63.0 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Collectivist Cultural Orientation item for your institution and the comparison group. CEU CECE 15-16 In general, people on this campus help each other succeed. 79% 82% In general, people on this campus support each other. 68% 82% In general, people on this campus work together toward common goals. 72% 8 Humanized Educational Environments 17
Availability of opportunities for students to develop meaningful relationships with faculty and staff members who care about and are committed to their success. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Humanized Educational Environments indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. comparison to Asian/Asian American 58.3 59.5 Black/African American 58.5 59.7 Hispanic/Latino 72.2 59.0 Native American 57.9 58.3 White 65.4 66.2 Multiracial 62.8 56.2 Male 60.9 64.4 Female 63.3 62.8 First-generation 58.8 62.2 Not first-generation 63.2 65.3 Part-time 59.7 62.8 Full-time 61.9 63.1 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Humanized Educational Environment item for your institution and the comparison group. CEU CECE 15-16 In general, educators care about students on my campus. 81% 82% In general, educators on campus are committed to my success. 8 In general, I view educators on my campus as caring human beings. 79% 82% 18
Proactive Philosophies Philosophies that lead educators to proactively bring important information, opportunities, and support services to students, rather than waiting for students to seek them out or hunt them down on their own. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Proactive Philosophies indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. comparison to Asian/Asian American 53.9 52.8 Black/African American 46.7 47.3 Hispanic/Latino 48.1 50.3 Native American 55.2 51.8 White 51.4 50.6 Multiracial 49.2 44.7 Male 51.4 52.9 Female 51.1 50.2 First-generation 50.4 50.8 Not first-generation 52.1 51.6 Part-time 49.3 49.6 Full-time 53.6 51.5 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Proactive Philosophies item for your institution and the comparison group. People on this campus often send me important information about new learning opportunities. People on this campus often send me important information about support that is available on campus. On campus, I feel like I have to hunt down new learning opportunities on my own. Holistic Support CEU CECE 15-16 71% 76% 7 66% 28% 38% 19
Access to at least one faculty or staff member that they are confident will provide the information they need, offer the help they seek, or connect them with the information or support that they require regardless of the problem or issue that they face. The table below displays the mean group scores for the Holistic Support indicator, and how that group compares to all of the students from that group for the CECE 2016 administration. comparison to Asian/Asian American 58.1 56.2 Black/African American 48.7 56.0 Hispanic/Latino 59.9 57.6 Native American 51.0 53.3 White 66.2 63.4 Multiracial 57.2 48.5 Male 59.3 60.9 Female 59.9 59.7 First-generation 52.2 59.2 Not first-generation 60.1 62.1 Part-time 57.3 56.8 Full-time 57.9 31.0 The table below displays the percentage of students who selected somewhat or strongly agree to each Holistic Support item for your institution and the comparison group. If I need support, I know a person on campus who I can trust to give me that support. If I have a problem, I know a person on campus who I can trust to help me solve that problem. If I need information, I know a person on campus who I can trust to give me the information I need. CEU CECE 15-16 72% 74% 66% 73% 7 79% Item Frequencies & Respondent Profile 20
The Item Frequencies and Respondent Profile reports present item-by-item student responses (count and percentage) as well as student-reported demographic information. The report includes the following features: Item wording and variable names: Survey items are in the same order and wording as they appear on the instrument. Values and response options: Variable names are included for easy reference to your data file and codebook. Also, variable response options are provided; these are also worded as they appear on the instrument. Count and column percentages: The Count column contains the number of students who selected the corresponding response options. The column percentage is the percentage of students selecting the corresponding response option. Please see attached document for item frequencies and respondent profile. Important Notes 1. This report focuses on data generated from the CECE Undergraduate Survey. A CECE Graduate Survey for graduate students was made available in 2016 and a CECE Faculty Survey will be made available in 2017. 2. Subsequent annual reports will include a comparison of UHWO s CECE indicator scores across time, so that your campus can track progress toward cultivating more diverse, inclusive, and equitable campus environments. 3. Although the CECE Project understands that campuses seek to utilize survey results to inform institutional improvement efforts, the ways in which campuses should apply CECE survey findings will vary across institutions and depend on each organization s history, culture, and community context. As a result, the CECE Project does not provide recommendations within its annual reports. The project does offer holistic organizational diversity assessments, professional development services, expert consultations, and institutional change toolkits that can be leveraged in combination with the CECE indicators to cultivate more diverse, inclusive, and equitable environments. 21