Toggle between institution and student characteristics below:
Institution |
Student |
First-Year | Senior | Institutions |
Athletic Affiliation1 | ||||
NCAA Division I | 19% | 21% | 9% | |
NCAA Division II | 7% | 8% | 9% | |
NCAA Division III | 9% | 8% | 15% | |
Data not available | 66% | 63% | 66% | |
Barron's Profile of American Colleges Selectivity Index1 | ||||
Noncompetitive | <1% | 1% | 2% | |
Less competitive | 7% | 8% | 12% | |
Competitive | 38% | 41% | 46% | |
Very Competitive | 17% | 17% | 15% | |
Highly to Most Competitive | 9% | 8% | 8% | |
Data not available | 27% | 23% | 17% | |
Carnegie 2015 Basic Classification1 | ||||
Doctoral Universities: Highest Research Activity | 13% | 15% | 5% | |
Doctoral Universities: Higher Research Activity | 10% | 11% | 6% | |
Doctoral Universities: Moderate Research Activity | 8% | 10% | 6% | |
Master's Colleges & Universities: Larger Programs | 22% | 26% | 25% | |
Master's Colleges & Universities: Medium Programs | 7% | 7% | 13% | |
Master's Colleges & Universities: Small Programs | 3% | 3% | 7% | |
Baccalaureate Colleges: Arts & Sciences Focus | 7% | 5% | 14% | |
Baccalaureate Colleges: Diverse Fields | 6% | 5% | 12% | |
Other/Not classified | 23% | 18% | 13% | |
Control1 | ||||
Public | 46% | 55% | 38% | |
Private | 32% | 29% | 54% | |
Data not available | 22% | 16% | 7% | |
Enrollment Size (total undergraduate enrollment) | ||||
Small (fewer than 2,500) | 15% | 13% | 43% | |
Medium (2,500-4,999) | 13% | 12% | 19% | |
Large (5,000-9,999) | 16% | 16% | 15% | |
Very large (10,000 or more) | 34% | 42% | 15% | |
Data not available | 22% | 17% | 8% | |
Locale1 | ||||
City | 42% | 46% | 43% | |
Suburban | 19% | 20% | 22% | |
Town | 15% | 15% | 23% | |
Rural | 2% | 2% | 5% | |
Data not available | 22% | 16% | 8% | |
Minority-Serving Institution1 | ||||
Not a minority-serving institution | 66% | 68% | 78% | |
Historically black colleges and universities | 2% | 2% | 5% | |
Hispanic-serving institution | 7% | 9% | 6% | |
Tribal college or university | <1% | <1% | <1% | |
Other minority-serving institution | 3% | 4% | 4% | |
Data not available | 22% | 16% | 8% | |
U.S. Region and Canada | ||||
New England | 6% | 6% | 8% | |
Mid East | 14% | 13% | 18% | |
Great Lakes | 13% | 13% | 15% | |
Plains | 6% | 7% | 9% | |
Southeast | 20% | 20% | 24% | |
Southwest | 7% | 9% | 8% | |
Rocky Mountains | 4% | 5% | 3% | |
Far West | 9% | 12% | 9% | |
Outlying Areas | <1% | <1% | <1% | |
Canada | 22% | 16% | 8% | |
N | 325,485 | 373,372 | ~1,020 |
1 Not available for Canadian institutions |
2 About 1,020 institutions are included in the data. The precise number is not reported to prevent estimation of an individual institution’s results. |
First-Year | Senior |
Age2 | |||
19 or younger | 65% | <1% | |
20 through 23 | 7% | 53% | |
24 through 29 | 2% | 13% | |
30 through 39 | 1% | 8% | |
40 through 55 | 1% | 6% | |
Over 55 | <1% | <1% | |
Missing | 23% | 19% | |
Distance education status2 | |||
No | 75% | 73% | |
Yes | 3% | 9% | |
Missing | 22% | 18% | |
Enrollment status1 | |||
Part-time | 5% | 17% | |
Full-time | 95% | 83% | |
First-generation student2 | |||
No | 45% | 44% | |
Yes | 32% | 38% | |
Missing | 23% | 18% | |
Grades2 | |||
Mostly A's | 36% | 42% | |
Mostly B's | 34% | 35% | |
Mostly C's or lower | 8% | 5% | |
Missing | 22% | 18% | |
Major field category2 | |||
Arts & Humanities | 7% | 8% | |
Biological Sciences, Agriculture, & Natural Resources | 9% | 8% | |
Physical Sciences, Mathematics, & Computer Science | 5% | 5% | |
Social Sciences | 9% | 11% | |
Business | 11% | 14% | |
Communications, Media, & Public Relations | 3% | 3% | |
Education | 5% | 5% | |
Engineering | 6% | 6% | |
Health Professions | 12% | 12% | |
Social Service Professions | 4% | 4% | |
Other majors (not categorized) | 6% | 5% | |
Missing | 23% | 18% | |
Race or ethnicity1 | |||
American Indian or Alaska Native | <1% | <1% | |
Asian | 4% | 4% | |
Black or African American | 7% | 7% | |
Hispanic or Latino | 9% | 9% | |
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | <1% | <1% | |
White | 40% | 46% | |
Other | <1% | <1% | |
Foreign or nonresident alien | 3% | 2% | |
Two or more races/ethnicities | 3% | 3% | |
Unknown | 3% | 3% | |
Missing | 30% | 26% | |
Residence status2 | |||
Dormitory or other campus housing | 45% | 12% | |
Fraternity or sorority house | <1% | 1% | |
Residence within walking distance of the institution | 7% | 19% | |
Residence farther than walking distance of the institution | 21% | 42% | |
Other | 4% | 7% | |
Missing | 23% | 19% | |
Sex1 | |||
Male | 34% | 35% | |
Female | 65% | 66% | |
Missing | <1% | <1% | |
Student-athlete status2 | |||
No | 70% | 77% | |
Yes | 7% | 5% | |
Missing | 23% | 18% | |
N | 325,485 | 373,372 |
1 Institution-reported |
2 Student-reported |
Here are all the tips, suggestions, and notes to help you make the most of the NSSE Report Builder:
