LIVING & LEARNING VILLAGES

at NC STATE

10 Years of

Housing System OverviewTotal Bed Spaces 10,251

Residence Halls 6,566Wolf Village 1,208ES King Village 528Western Manor 273 Greek Houses 481

Wolf Ridge 1,195

78 Buildings2.9 Million Square Feet

$565 Million Inventory Replacement Value

• 7 computer labs with 115 workstations, jointly funded by ETF monies, 24/7 access to campus community

• Student study rooms in each residential facility with group collaboration equipment

• Partnership with Writing Tutors program

• Various other tutoring efforts coordinated with Undergraduate Tutorial Center

• Collaboration with Summer Start program

ACADEMIC SUPPORT EFFORTS

Fast FactsFAST FACTS• 76% (3,204) of new freshmen live on campus.

• Students returning to housing have increased 37% between 2005 and 2013 (growth from 2,727 to 3,730).

• Gender Breakdown Women 45%

Men 55%

• Class Representation in Residence Halls, Wolf Ridge and Wolf Village

Freshmen 43%Sophomore 30%Junior 16%Senior 10%Graduate 1%

What are Villages?

• Interest-based living communities.

• Engage students both inside and outside the classroom.

• Partner with entities from around campus for cross-discipline experiences.

• Offer unparalleled living and learning experiences for maximum involvement at NC State.

LIVING & LEARNING VILLAGES

• 2,182 or 28% of students on campus live in 13 Villages

• 1,345, or 42% of new freshmen live in 13 Villages

• 6,491 or 83% of residence hall students live in buildings that house Villages

• Between 2003 and 2013, there were 11,300 individual students in living and learning villages.

STRUCTURE & STAFFING

• Task Force on Living and Learning at NC State

• Administrative Council– Village Director– Housing Staff– DASA Partners– Academic Partners– Campus Partners– Students

• Student Mentors• Scholars and Artists in

Residence

FUNDING• Housing Funding

– $25k program funding– Mentor compensation– General staffing

• Partner Funding– Director salary– Office expenses– In-kind contributions

• Co-funding – Positions– Academic courses

13 VILLAGE OPTIONS

• ARTS Village (132)• EcoVillage (60)• Engineering (98)• First Year College Village

(557)• Global Village (240)• Honors Village (375)• Impact Leadership Village

(108)

Living and Learning Villages• Scholars Village (215)• Second Year Transitions and

Transfer (STATE) Village (85)• Students Advocating for Youth

(SAY) Village (54)• Women in Science and

Engineering (WISE) Village (262)

• Women of Welch (WOW) Village (13)

• Wellness Village (19)

Living and Learning Villages with Second Year Programs

Beginning Fall 2014

Students Living in a Village % Breakdown by Year

Freshmen 70%Sophomores 21%Juniors 6%Seniors 3%

PROGRAMS• Scholars in Residence• WISE and the NC School of

Science and Math• SAY partnership with the

Boys and Girls Club• FYC – Outdoor Adventures

Program• Scholars VIA groups• Global Village trip to DC• Arts Village – Artist in

Residence and Masters Classes

• Honors – Faculty in Residence• WOW – Faculty dinners

VILLAGE IMPACT• WISE Village

– WISE students are retained at a higher rate in the science disciplines than students not in WISE.

– For College of Engineering students, the matriculation rates of WISE students were markedly higher than for other female students in engineering programs, as well being higher than for male students.

– Students who return to WISE for a second year maintain a significantly higher cumulative GPA than non-WISE students and WISE students who do not return for the sophomore year.

VILLAGE IMPACT• FYC VILLAGE

– When the 2008 FYC cohort was compared to peers, FYC students had significantly higher levels of two- and three-year retention than did their matched peers.

– When compared to their peers, FYC students changed majors significantly less often than their matched peers.

– FYC Village residents post higher cumulative GPAs than non-village residents after the 2nd, 4th, 6th, and 8th semesters.

2008 and 2013 Cohort College Preparation by Housing Choice

2008 and 2013 Cohort College Preparation by Housing Choice

2008 Cohort Campus Participation by Housing Type

2008 Cohort Performance by Housing Type

2008 Cohort Performance by Housing Type

2008 Cohort Performance by Housing Type

Cumulative GPA

2008 Cohort Performance by Housing Type

2008 Cohort Performance by Housing Type

2008 Cohort Performance by Housing Type

Conclusion

• NC State is consistent with the literature:– LLV students are better prepared and more

successful– Causality of LLV participation and increased

success cannot be inferred– Student living in Villages participate in more

activities.– LLV participants are retained to University Housing

“It’s the next best thing to home. The Village helped me transition to college. It was a way for strangers to come together around a common interest and become friends.” Gene HoneycuttImpact Leadership Village

“It definitely feel like the people who are a part of a Village get a step up. We get a little bit extra in our first year experiences than people who may not choose to be part of the Village.”Amanda McKnightWomen of Welch Village

“I like the breadth of diversity of people living in the Village. It’s really a community. Everyone cares about learning and not just schooling.”Ravi ChittillaHonors Village

“The Global Village has enhanced my college experience ten-fold.”Hannah DewaneGlobal Village