• A. Purpose and Methodology
• B. Institutional Information
• C. Institutional Culture
• D. Curriculum and Pedagogy
• E. Faculty Roles and Rewards
• F. Mechanisms and Resources
• G. Community-Campus Exchange

C. Institutional Culture

Respondents were asked a series of questions to determine the overall culture of the institution with regard to service/civic engagement. Respondents assessed whether service/civic engagement was a part of the mission statement of strategic plan of the institution, the extent to which the president was involved in and/or advocated for civic engagement on campus, the extent to which the institution supported faculty and students to participate in service-related activities.

Mission Statement and Strategic Plan

The majority of institutions included service/civic engagement in their mission statement (91%) and strategic plan (83%). In the 2003-04 survey, respondents reported that 89% included engagement in its mission statement and 84% in its strategic plan.

President Involvement

Presidential involvement in service/civic engagement was most frequent in terms of publicly promoting service/civic engagement (84%), providing fiscal support (72%), participating in service/civic engagement activities (67%), and service on community boards (66%).

Student Participation in Service/Civic Engagement on Campus

There is a general trend that students were participating at an increased rate in 2004-05 when compared to 2003-04 rates across most categories. Respondents indicated that students were more likely to on service-related committees (80% in 2003-04 versus 82% in 2004-05), act as liaisons to community partners (67% in 2003-04 versus 70% in 2004-05), recruit faculty participation (35% in 2003-04 versus 37% in 2004-05), and act as co-instructors (16% in 2003-04 versus 18% in 2004-05).

For the 16% of respondents that indicated that students were involved in other ways, the most frequent responses included that students (a) are involved in service clubs and organizations; (b) participate and run service-related conferences, trainings, and workshops; and (c) participate on various councils and boards.

Student Voice on Campus

The vast majority of institutions reported that there were formal opportunities for their students to discuss concerns with the administration (88%), was a student government with has autonomous control of funds/activities fees (74%), and that students sit on academic committees (73%). Students were less likely to sit on budgetary committees (43%).

Comparisons between 2003-04 and 2004-05 suggested that there were increases in the percent of students sitting on budget committees (36% versus 43%), sitting on hiring committees (61% versus 63%), and having opportunities to discuss concerns with the administration (86% versus 88%).

For the 10% of respondents that indicated that students had other ways of expressing their voice on campus, the most frequent response was that students were represented on various committees, boards, meetings, and the student government.

Institutional Support for Faculty Involvement in Service/Civic Engagement

As shown in Figure 9, respondents indicated that faculty and administrative staff were most likely to receive institutional support in the form of on site service opportunities, which might include blood drives, or food drives (93%). Faculty were also likely to get support by having opportunities to serve with students as advisors to extracurricular services groups (87%) and service with students on service projects (85%). Faculty were less likely to receive paid time off to participate in service activities (25%).

For those 10% of respondents indicating that there were other ways that their institutions supported faculty and administrative staff, responses include (a) various types of monetary incentives; (b) providing service opportunities for staff to participate in; and (c) awards, recognition, and encouragement.