To represent the multi-dimensional nature of student engagement at national, sector, institutional, and intra-institutional levels, NSSE developed ten Engagement Indicators organized within four engagement themes.
To learn more, click on an Engagement Indicator below.
Theme | Engagement Indicators |
---|---|
Academic Challenge |
Higher-Order Learning Reflective & Integrative Learning Learning Strategies Quantitative Reasoning |
Learning with Peers |
Collaborative Learning Discussions with Diverse Others |
Experiences with Faculty |
Student-Faculty Interaction Effective Teaching Practices |
Campus Environment |
Quality of Interactions Supportive Environment |
Higher-Order Learning
Challenging intellectual and creative work is central to student learning and collegiate quality. Colleges and universities promote high levels of student achievement by calling on students to engage in complex cognitive tasks requiring more than mere memorization of facts. This Engagement Indicator captures how much students' coursework emphasizes challenging cognitive tasks such as application, analysis, judgment, and synthesis. Items include:
Reflective & Integrative Learning
Personally connecting with course material requires students to relate their understandings and experiences to the content at hand. Instructors emphasizing reflective and integrative learning motivate students to make connections between their learning and the world around them, reexamining their own beliefs and considering issues and ideas from others' perspectives. Items include:
Learning Strategies
College students enhance their learning and retention by actively engaging with and analyzing course material rather than approaching learning as absorption. Examples of effective learning strategies include identifying key information in readings, reviewing notes after class, and summarizing course material. Knowledge about the prevalence of effective learning strategies helps colleges and universities target interventions to promote student learning and success. Items include:
Quantitative Reasoning
Quantitative literacy—the ability to use and understand numerical and statistical information in everyday life— is an increasingly important outcome of higher education. All students, regardless of major, should have ample opportunities to develop their ability to reason quantitatively—to evaluate, support, and critique arguments using numerical and statistical information. Items include:
Collaborative Learning
Collaborating with peers in solving problems or mastering difficult material deepens understanding and prepares students to deal with the messy, unscripted problems they encounter during and after college. Working on group projects, asking others for help with difficult material or explaining it to others, and working through course material in preparation for exams all represent collaborative learning activities. Items include:
Discussions with Diverse Others
Colleges and universities afford students new opportunities to interact with and learn from others with different backgrounds and life experiences. Interactions across difference, both inside and outside the classroom, confer educational benefits and prepare students for personal and civic participation in a diverse and interdependent world. Items include:
Student-Faculty Interaction
Interactions with faculty can positively influence the cognitive growth, development, and persistence of college students. Through their formal and informal roles as teachers, advisors, and mentors, faculty members model intellectual work, promote mastery of knowledge and skills, and help students make connections between their studies and their future plans. Items include:
Effective Teaching Practices
Student learning is heavily dependent on effective teaching. Organized instruction, clear explanations, illustrative examples, and effective feedback on student work all represent aspects of teaching effectiveness that promote student comprehension and learning. Items include:
Quality of Interactions
College environments characterized by positive interpersonal relations promote student learning and success. Students who enjoy supportive relationships with peers, advisors, faculty, and staff are better able to find assistance when needed, and to learn from and with those around them. Items include:
Supportive Environment
Institutions that are committed to student success provide support and involvement across a variety of domains, including the cognitive, social, and physical. These commitments foster higher levels of student performance and satisfaction. This Engagement Indicator summarizes students' perceptions of how much an institution emphasizes services and activities that support their learning and development. Items include: