|Submission Date||Feb. 24, 2015|
University of Missouri
PA-5: Assessing Diversity and Equity
Sr. Recycling & Waste Minimization Specialist
Has the institution assessed diversity and equity in terms of campus climate?:
A brief description of the campus climate assessment(s) :
Building on earlier campus climate students from 2001-2005 and 2009 which studied the experiences of specific populations on campus, the University of Missouri conducted a comprehensive campus climate study of faculty, staff and students in Spring 2012. Data were collected from 3,380 respondents through an online survey and is currently being analyzed.
The 2001-2005 MU Campus Climate Study was a rigorous and comprehensive self-evaluation that provided new information about how majority and minority group members perceived the current climate for diversity at MU for six groups: women, people of color, people with disabilities, lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) individuals, non-Christian religious minorities, and non-native English speakers.
Data collection for Phase I began in the fall of 2001, which involved MU’s participation in the Rankin National Climate Study. There were three simultaneous phases of data collection in 2002, and the fifth and final phase of data collection was completed in February 2005. Data was collected from nearly 6,000 faculty, staff, students and administrators at MU across all five phases of data collection. In addition, three volumes of reports were prepared and disseminated containing nearly 500 pages of findings and information, which can be found here: http://diversity.missouri.edu/about/climate/2001-2005/index.php
Has the institution assessed student diversity and educational equity?:
A brief description of the student diversity and educational equity assessment(s):
The 2009 campus climate survey was used to provide comparative data for earlier campus climate research from 2001 through 2005. Unlike the previous series of studies, the focus was solely on students. All undergraduate, graduate and professional students were notified and invited to participate via mass e-mail, MU Info and campus promotions. A self-selection of 3,522 or 12 percent of the student population responded. Participants were predominantly undergraduate (77.4 percent), female (66.5 percent), White/European American (80.4 percent), Heterosexual (90.1 percent), and without disabilities (92.1 percent)
When asked about numerical diversity on campus, students of color were less satisfied than white students with the number of students, faculty, and staff. Moreover, students of color were less satisfied with the overall climate than white students. When asked about satisfaction with the overall campus climate related to diversity, the most satisfied groups included White, Christian, Political Conservatives, Political Moderates, Veterans, Men, and Women. The least satisfied groups were Transgender, LGBQ, People of color, Religious minorities, People with disabilities, Political liberals, Agnostics/atheists, and non-native English speakers.
Experiences of harassment (17.8 percent), embracing diversity (14.5 percent), and satisfaction with numerical diversity (34.8 percent) each accounted for significant variance in predicting student “satisfaction with overall climate” with the full model accounting for 66.9 percent of the variance in student ratings. Despite clear influences related to personal experiences of harassment and the general climate, we found that the degree to which “students in general” and “administrators” were perceived to embrace diversity were important. Moreover, the central predictor of ratings of overall climate were based on “satisfaction with numerical diversity” for students, faculty and staff, which partially mediated the variance accounted for by personal experiences of harassment.
For the complete executive summary, please visit http://diversity.missouri.edu/about/climate/index.php
Survey with past participants of Diversity 101 (an online course for faculty and staff) revealed that out of complete responses (n=38): 92% of respondents reported that they felt more confident in their ability to engage with individuals who are different from themselves as a result of participating in this online course; 41% reported initiating changes to department policies or practices to be more inclusive; 75% reported that they have made efforts to speak up when people say things that are inappropriate or offensive; and 89% have made an effort to be mindful of when they are applying biases and to stop and question assumptions.
MU Communication faculty and Chancellor’s Diversity Initiative staff are collaborating with students in Freshmen Interest Groups on a research project to test what impact six online diversity education lessons and the race of the avatar mentor in each lesson has on student learning and attitudes.
Has the institution assessed employee diversity and employment equity?:
A brief description of the employee diversity and employment equity assessment(s):
As required by law, the University completes an affirmative action plan which assesses demographic diversity by comparing employee demographics with the demographics of those eligible to seek employment in the identified job group in the identified recruiting region. By law, the appropriate comparator is the job market, not the “communities being served.” The University seeks to remedy underutilization as identified by the Plan.
Additionally, the University seeks to track equity complaints to assess trouble spots and recurring issues. A faculty exit interview system gives departing faculty a final opportunity to alert the University to equity issues that need to be addressed.
Has the institution assessed diversity and equity in terms of governance and public engagement?:
A brief description of the governance and public engagement assessment(s):
The University’s strategic plan addresses diversity and creates measures for assessing progress: “Continually strengthen a diverse, safe and inclusive culture that encourages and rewards interaction across demographics, social, and interpersonal differences”
The website URL where information about the assessment(s) is available:
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE
staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution and complete the Data Inquiry Form.
The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution and complete the Data Inquiry Form.