Military Education: Student and Faculty Perceptions of Student	 
Life at the Military Academies (12-SEP-03, GAO-03-1001).	 
                                                                 
The Army, Navy, and Air Force each operate an academy to educate 
and train young men and women to become leaders and effective	 
junior officers in the military services. The approximately 4,000
students who attend each academy undergo a challenging 4-year	 
program of academic, physical, and military education that	 
culminates in a bachelor's degree and a commission as a military 
officer. In addition to completing academic course work, students
must participate in rigorous military training and in mandatory  
athletic activities. In return for their free education, these	 
students must serve on active duty for 5 years after graduation. 
In two reports, GAO reviewed all three service academies and	 
their preparatory schools. In this report, GAO surveyed students 
and faculty to obtain their perceptions of various aspects of	 
student life at the academies. GAO conducted a Web-based survey  
of 12,264 students and 2,065 faculty members at the three service
academies on questions related to such student life issues as	 
academic and military programs; gender- and race-/ethnicity-based
discrimination and harassment; and preferential treatment. GAO's 
survey did not query students and faculty on specific incidents  
of alleged sexual assault at the academies. We are making no	 
recommendations in this report. DOD reviewed a draft of this	 
report and had no comments.					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-03-1001					        
    ACCNO:   A08415						        
  TITLE:     Military Education: Student and Faculty Perceptions of   
Student Life at the Military Academies				 
     DATE:   09/12/2003 
  SUBJECT:   Academic achievement				 
	     College students					 
	     Education or training				 
	     Educational research				 
	     Educational standards				 
	     Higher education					 
	     Military training					 
	     Racial discrimination				 
	     Sex discrimination 				 
	     Sexual harassment					 
	     Surveys						 
	     Federal service academies				 
	     College faculty					 
	     Quality of life					 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Product.                                                 **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-03-1001

                                       A

Report to the Subcommittee on Defense, Committee on Appropriations, House
of Representatives

September 2003 MILITARY EDUCATION Student and Faculty Perceptions of
Student Life at the Military Academies

GAO- 03- 1001

Contents Letter 1

Results in Brief 3 Background 5 Students Express Overall Satisfaction with
Academies,

but Perceptions Vary on Some Quality- of- Life Issues 8 Faculty Generally
Agree with Student Perceptions on Some

Quality- of- Life Issues 37 Conclusion 52 Agency Comments 52

Appendixes

Appendix I: Scope and Methodology 54

Appendix II: Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses 58

Appendix III: Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses 78

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments 93 Related GAO Products
94 Tables Table 1: Female and Racial/ Ethnic Minorities at the Service

Academies at Time of Survey (February- March 2003) 6 Table 2: Civilian and
Military Faculty at the Service Academies, as

of February 2003 7 Table 3: Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction of Male and
Female

Students with Social Life at the Academies 17 Table 4: Student Perceptions
of Campus Services at the

Military Academy 18 Table 5: Student Perceptions of Campus Services at the

Naval Academy 18 Table 6: Student Perceptions of Campus Services at the

Air Force Academy 19 Table 7: Perceptions of Male and Female Students of
the Emphasis

Placed on Prevention of Gender- based Discrimination 22 Table 8:
Perceptions of Male and Female Students of the Emphasis

Placed on Prevention of Sexual Harassment 24 Table 9: Perceptions of Male
and Female Students of the Overall

Atmosphere for Women at the Academies 26

Table 10: Perceptions of Minority and Nonminority Students of the Overall
Atmosphere for Racial/ Ethnic Minorities at the Academies 32 Table 11:
Percentage of Student Group and Nongroup Members

Perceiving Preferential Treatment of Student Groups 32 Table 12:
Percentage of Student Group and Nongroup Members

Perceiving Discriminatory Treatment of Student Groups 34 Table 13:
Percentage of Faculty Perceiving Preferential Treatment of

Student Groups in the Admissions Process 49 Table 14: Percentage of
Faculty Perceiving Preferential Treatment of

Student Groups While at the Academies 50 Table 15: Number of Student and
Faculty Survey Responses and

Corresponding Response Rates 56 Table 16: Characteristics of Survey
Respondents Compared to

Academy Student Populations 57 Figures Figure 1: Student Rating of Overall
Satisfaction with

the Academies 9 Figure 2: Student Perceptions of the Extent to Which

Quality- of- Life Issues Are Openly Confronted and/ or Solved at the
Academies 10 Figure 3: Student Ratings of the Overall Academic Program at

the Academies 11 Figure 4: Student Perceptions of Their Academic Workload
12 Figure 5: Student Perceptions of the Military Development

Programs at the Academies 13 Figure 6: Student Perceptions of Whether the
Honor Code/ Concept

Is Practiced As Taught 14 Figure 7: Student Perceptions of How Fairly the
Honor Code/

Concept Is Applied at Their Academy 15 Figure 8: Student Perceptions of
Social Life at the Academies 16 Figure 9: Student Perceptions of Adequacy
or Inadequacy of Time

to Handle Personal Affairs 20 Figure 10: Student Perceptions of the
Emphasis Academies Place on

Prevention of Gender- based Discrimination 21 Figure 11: Student
Perceptions of the Emphasis Academies Place on

Prevention of Sexual Harassment 23 Figure 12: Student Perceptions of the
Overall Atmosphere for

Women at the Academies 25 Figure 13: Student Perceptions of the Emphasis
Academies Place on

Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based Discrimination 27

Figure 14: Percentage of Minorities and Nonminorities Reporting
Underemphasis of Academies* Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based
Discrimination 28 Figure 15: Student Perceptions of the Emphasis Academies
Place on

Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based Harassment 29 Figure 16: Percentage
of Minorities and Nonminorities Reporting

Underemphasis of Academies* Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based
Harassment 30 Figure 17: Perceptions of Students of the Overall Atmosphere
for

Racial/ Ethnic Minorities at the Academies 31 Figure 18: Student Responses
on Career Intentions 36 Figure 19: Faculty Perceptions of the Overall
Academic Program at

the Academies 38 Figure 20: Faculty Perceptions of the Academic Workload
at the

Academies 39 Figure 21: Faculty Perceptions of the Overall Military
Development

Program at the Academies 40 Figure 22: Faculty Perceptions of the Extent
to Which the Honor

Code/ Concept Is Practiced as Taught 41 Figure 23: Faculty Perceptions of
the Extent to Which the Honor

Code/ Concept Is Fairly Applied 42 Figure 24: Faculty Perceptions of the
Emphasis Placed on the

Prevention of Gender- based Discrimination 43 Figure 25: Faculty
Perceptions of the Emphasis Placed on the

Prevention of Sexual Harassment 44 Figure 26: Faculty Perceptions of the
Overall Atmosphere for

Women at the Academies 45 Figure 27: Faculty Perceptions of the Emphasis
on the Prevention of

Race-/ Ethnicity- based Discrimination at the Academies 46 Figure 28:
Faculty Perceptions of the Emphasis on the Prevention of

Race-/ Ethnicity- based Harassment 47 Figure 29: Faculty Perceptions of
the Overall Atmosphere for

Racial/ Ethnic Minorities at the Academies 48 Figure 30: Faculty
Perceptions of the Emphasis on Varsity

Intercollegiate Athletics at the Academies 51

Abbreviations

DOD Department of Defense USAFA U. S. Air Force Academy USMA U. S.
Military Academy USNA U. S. Naval Academy

This is a work of the U. S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without further permission from GAO. However, because this
work may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this material
separately.

Letter

September 12, 2003 The Honorable Jerry Lewis Chairman The Honorable John
P. Murtha Ranking Minority Member Subcommittee on Defense Committee on
Appropriations House of Representatives The Army, the Navy, and the Air
Force each operate an academy to educate and train young men and women to
be leaders and effective junior officers in the military services. Student
life at the military service academies is demanding and, in many ways,
differs from student life at other colleges and universities. The
approximately 4, 000 students 1 who attend each academy at any one time
undergo a challenging 4- year program of academic, physical, and military
education that culminates in a bachelor*s degree and a commission as a
military officer. In addition to completing the

academic course work at the service academies, students must participate
in rigorous military training activities and in mandatory athletic
activities. In return for their free education, these students must serve
on active duty for 5 years after graduation.

The House of Representatives report on defense appropriations for fiscal
year 2003 2 directed that we perform reviews of all three service
academies and their respective preparatory schools. In September 2003, we
issued two reports on these topics. In our report on the three service
academies, we recommended that the Secretary of Defense, in concert with
the

services, enhance performance goals and measures to improve oversight of
the academies* operations and performance. 3 In our report on the three
service academy preparatory schools, we recommended that the Secretary of
Defense, together with the services and service academies, clarify the

1 Students attending the U. S. Military Academy at West Point, New York,
and the U. S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs, Colorado, are called
*cadets,* while those attending the U. S. Naval Academy, in Annapolis,
Maryland, are called *midshipmen.* We refer to cadets and midshipmen
collectively as *students.*

2 H. R. Rept. 107- 532, at 14- 15 (2002). 3 U. S. General Accounting
Office, Military Education: DOD Needs to Enhance Performance Goals and
Measures to Improve Oversight of Military Academies, GAO- 03- 1000
(Washington, D. C.: Sept. 10, 2003).

schools* mission statements, establish quantified performance goals and
measures, and enhance the existing oversight framework by using quantified
performance goals and measures to objectively evaluate the performance of
the schools. 4 As part of our review of the service academies, the House
report also directed us to survey students and faculty to obtain their
perceptions of various aspects of student life at the academies. As agreed
with your offices, this report presents the results of the student and
faculty surveys.

We conducted Web- based surveys of all students and faculty at the three
service academies* the U. S. Military Academy (Military Academy) at West
Point, New York; the U. S. Naval Academy (Naval Academy) in Annapolis,
Maryland, and the U. S. Air Force Academy (Air Force

Academy), in Colorado Springs, Colorado. In total, we surveyed 12, 264
students and 2,065 faculty members 5 between February 5 and March 7, 2003.
We obtained responses from 9,238 students (an overall response rate of 75
percent) and 1,586 faculty members (an overall response rate of 77
percent) to questions related to such student life issues as academic and
military programs, the honor code/ concept, 6 social life and campus
services, gender- and race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination 7 and
harassment, 8 and preferential treatment for various student groups. We
also asked students about their career intentions. Our surveys did not
query students and faculty on specific incidents of alleged sexual assault
at the academies.

4 U. S. General Accounting Office, Military Education: DOD Needs to Align
Academy Preparatory Schools* Mission Statements with Overall Guidance and
Establish Performance Goals, GAO- 03- 1017 (Washington, D. C.: Sept. 10,
2003). These schools exist to prepare selected students who are not ready
academically to attend one of the academies.

5 This number includes instructors and other academy staff who have
contact with students. 6 Students pledge not to lie, cheat, or steal as a
fundamental guide to their conduct at the academies. This pledge is the
basis for honor systems to investigate violations that are run by students
and overseen by academy officials.

7 Academy policies or practices that lead to unfair adverse treatment of a
person or group based on race, ethnicity, gender, or religion. 8
Derogatory comments, gestures, or other actions aimed at race, gender,
religion, or ethnicity that interfere with an individual*s performance or
create an intimidating, offensive, or hostile environment, including
unwanted sexual advances, requests for sexual favors,

and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature.

The individual academy response rates for the student survey were 83
percent at the Military Academy; 82 percent at the Naval Academy; and 60
percent at the Air Force Academy. The individual academy response rates
for the faculty survey were 90 percent at the Military Academy; 73 percent
at the Naval Academy; and 69 percent at the Air Force Academy. We were
unable to determine the reason for the lower overall response

rates from students and faculty at the Air Force Academy. There were
initial difficulties in resolving inaccuracies in the list of student and
faculty E- mail addresses provided to us by the Air Force Academy,
resulting in delays in notifying all students and faculty of the surveys*
availability. Additionally, during the survey period, issues associated
with alleged sexual assaults at the Air Force Academy became widely
reported in

the press, and several Air Force and Department of Defense (DOD)
investigations commenced. Due to concerns about the overall lower Air
Force Academy survey response rates, we extended the survey period by a
week to March 7, 2003, at all academies. We received full cooperation from
Air Force Academy officials, who sent additional notices to students and
faculty encouraging them to respond to our surveys. Although overall
response rates at the Air Force Academy were lower, our analysis shows

that the survey responses for various groups at each academy (e. g., women
and minorities) appear generally representative of their respective
academy populations. Further details of our scope and methodology are in
appendix I. Student and faculty surveys and responses are available in
appendixes II and III, respectively. We performed our work between
November 2002 and July 2003 in accordance with generally accepted
government auditing standards.

Results in Brief The majority of the 9,238 students who responded to our
survey at the three military academies expressed overall satisfaction with
their academy, although the students gave wide- ranging responses to a
variety of questions

about quality- of- life issues. A majority of students at each academy
reported that quality- of- life problems are openly confronted and/ or
solved at the academies to some, little, or no extent. For example, about
59 percent of students at the Military and Naval Academies and 71 percent
at the Air Force Academy held this view. Overall satisfaction with
academic training was high, with 90 percent of students rating their
academic programs as good or excellent. However, students reported
somewhat less satisfaction with various aspects of their military
training. For example, one- quarter to one- third of the students at each
academy rated their school*s performance standards for developing military
officers from much too low to generally too low. Students had mixed views
about the practice

of the honor code/ concept at their academies, with 15 percent at the
Military Academy, 31 percent at the Naval Academy, and 28 percent at the
Air Force Academy reporting that it is practiced as taught only to some, a
little, or no extent. Students reported varying levels of satisfaction or
dissatisfaction with their social life and with such campus services as
the quality of mess hall food, laundry services, medical care, and
computer equipment. Most differences in student responses on the emphasis
the academies give to the prevention of gender- and race-/ ethnicity-
based discrimination and harassment were generally between male and female

students and between minority and nonminority students. For example, about
half the students at each academy responded that their academy*s emphasis
on preventing sexual harassment was about right. However, 25 percent of
female students at the Military Academy, 21 percent at the Naval Academy,
and 37 percent at the Air Force Academy reported that prevention of sexual
harassment was generally or greatly underemphasized. Minority students
were also more likely than nonminority students to report the prevention
of race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination and harassment as
underemphasized. There were similar

differences in perceptions of the degree to which various groups, such as
females, minorities, and recruited athletes, received preferential
treatment during the admissions process or at the academies in general.
For example,

58 percent of male students at the Military Academy, 63 percent at the
Naval Academy, and 53 percent at the Air Force Academy responded that
female students received preferential treatment during the admissions
process, while about one quarter of female students at each academy
reported the same perception. In addition, 86 percent of students who were

not recruited athletes at the Military Academy, 83 percent at the Naval
Academy, and 87 percent at the Air Force Academy reported that recruited
athletes received preferential treatment during the admissions process,
while over 60 percent of recruited athletes reported the same perception.

The 1,586 faculty members who responded to our survey at the three
military academies generally agreed with the students* perceptions of
aspects of student life at the academies, but they were less likely than
students to say that quality- of- life problems are seldom openly
confronted and/ or solved. A large majority of faculty rated the overall
academic program at the academies as good or excellent. However, 26
percent of

faculty at the Military Academy, 22 percent at the Naval Academy, and 32
percent at the Air Force Academy rated their academy*s performance
standards for developing military officers as generally too low or much
too

low. Faculty perceptions varied on the practice of the honor code/
concept. While 51 percent of faculty at the Military Academy, 41 percent
at the Naval

Academy, and 34 percent at the Air Force Academy reported that the honor
code/ concept was practiced as taught to a great or very great extent, 22
percent of faculty at the Military Academy, 32 percent at the Naval
Academy, and 36 percent at the Air Force Academy indicated that it was
practiced as taught to some, a little, or no extent. Faculty perceptions
varied on issues associated with gender- and race-/ ethnicity- based
discrimination and harassment and preferential treatment of various

groups of students during the admissions process or at the academies in
general. Seventy- five percent of faculty at the Military and Naval
Academies and 65 percent at the Air Force Academy reported that the level
of emphasis given to the prevention of sexual harassment was about right.
However, about half of faculty at each academy reported that the overall

atmosphere for women at the academies was good or excellent. About 80
percent of the faculty reported that the level of emphasis placed on the
prevention of race-/ ethnicity- based harassment is about right. Finally,
more than 90 percent of faculty who had participated in the admissions
process in the past 4 years at the Military and Naval Academies and 72
percent at the Air Force Academy responded that recruited athletes
received preferential treatment during the admissions process.

We are making no recommendations in this report. DOD reviewed a draft of
this report and had no comments.

Background The Departments of the Army, Navy, and Air Force each have
their own educational institutions (academies) to produce a portion of
each branch*s officer corps: 9

 U. S. Military Academy, established in 1802,  U. S. Naval Academy,
established in 1845, and  U. S. Air Force Academy, established in 1954.
The academies are structured to provide a curriculum critical to the
development of successful future officers in the areas of academic,
military, and physical achievement. Additionally, the academies emphasize

9 Other sources for commissioned officers include Reserve Officer Training
Corps programs at colleges and universities and Officer Candidate/
Training Schools for individuals who already have college degrees.

the moral and ethical development of students through their respective
honor codes and concepts.

Approximately 4,000 students are enrolled at each of the three service
academies at any one time, though in December 2002 Congress authorized an
annual increase of up to 100 students until the total number reaches 4,
400 for each academy. 10 Each academy*s student population consists of
about 15 percent women and 19 to 24 percent racial/ ethnic minorities.
Table 1 shows the numbers of females and racial/ ethnic minorities at each
academy during the time our survey was taken.

Tabl e 1: Female and Racial/ Ethnic Minorities at the Service Academies at
Time of Survey (February- March 2003) Tot al number Total number of women
Total number of racial/ ethnic Service academy of students (percent of
student body) minorities (percent of student body)

U. S. Military Academy 3,957 616 (16%) 947 (24%) U. S. Naval Academy 4,229
648 (15%) 851 (20%) U. S. Air Force Academy 4,073 669 (16%) 776 (19%)

Tot al 12, 259 1, 933 (16%) 2,574 (21%)

Source: DOD. Note: Demographic information is based on a snapshot of each
academy. Therefore, there may be differences between our survey population
and the demographic figures.

10 Pub. L. 107- 314, Bob Stump National Defense Authorization Act for
Fiscal Year 2003,

S: 532, December 2, 2002.

The academies employ both civilian and military faculty. Faculty at the
Military Academy and the Air Force Academy are comprised predominantly of
military officers (79 and 75 percent, respectively), while at the Naval
Academy 59 percent of the faculty are civilians. Table 2 shows the
distribution of civilian and military faculty members at each academy
during the time our survey was taken. Additionally, the academies* staffs
include others who have regular contact with students, such as military
officers who serve as commanders to students at each academy (tactical
officers at the Military Academy, company commanders at the Naval Academy,
and air officers commanding at the Air Force Academy). About 398 of these
other staff were also given the faculty survey.

Tabl e 2: Civilian and Military Faculty at the Service Academies, as of
February 2003 Tot al number Total number of civilian faculty

Total number of military faculty Service academy of faculty (percent of
faculty) (percent of faculty)

U. S. Military Academy 622 131 (21%) 491 (79%) U. S. Naval Academy 555 326
(59%) 229 (41%) U. S. Air Force Academy 490 123 (25%) 367 (75%)

Tot al 1,667 580 (35%) 1,087 (65%)

Source: DOD. Note: Demographic information is based on a snapshot of each
academy. Therefore, there may be differences between our survey population
and the demographic figures.

Between 1993 and 1995, we issued a series of reports 11 on student
treatment at the three service academies. At the core of our reviews were
surveys of academy students and faculty on a range of student- related
subjects, including sexual harassment and the treatment of women and
minorities. In the reports, we concluded that more actions were needed to
eliminate sexual harassment and that disparities in the treatment of women
and minorities existed at the academies. We made recommendations to

11 U. S. General Accounting Office, DOD Service Academies: More Actions
Needed to Eliminate Sexual Harassment, GAO/ NSIAD- 94- 6 (Washington, D.
C.: Jan. 31, 1994);

DOD Service Academies: Update on Extent of Sexual Harassment, GAO/ NSIAD-
95- 58 (Washington, D. C.: Mar. 31,1994); Naval Academy: Gender and Racial
Disparities,

GAO/ NSIAD- 93- 54 (Washington, D. C.: April 30, 1993); Air Force Academy:
Gender and Racial Disparities, GAO/ NSIAD- 93- 244 (Washington, D. C.:
Sept. 24, 1993); and Military Academy: Gender and Racial Disparities, GAO/
NSIAD- 94- 95 (Washington, D. C.: Mar. 17, 1994).

help DOD achieve its goal of a sexual harassment- free environment and to
improve the monitoring and evaluation of gender and racial disparities.

Students Express Although a majority of the 9, 238 students who responded
to our survey

Overall Satisfaction at the three military service academies expressed
overall satisfaction

with their academy, the students gave wide- ranging responses to a variety
with Academies,

of questions about quality- of- life issues. A majority responded that but
Perceptions

quality- of- life problems are openly confronted and/ or solved at their
Vary on Some

academies to some, little, or no extent. Most students responded they were
satisfied overall with their academic and military training, but they

Quality- of- Life Issues expressed mixed views on the practice of the
honor code/ concept on their

campuses. They reported varying levels of satisfaction with their social
life and certain campus services. Their perceptions of discrimination and
harassment prevention and preferential treatment issues often varied
according to gender and race/ ethnicity. Finally, many students indicated
that they planned long military careers.

Overall Satisfaction with The majority of students at all three academies
reported that, overall, Academies Is High

they were satisfied with their academy, while about one- fifth of the
students at each school responded that they were dissatisfied. As figure 1
shows, 62 percent at the Military Academy (USMA), 64 percent at the Naval
Academy (USNA), and 59 percent at the Air Force Academy (USAFA) reported
their overall satisfaction with their academy.

Figure 1: Student Rating of Overall Satisfaction with the Academies In
percent 100

90 80 70

64.4 61.6 60

58.6

50 40 30

23.9 18.5

19.9 18.9 17.5 20

16.7 10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Very or generally satisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied Generally
or very dissatisfied Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due
to rounding.

At the same time, some 59 to 71 percent of students at each academy
reported that quality- of- life problems are being openly confronted and/
or solved at the academies to some, little, or no extent.

Figure 2: Student Perceptions of the Extent to Which Quality- of- Life
Issues Are Openly Confronted and/ or Solved at the Academies

In percent 100

90 80

71.2

70

59.3 59.1

60 50 40

30.5 32.2

30

22.6

20

10.1 8.7

10

6.1

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Some/ little or no extent Moderate extent Great or very great extent
Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Students* Rating of As figure 3 shows, between 90 and 93 percent of the
students at each

Academic and Military academy rated the overall academic program as good
or excellent. At the Training Is High

same time, a majority of them reported that they thought their academic
workload was definitely or probably too heavy (see fig. 4). This response
ranged from 63 percent at the Military Academy, 56 percent at the Naval
Academy, to 69 percent at the Air Force Academy.

Figure 3: Student Ratings of the Overall Academic Program at the Academies
In percent 100

92.7 90

92.4

90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10

5.5 8

5.8 1.8 2 1.8

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good to excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Figure 4: Student Perceptions of Their Academic Workload In percent 100

90 80 70

69 62.9

60

55.5

50

42.9

40

35.3 30.3

30 20 10

1.8 1.6 .8

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Definitely or probably too light About right Definitely or probably too
heavy Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

In terms of military training, the majority of students at each academy
evaluated their overall military development program as good or excellent.
As figure 5 shows, the percentages ranged from 53 percent at the Air Force
Academy to 71 percent at the Military Academy. However, about one- quarter
to one- third of the students rated their academy*s performance standards
for developing military officers as generally or much too low (see
question 8, app. II). Moreover, about 40 percent of the students at the
Air Force and Naval Academies and 27 percent at the Military Academy
evaluated the 4- year class system for developing military officers as
very or generally ineffective (see question 9, app. II).

Figure 5: Student Perceptions of the Military Development Programs at the
Academies In percent 100

90 80

70.8

70 60

57.3 52.9

50 40 30

26.6 26.3 19.4

20.7

20

16.1 9.8

10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good to excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Students Have Mixed Students gave varied responses regarding the practice
of the honor

Views on the Practice of code/ concept at their academy. Whereas 62
percent of students at the

the Honor Code/ Concept Military Academy believed the honor code/ concept
is practiced as taught to

at Their Academy a great or very great extent, 37 percent of students at
the Naval Academy

and 43 percent at the Air Force Academy held the same view (see fig. 6).

Figure 6: Student Perceptions of Whether the Honor Code/ Concept Is
Practiced As Taught

In percent 100

90 80 70

62.1

60 50

42.6

40

36.8 30.9

32.4 28.1

29.3 30

23.3

20

14.7

10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Some/ little or no extent Moderate extent Great/ very great extent Source:
GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Students also expressed varied impressions of how fairly the honor code/
concept is applied at the academies with respect to students who have been
accused of similar violations. As figure 7 shows, about 40 percent of
students at the Military and Air Force Academies and 30 percent at the
Naval Academy reported that they thought the honor code/ concept was
fairly applied to students with similar violations to a great or very
great extent.

Figure 7: Student Perceptions of How Fairly the Honor Code/ Concept Is
Applied at Their Academy

In percent 100

90 80 70 60 50

42.9 40.2

37.3

40

35.2 30.7 30.8

29.1

30

26.4 27.4 20 10

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Some/ little or no extent Moderate extent Great/ very great extent Source:
GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Students Report Various A majority of students at each academy expressed
dissatisfaction with the

Levels of Dissatisfaction social life on their campus. As figure 8
indicates, the percentages ranged

with Social Life and Certain from a high of 73 percent at the Military
Academy to a low of 57 percent at

Campus Services the Naval Academy.

Figure 8: Student Perceptions of Social Life at the Academies In percent
100

90 80

72.6

70

64.7

60

56.7

50 40 30

25.9 21.5

20

17.4 13.6

13.8 13.8 10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Very or generally dissatisfied Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
Generally or very satisfied Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to
100 due to rounding.

Male students were more likely to be dissatisfied with their social life
than female students. As table 3 shows, between 60 and 74 percent of males
across the three academies expressed dissatisfaction with their social
life while between 42 and 63 percent of females across the academies had a
similar response.

Tabl e 3: Satisfaction or Dissatisfaction of Male and Female Students with
Social Life at the Academies

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Level of satisfaction Males Females Males Females Males
Females

Generally or very satisfied 12 23 23 41 18 39 Neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied 14 14 17 18 14 14

Generally or very dissatisfied 74 63 60 42 68 47 Source: GAO.

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Students also expressed varying levels of satisfaction or dissatisfaction
with certain campus services. As tables 4, 5, and 6 indicate, the majority
of students at the three academies were generally satisfied with medical
care (except for the Air Force Academy), updating of school computer
equipment, condition of athletic facilities (except for the Military
Academy), and personal safety. At the same time, some 40 to 50 percent of
students at each academy indicated that they were dissatisfied with the

quality of mess hall food and laundry service on campus.

Table 4: Student Perceptions of Campus Services at the Military Academy

Numbers in percent

Updating of Condition of Level of Medical computer

Quality of mess Laundry athletic Personal satisfaction care equipment hall
food service

facilities safety

Generally or very satisfied 58 57 40 31 27 89

Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 21 25 21 20 14 9 Generally or very
dissatisfied 21 18 39 49 59 3 Source: GAO.

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Table 5: Student Perceptions of Campus Services at the Naval Academy

Numbers in percent

Updating of Condition of Medical computer

Quality of mess Laundry athletic Personal Level of satisfaction care
equipment hall food service

facilities safety

Generally or very satisfied 56 53 39 30 72 85 Neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied 24 25 24 24 14 12

Generally or very dissatisfied 21 22 38 47 14 3 Source: GAO.

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Table 6: Student Perceptions of Campus Services at the Air Force Academy

Numbers in percent

Updating of Condition of Level of Medical computer

Quality of mess Laundry athletic Personal satisfaction care equipment hall
food service

facilities safety

Generally or very satisfied 36 60 24 18 57 84 Neither satisfied nor
dissatisfied 21 26 19 25 15 13 Generally or very dissatisfied 43 14 57 56
29 4 Source: GAO.

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

A majority of students, with higher percentages at the Military and Air
Force Academies, reported that they did not have adequate time to handle
their personal affairs. As figure 9 indicates, 58 percent at the Naval
Academy, 67 percent at the Military Academy, and 73 percent at the Air
Force Academy reported that the time they had was generally or very
inadequate.

Figure 9: Student Perceptions of Adequacy or Inadequacy of Time to Handle
Personal Affairs

In percent 100

90 80

72.5

70

66.7

60

58.3

50 40

38.7 31

30

26.5

20 10

2.4 2.9

1.1

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Very or generally inadequate Adequate Generally more, or much more than
adequate Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to
rounding.

Student Perceptions Student responses on a range of discrimination and
harassment issues

of Prevention of often varied according to gender or race/ ethnicity. As
figure 10 shows,

Discrimination and 47 percent of students at the Military Academy, 45
percent at the Naval

Harassment Varied Academy, and 51 percent at the Air Force Academy
responded that their

academy*s emphasis on preventing gender- based discrimination was about
right. However, as table 7 indicates, these responses varied according to
the respondents* gender, with female students more likely to say that

prevention was underemphasized. Between 34 and 47 percent of female
students at each academy believed that prevention was underemphasized
while between 8 and 17 percent of male students had a similar response.

Figure 10: Student Perceptions of the Emphasis Academies Place on
Prevention of Gender- based Discrimination

In percent 100

90 80 70 60

51

50

47.1 45.1

40.7 38.6

40 30

26.5 22.4 20

16.2 12.3 10

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

Tabl e 7: Perceptions of Male and Female Students of the Emphasis Placed
on Prevention of Gender- based Discrimination

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Level of emphasis Males Females Males Females Males
Females

Greatly or generally underemphasized 8 34 13 35 17 47

Emphasis is about right 47 51 45 51 52 46

Generally or greatly overemphasized 45 15 43 14 31 7

Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

As figure 11 shows, in terms of sexual harassment, about one half of the
students at each academy responded that their academy*s emphasis on the
prevention of sexual harassment was about right. However, female

students were more likely than male students to report that the prevention
of sexual harassment was generally or greatly underemphasized. Twenty-
five percent of female students at the Military Academy, 21 percent

at the Naval Academy, and 37 percent at the Air Force Academy responded
that the prevention of sexual harassment was generally or greatly
underemphasized (table 8).

Figure 11: Student Perceptions of the Emphasis Academies Place on
Prevention of Sexual Harassment

In percent 100

90 80 70 60

54 52.1 50

48.9 44.1

40

38.4 33.6

30 20

14.2

10

7.6 7

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

Tabl e 8: Perceptions of Male and Female Students of the Emphasis Placed
on Prevention of Sexual Harassment

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Level of emphasis Males Females Males Females Males
Females

Greatly or generally underemphasized 4 25 4 21 10 37

Emphasis is about right 54 60 48 55 54 46

Generally or greatly overemphasized 42 15 48 24 37 18

Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

As figure 12 shows, about one half of all students at each of the three
academies rated the overall atmosphere for women as good or excellent. The
percentages ranged from 57 percent at the Military and Air Force Academies
to 49 percent at the Naval Academy. However, female students were more
likely to view the atmosphere for women as poor or below average than were
male students. As table 9 indicates, between 36 and 43 percent of female
students at the three academies expressed this view compared with between
17 and 22 percent of the males. The results of our 1994 survey of students
on sexual harassment issues showed that the majority of women students
experienced some form of gender- based harassment that interfered with
their performance or created an

intimidating, hostile, or offensive environment.

Figure 12: Student Perceptions of the Overall Atmosphere for Women at the
Academies In percent 100

90 80 70 60

57.3 57.1

49.3

50 40 30

25.8 25

20.4 22.2 21.5

21.5 20 10

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good or excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Tabl e 9: Perceptions of Male and Female Students of the Overall
Atmosphere for Women at the Academies

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Level of emphasis Males Females Males Females Males
Females

Poor or below average 17 39 22 43 18 36 Average 21 30 24 30 20 29 Good or
excellent 63 31 54 27 62 36 Source: GAO.

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

The perceptions of students on the emphasis the academies place on
preventing race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination also varied according to
group membership. As figure 13 shows, a large majority of students at each
academy reported that the emphasis was about right. The percentages ranged
from 75 percent at the Naval Academy to 68 and 62 percent, respectively,
at the Air Force and Military Academies.

Figure 13: Student Perceptions of the Emphasis Academies Place on
Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based Discrimination

In percent 100

90 80

75

70

68 61.6

60 50 40

31.6

30

20.1

20

16.6 12

10

6.8 8.4

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

However, minority students were more likely than nonminority students to
report that the prevention of race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination was
generally or greatly underemphasized. As figure 14 shows, 4 percent of
nonminority students at the Military Academy, 5 percent at the Naval
Academy, and 9 percent at the Air Force Academy responded that their

academy underemphasized this prevention. By comparison, 17 percent of
minority students at the Military Academy, 21 percent at the Naval
Academy, and 27 percent at the Air Force Academy responded in this way.

Figure 14: Percentage of Minorities and Nonminorities Reporting
Underemphasis of Academies* Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based
Discrimination In percent 100

90 80 70 60 50 40 30

27 21

20

17 10

9 4

5 0 USMA USNA USAFA

Minorities Nonminorities Source: GAO.

In terms of race-/ ethnicity- based harassment, a large majority of all
students responded that their academy*s emphasis on preventing such
harassment was about right. For example, as figure 15 shows, 77 percent of
all students at the Naval Academy, 71 percent at the Air Force Academy,
and 65 percent at the Military Academy reported this view. However, as

figure 16 indicates, minority students were more likely to report that the
prevention of race-/ ethnicity- based harassment was generally or greatly
underemphasized.

Figure 15: Student Perceptions of the Emphasis Academies Place on
Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based Harassment

In percent 100

90 80

76.5 71.4

70

64.7

60 50 40

29.5

30 20

15.4 17.3

11.3

10

5.9 8.2

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

Figure 16: Percentage of Minorities and Nonminorities Reporting
Underemphasis of Academies* Prevention of Race-/ Ethnicity- based
Harassment In percent 100

90 80 70 60 50 40 30

27 20

20

14

10

8 3 5 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Minorities Nonminorities Source: GAO.

A large majority of all students rated the overall atmosphere for racial/
ethnic minorities as good or excellent. As figure 17 shows, 83 percent of
students at the Military Academy, 81 percent at the Naval Academy, and 79
percent at the Air Force Academy expressed this view. However, these views
varied within groups. As table 10 shows, minority students were more
likely than nonminority students to evaluate the overall atmosphere for
minorities as poor or below average. Some 10 to 17 percent of minority
students expressed this view while about 2 percent of nonminority students
had a similar view.

Figure 17: Perceptions of Students of the Overall Atmosphere for Racial/
Ethnic Minorities at the Academies

In percent 100

90

83 81.4

80

78.5

70 60 50 40 30 20

14.4 16 12.8

10

4.2 4.2 5.5

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good or excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Table 10: Perceptions of Minority and Nonminority Students of the Overall
Atmosphere for Racial/ Ethnic Minorities at the Academies

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Rating Nonminorities Minorities Nonminorities Minorities
Nonminorities Minorities

Poor or below average 2 10 2 11 2 17 Average 10 23 12 22 14 22 Good or
excellent 88 67 86 67 83 60 Source: GAO.

Note: Percentages may not add to100 due to rounding.

Student Perceptions Student perceptions varied as to whether various
groups of students, of Preferential

such as women, recruited athletes, and minorities, receive preferential
Treatment Varied treatment during the admissions process and in general at
the academies. The differences varied most between members of a particular
group and those who were not part of that group. As table 11 shows, 58
percent of male students at the Military Academy, 63 percent at the Naval
Academy, and 53 percent at the Air Force Academy believed that women
received preferential treatment during the admissions process. By
comparison, 25 percent of female students at the Military Academy, 27
percent at the Naval Academy, and 24 percent at the Air Force Academy
expressed the same view. Additionally, between 83 and 87 percent of
students who were

not recruited athletes believed that recruited athletes received
preferential treatment during the admissions process. Between 64 and 68
percent of recruited athletes held the same view.

Table 11: Percentage of Student Group and Nongroup Members Perceiving
Preferential Treatment of Student Groups

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Nonmembers Members of Nonmembers Members of

Nonmembers Members of Group of group group of group group of group group

Preferential treatment during the admissions process

Women 58 25 63 27 53 24 Recruited athletes 86 68 83 67 87 64

(Continued From Previous Page)

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Nonmembers Members of Nonmembers Members of

Nonmembers Members of Group of group group of group group of group group

African- American 46 20 43 14 41 17

Hispanic 34 35 32 22 29 24 Asian 26 14 22 9 22 11 Native Hawaiian/ other

Pacific Islander 23 27 20 11 19 6 AmericanIndian/ Alaska Native 26 31 22
36 22 15

Preferential treatment in general at the academies

Women 47 5 50 6 49 8 Varsity athletes 74 33 69 37 80 34 African- American
18 3 16 0 22 3

Hispanic 8 5 7 4 8 10 Asian 8 4 5 2 2 8 Native Hawaiian/ other

Pacific Islander 5 6 4 4 5 0 AmericanIndian/ Alaska Native 5 7 4 9 5 6
Source: GAO.

Student perceptions also varied as to whether the same groups of students
receive discriminatory treatment (unfair, adverse treatment) during the
admissions process and in general at the academies. Table 12 shows the

differences between groups of students and those who are outside those
groups in perceptions of discriminatory treatment during the admissions
process and at the academies in general. For example, between 37 and 42
percent of female respondents at the three academies reported that they
perceived discriminatory treatment in general at the academy while 8 to 14
percent of male respondents held the same view.

Tabl e 12: Percentage of Student Group and Nongroup Members Perceiving
Discriminatory Treatment of Student Groups

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Nonmembers Members of Nonmembers Members of

Nonmembers Members of Group of group group of group group of group group

During the admissions process

Women 3 14 2 6 2 11 Recruited athletes 1 5 1 6 2 10

African- American 1 18 1 18 2 17

Hispanic 2 4 1 6 2 8 Asian 2 7 1 8 1 8 Native Hawaiian/ other

Pacific Islander 1 12 1 11 1 18 AmericanIndian/ Alaska Native 2 2 2 2 2 2

In general at the academy

Women 10 42 14 42 8 37 Varsity athletes 3 24 7 31 5 33 African- American 2
23 2 31 2 29

Hispanic 2 4 2 6 2 8 Asian 1 9 1 7 1 14 Native Hawaiian/ other

Pacific Islander 1 9 1 4 1 18 AmericanIndian/ Alaska Native 1 4 1 3 1 4

Source: GAO.

A majority of students at the Military Academy and the Air Force Academy
(54 percent and 64 percent, respectively) indicated that varsity
intercollegiate athletics were generally or greatly overemphasized,

while at the Naval Academy 39 percent of the students reported the same
overemphasis (see question 29, app. II).

In our prior surveys on student treatment, we asked respondents whether
they believed women and minorities were treated better than, the same as,
or worse than men by various academy systems such as faculty members.
Students perceived that women and minorities generally received treatment
equal to that of men and whites. However, differences

in student perceptions were generally between male and female students and
minorities and nonminority students.

Many Students Plan Long Many students at the three academies reported that
they plan to stay in

Military Careers the military beyond their initial obligation or until
retirement (40 percent

at the Military Academy, 44 percent at the Naval Academy, and 55 percent
at the Air Force Academy), while between 14 and 19 percent across all
academies responded that they would probably or definitely leave at the
end of their obligation. Figure 18 shows the student responses of their
career intentions.

Figure 18: Student Responses on Career Intentions In percent 100

90 80 70 60

55.1

50

44.2 40.2 40.8 38.8

40

30.9

30 20

19 17 14 10

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Remain in military beyond obligation, possibly or definitely until
retirement Undecided about remaining in military beyond obligation
Probably or definitely leave military upon completion of obligation
Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Faculty Generally The 1,586 faculty members who responded to our survey
generally agreed

Agree with Student with student perceptions of aspects of student life at
the academies, but

they were less likely than students to report that quality- of- life
problems Perceptions on Some

at the academies are seldom openly confronted and/ or solved. Faculty
Quality- of- Life Issues

perceptions varied on the practice of the honor code/ concept and gender
and race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination and harassment and preferential
treatment issues.

Faculty Perceptions Varied Thirty- eight percent of the faculty at the
Military Academy, 45 percent at

on the Extent to Which the Naval Academy, and 46 percent at the Air Force
Academy reported that Quality- of- Life Problems

quality- of- life problems are openly confronted and/ or solved to some,
little, Are Addressed

or no extent at the academies. By comparison, 59 percent of students at
the Military and Naval Academies and 71 percent of students at the Air
Force Academy held the same views. About one third of faculty at each
academy indicated that these problems are openly confronted and/ or solved
to a

moderate extent (see question 29, app. III).

Overall Satisfaction with Overall faculty satisfaction with academic and
military training is high. As

Academic and Military figure 19 shows, a large majority of faculty members
at each academy

Training Is High rated the overall academic program as good or excellent
(88 percent at the

Military Academy, 87 percent at the Naval Academy, and 91 percent at the
Air Force Academy).

Figure 19: Faculty Perceptions of the Overall Academic Program at the
Academies In percent 100

91.4

90

87.7 86.7 80

70 60 50 40 30 20

9.4 10.6

10

4.0 4.6 2.9 2.7

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good to excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

With regard to the students* academic workload, figure 20 shows that 55
percent of faculty at the Military Academy, 60 percent at the Naval
Academy, and 58 percent at the Air Force Academy responded that the
workload was about right.

Figure 20: Faculty Perceptions of the Academic Workload at the Academies
In percent 100

90 80 70

60.3 58.2

60

55.1

50 40

35.8 31.4 32.3 30

20

9.1 8.2 9.4

10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Definitely or probably too light About right Definitely or probably too
heavy Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Figure 21 shows the faculty perceptions of the overall military
development program. Seventy- three percent at the Military Academy, 77
percent at the Naval Academy, and 60 percent at the Air Force Academy
reported that the overall military development program was good or
excellent. However, 26 percent of faculty at the Military Academy, 22
percent at the Naval

Academy, and 32 percent at the Air Force Academy rated their academy*s
performance standards for developing military officers as generally too
low or much too low (see question 10, app. III).

Figure 21: Faculty Perceptions of the Overall Military Development Program
at the Academies

In percent 100

90 80

76.7 73.1

70

60.2

60 50 40 30

18.5 21.3

20

17.4 17.3 9.6

10

6.1

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good to excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Faculty Perceptions Faculty perceptions varied on the practice of the
honor code/ concept. Varied on Practice of the

Figure 22 shows that while 51 percent of faculty at the Military Academy,
Honor Code/ Concept 41 percent at the Naval Academy, and 34 percent at the
Air Force Academy reported that the honor code/ concept was practiced as
taught to a great or very great extent. Twenty- two percent of faculty at
the Military Academy, 32 percent at the Naval Academy, and 36 percent at
the Air Force Academy

indicated that it was practiced as taught to some, a little, or no extent.

Figure 22: Faculty Perceptions of the Extent to Which the Honor Code/
Concept Is Practiced as Taught

In percent 100

90 80 70 60

50.9

50

41.2

40

35.6 33.6 31.8

30.8

30

26.7 27

22.4

20 10

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Some/ little or no extent Moderate extent Great/ very great extent Source:
GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

As figure 23 shows, 53 percent of faculty at the Military Academy and 41
percent at the Naval and Air Force Academies reported that the honor code/
concept was applied fairly with respect to students who have been accused
of similar violations.

Figure 23: Faculty Perceptions of the Extent to Which the Honor Code/
Concept Is Fairly Applied

In percent 100

90 80 70 60

52.9

50

41.2 41.1 40

31 32.5

30

27.8 26.4

23.2 23.9 20

10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Some/ little or no extent Moderate extent Great/ very great extent Source:
GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Faculty Perceptions Faculty were asked for their perceptions on the same
gender- based and

of Prevention of race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination and harassment
issues as were

Discrimination and students. The same definitions of discrimination and
harassment were

Harassment Varied used. Figure 24 shows that about 70 percent of the
faculty at each academy reported that the level of emphasis given to the
prevention of gender- based discrimination was about right.

Figure 24: Faculty Perceptions of the Emphasis Placed on the Prevention of
Gender- based Discrimination

In percent 100

90 80

70.2 72.3

70

68.9

60 50 40 30

21.4

20

15.5 18 14.3

9.7 9.8 10

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

Figure 25 shows that 75 percent of the faculty at the Military and Naval
Academies and 65 percent at the Air Force Academy reported that the level
of emphasis given to the prevention of sexual harassment was about right.
Figure 26 shows that just over one half of the faculty at each academy
assessed the overall atmosphere for women at the academies as good

or excellent.

Figure 25: Faculty Perceptions of the Emphasis Placed on the Prevention of
Sexual Harassment

In percent 100

90 80

75 75

70

65.1

60 50 40 30

23.5

20

16.3 13 12

11.3

10

8

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

Figure 26: Faculty Perceptions of the Overall Atmosphere for Women at the
Academies

In percent 100

90 80 70 60

58.2 54.8 50.7 50

40 30

23.8 23 25.3 24

22.2 20

17.9

10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good or excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

With regard to the emphasis the academies place on the prevention of
race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination, figure 27 shows that about 80
percent of faculty at each academy reported that the emphasis was about
right.

Figure 27: Faculty Perceptions of the Emphasis on the Prevention of Race-/
Ethnicity- based Discrimination at the Academies In percent 100

90

81.4 82

80

78.3

70 60 50 40 30 20

15.3 10.5

8.1 8.6

9.5 10

6.4 0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

A similar majority of faculty at each academy reported that the emphasis
placed on the prevention of race-/ ethnicity- based harassment is about
right and that the overall atmosphere for racial/ ethnic minority students
at the academies is good or excellent. Figures 28 and 29 show these
perceptions.

Figure 28: Faculty Perceptions of the Emphasis on the Prevention of Race-/
Ethnicity- based Harassment In percent 100

90

83.2 79.8

82.1

80 70 60 50 40 30 20

13.2 7 9.6

7.2 8.2

9.7 10 0

USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

Figure 29: Faculty Perceptions of the Overall Atmosphere for Racial/
Ethnic Minorities at the Academies

In percent 100

90

79.4 76.9 80

73.8

70 60 50 40 30

16.4 19.4

18.2

20 10

4.2 6.8 4.9

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Poor or below average Average Good or excellent Source: GAO. Note:
Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Faculty Perceptions Faculty perceptions varied as to whether different
groups of students,

of Preferential such as women, recruited athletes, and minorities, receive
preferential Treatment Varied

treatment during the admissions process and in general at the academies.
Table 13 shows the differences between faculty who had been involved in
the admissions process in the last 4 years and those who had not in
perceptions of preferential treatment during the admissions process.

More than 90 percent of the faculty who had participated in the admissions
process in the last 4 years at the Military and Naval Academies and 72
percent at the Air Force Academy responded that they perceived recruited
athletes as receiving preferential treatment during the admissions
process. While 75 percent of the faculty who had participated in the
admissions process at the Military Academy and 81 percent at the Naval
Academy reported that they perceived African- Americans as receiving
preferential treatment during the admissions process, only 29 percent of
faculty at the Air Force Academy who had participated in the process gave
the same assessment.

Table 13: Percentage of Faculty Perceiving Preferential Treatment of
Student Groups in the Admissions Process

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Had not

Had not Had not Participated

participated in Participated in participated in Participated in
participated in Group in the process the process the process

the process the process the process

Women 14 36 16 32 13 24 Recruited athletes 93 88 92 86 72 84

African- American 75 71 81 68 29 37

Hispanic 65 52 75 56 24 26 Asian 13 22 15 17 2 10 Native Hawaiian/ other

Pacific Islander 29 33 52 32 11 13 American Indian/ Alaska Native 45 40 63
46 18 19

Source: GAO.

With the exception of perceptions regarding varsity athletes, faculty
across the academies were less likely to perceive preferential treatment
of various student groups while at the academies, as shown by table 14.

Tabl e 14: Percentage of Faculty Perceiving Preferential Treatment of
Student Groups While at the Academies

Numbers in percent

Group USMA USNA USAFA

Women 11 10 10 Varsity athletes 56 55 63 African- American 12 10 6
Hispanic 4 5 3 Asian 1 2 1 Native Hawaiian/ other Pacific Islander 1 2 1

American- Indian/ Alaska Native 2 3 2 Source: GAO.

As figure 30 shows, about one- half the faculty at the Military and Naval
Academies and 70 percent of the faculty at the Air Force Academy reported
that the relative emphasis given to varsity intercollegiate athletics was

generally or greatly overemphasized.

Figure 30: Faculty Perceptions of the Emphasis on Varsity Intercollegiate
Athletics at the Academies

In percent 100

90 80

69.1

70 60

56.5 51.4

50

42.8

40

36.6

30

28

20 10

6.9 5.8 2.8

0 USMA USNA USAFA

Greatly or generally underemphasized Emphasis is about right Generally or
greatly overemphasized Source: GAO. Note: Percentages may not add to 100
due to rounding.

Conclusion The results of the student and faculty surveys presented in
this report highlight several areas that may warrant further study. For
example,

the percentage of students and faculty that rated their academy*s
performance standards for developing military officers as being generally
or much too low suggests that this may be an area of concern. Likewise,
similar responses from students and faculty related to the conduct of

the honor code/ concept underscore another area of potential concern. In
addition, the high percentage of student responses indicating
dissatisfaction with their social life at the academies and with certain
campus services may also suggest cause for concern.

In our report on oversight and admissions issues at the service academies,
12 we concluded that DOD conducts considerable oversight of the academies*
operations and performance, but they lack a complete oversight framework.
To develop a more complete oversight framework, we recommended that DOD
improve its oversight by enhancing its performance goals and measures. The
academies* climate surveys are conducted periodically and can inform
decision makers about areas that may warrant further attention. The
results of our surveys, especially those areas mentioned above, may be of
use to DOD in enhancing the quality of its oversight.

Agency Comments DOD reviewed a draft of this report and had no comments.
We are sending copies of this report to the appropriate congressional
committees; the Secretaries of Defense, the Army, the Navy, and the Air
Force; and the Director, Office of Management and Budget. We will also
make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the report will
be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at http:// www. gao. gov.

12 GAO- 03- 1000.

Please contact me on (202) 512- 5559 if you or your staff have any
questions concerning this report. Key contributors are listed in appendix
IV.

Derek B. Stewart Director Defense Capabilities and Management

Appendi Appendi xes x I

Scope and Methodology To obtain student and faculty perceptions of aspects
of student life at the U. S. Military Academy, the U. S. Naval Academy,
and the U. S. Air Force Academy, we took the following initial steps:

 To design two separate surveys (one for students and one for faculty),
we reviewed our surveys used to query academy students in 1993 and 1994
and prior service academy instruments to develop general topics and
questions that were appropriate indicators of student life issues.
Specifically, we reviewed student and faculty surveys on quality- of- life
issues administered by the Military, Naval, and Air Force Academies within
the last 2 years. 1 We also reviewed the student and faculty surveys on
various aspects of student life that we administered during our 1994
review of the Air Force Academy. 2 For the student survey, we developed
questions for nine general topics: (1) academic climate; (2) military/
professional development; (3) social and cultural climate; (4) harassment,
discrimination (gender- and race-/ ethnicity- based), and

preferential treatment for various groups of students; (5) moral climate
and honor code/ concept; (6) intercollegiate and intramural athletics; (7)
campus services; (8) personal affairs; and (9) career intentions.

For the faculty survey, we developed five student- related topics: (1)
academic climate; (2) military/ professional development; (3) harassment,
discrimination (gender- and race-/ ethnicity- based), and preferential
treatment for various groups of students; (4) moral climate and honor
code/ concept; and (5) intercollegiate and intramural athletics.

 To ensure the relevance and appropriateness of the survey questions, we
sought outside comments on our survey approach and questions from
officials in the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Personnel
and Readiness; the Army, Navy, and Air Force headquarters; and the
Military, Naval, and Air Force academies. The purpose of seeking outside
consultation was twofold. First, to determine whether the questions and
the manner in which we planned to ask them were adequate for addressing
the larger questions posed by our evaluation. Second, to find out whether
academy students and faculty had the

1 Each of the service academies periodically surveys its students and
faculty on topics including academic workload, perceptions of
discrimination and harassment, application of the honor code/ concept, and
the quality of campus services.

2 U. S. General Accounting Office, Air Force Academy: Gender and Racial
Disparities,

GAO/ NSIAD- 93- 244 (Washington, D. C.: Sept. 24, 1993).

knowledge to answer our survey questions. The reviewing officials did not
act as pretest interviewees; they provided critiques. Based on the
comments received, we modified the survey terminology to apply to the
respective academies, eliminated and/ or changed questions or response
items that did not apply, and added questions or response items to address
issues germane to all three service academies.

 To test the survey questions before they were administered, we pretested
the surveys in focus groups of students and faculty at the Naval and Air
Force Academies. At both academies, we held two student focus groups, one
for junior and senior students and one for freshmen and sophomore
students, and two faculty focus groups, one each for military and civilian
faculty. Each focus group consisted of approximately 10 participants, was
racially diverse, and included males and females. We refined the survey
questions based on the comments made during these sessions. Time
constraints prevented pretesting at the Military Academy, although we
discussed some of the survey topics with one student focus group during
our site visit.

 To identify all students and faculty that would be included in the
survey, we requested and obtained E- mail addresses for all students and
faculty. For the faculty population, we asked the academies to include
both

teaching faculty and other staff who have regular contact with students,
particularly the officers who serve as commanders of student units
(companies or squadrons). Since we left it to the discretion of the
academies which of these other staff they included (about 398 total), the
numbers of total faculty vary among academies. There were initial
difficulties in resolving inaccuracies in the E- mail addresses provided
to us by the Air Force Academy, but Air Force Academy officials worked
with us to resolve those issues.

To administer the surveys, we built six Web- based survey sites, two for
each academy (one for students and one for faculty). Before administering
the surveys, the superintendent of each academy notified all students and
faculty of our upcoming surveys and encouraged participation in them. This
notification was followed by our E- mail to all students and faculty,
containing the Web link to the appropriate survey as well as the
individual*s unique user name and password. The previously discussed
inaccurate E- mail addresses resulted in delays in notifying all students
and faculty at the Air Force Academy of the surveys* availability. The
Web- based surveys were initially operational from February 5 to February
28, 2003. During this time, students and faculty completed the

surveys and contacted designated GAO personnel, via telephone or E- mail,
regarding any difficulties. Each week, we sent follow- up E- mail to all
respondents, requesting that they complete the surveys if they had not
done so. At the end of the survey period, we extended the survey at all
academies by 1 week to March 7, 2003, to allow respondents at the Air
Force Academy additional time to complete the surveys. Each academy*s
superintendent sent out an additional notification E- mail, announcing
that

we were extending the deadline for the surveys and once again encouraging
participation. Table 15 shows that the response rates for the surveys were
generally high.

Table 15: Number of Student and Faculty Survey Responses and Corresponding
Response Rates Total number of Number of students

Response students and

and faculty rate faculty surveyed responding to survey

(percent) U. S. Military Academy

Students 3,987 3,323 83 Faculty 665 597 90

U. S. Naval Academy

Students 4,224 3,473 82 Faculty 663 484 73

U. S. Air Force Academy

Students 4,053 2,442 60 Faculty 737 505 69 Source: GAO.

To analyze the response rates for possible errors due to some groups
responding out of proportion to the population as a whole, we compared the
rates for certain demographic subgroups to the

relevant academy student populations. We found comparable distributions of
students for these subgroups and concluded that the survey results for
each academy appeared to be generally representative of the academy
populations. Although overall response rates for the Air Force Academy
were lower than those of the other two academies, the pattern of responses
across demographic groups is much the same as for the other academies.
Table 16 shows the percentage of groups who completed the student survey
compared to the percentage of identified groups in the entire student
population.

Table 16: Characteristics of Survey Respondents Compared to Academy
Student Populations

Numbers in percent

USMA USNA USAFA Survey Group as

Survey Group as Survey Group as Identified

response rate percentage of

response rate percentage of response rate percentage of student group

(percent) total population

(percent) total population

(percent) total population

Males 84. 7 84. 4 84. 4 84. 7 82 83.6 Females 15. 3 15. 6 15. 6 15. 3 18
16.4 Minorities a 22. 9 23. 9 20. 2 20. 1 20 19 Varsity athletes 19. 6 18.
3 Not tested b Not tested b 18.2 17.1 Prior enlisted Not tested b Not
tested b 10. 1 9.1 1.6 1.0 Prep school graduates 13. 8 14. 7 15. 9 16. 8
11.6 12.6

Source: GAO. a Our definition of *minority* differed somewhat from that
used by the academies. Differences in

response rates may be attributed to the differences in definition. For
example, we did not specify an *other* category for race/ ethnicity and
included a category for Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. b We were
unable to test these groups because of apparent measurement differences
between our

survey and the academies* demographic profiles. In our survey more
students responded that they were in these groups than the academies
reported in their population.

To analyze survey results, we noted responses for all questions and
highlighted those where a significant response occurred in a particular
category, such as an unfavorable opinion. We also compared responses by
groups for questions addressing those groups (e. g., male and female
student responses and minority and nonminority student responses). Since
we surveyed the entire student and faculty populations at all three

academies and not a statistical sample, achieved high response rates, and
found minimal occurrences of some groups responding out of proportion to
the population as a whole, the responses can be considered representative
of those populations.

We performed our work between November 2002 and July 2003 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.

Aspects of Student Life at the Academies:

Appendi x II

Student Survey and Responses Academic Climate 1. Considering all your
responsibilities, how would you characterize your academic workload?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Definitely too light .3 .3 .2 Probably too light 1.5 1. 3 .6 About right
35.3 42.9 30.3 Probably too heavy 48.1 45.1 50.5 Definitely too heavy 14.8
10.4 18.5

2. How much emphasis does the Academy place on academics, relative to what
you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 1.7 1. 1 2.8 Generally underemphasized 15. 7 9.7
26.1 Emphasis is about right 50. 6 49.9 54.1 Generally overemphasized 25.
3 29.8 14.3 Greatly overemphasized 6. 7 9.4 2. 7

3. How would you characterize the level of academic competition among
Academy students?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Definitely too little .7 .5 .6 Probably too little 9.1 7. 0 7.2 About
right 48.6 41.9 46.6 Probably too much 30. 3 36.2 33.6 Definitely too much
11. 2 14.4 12.0

4. How effective or ineffective is additional instruction available
outside the normal class meeting time for students who need it?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 2. 4 2.0 1. 2 Generally ineffective 3. 3 2.2 2. 0 Neither
effective nor ineffective 4. 0 2.9 1. 6 Generally effective 38.7 37.4 31.6

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very effective 51.7 55.5 63.6 5. Overall, how effective or ineffective are
your Academy instructors as teachers?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 1. 4 .8 .7 Generally ineffective 3. 3 4.6 3. 3 Neither
effective nor ineffective 5. 2 8.7 4. 8 Generally effective 56.1 66.8 62.0
Very effective 34.0 19.1 29.3

6. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall academic
program at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor .4 .4 .3 Below average 1. 4 1.6 1. 5 Average 5.5 8. 0 5.8 Good 33. 4
36.7 32.5 Excellent 59. 3 53.3 59.9

Military/ Professional Development 7. Considering all your
responsibilities, how would you characterize your military development
workload during the academic year?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Definitely too light 8.5 6. 4 1.4 Probably too light 33. 5 26.6 8. 8 About
right 40.7 50.7 40.4 Probably too heavy 13.8 13.7 33.6 Definitely too
heavy 3. 5 2.7 15.7

8. How would you rate the Academy*s performance standards for developing
you as an officer?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Much too low 2. 2 4.5 4. 9 Generally too low 21.0 28.2 22.1 About right
64.5 57.4 46.0 Generally too high 10. 3 8.3 19.7 Much too high 2.0 1. 5
7.3

9. How effective or ineffective is the four- year class system for
developing students as officers?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 8. 2 11.6 17.0 Generally ineffective 18.7 27.1 23.6
Neither effective nor ineffective 19.7 19.2 18.9 Generally effective 45.9
38.1 32.2 Very effective 7. 5 4.0 8. 3

10. How effective or ineffective are the summer military development
activities (not including initial entry summer training) for providing you
with the skills needed to be an officer?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 1. 5 2.9 3. 1 Generally ineffective 3. 3 7.9 6. 9 Neither
effective nor ineffective 4. 8 8.7 7. 5 Generally effective 46.9 45.7 41.2
Very effective 43.4 34.9 41.3

11. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall military
development program at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor 2.0 4. 1 6.6 Below average 7. 8 12.0 14.1 Average 19. 4 26.6 26.3
Good 49. 0 43.5 39.5 Excellent 21. 8 13.8 13.4

Social and Cultural Climate 12. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with
your social life at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very dissatisfied 33.0 22.6 30.3 Generally dissatisfied 39.6 34.1 34.4
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 13.6 17.4 13.8 Generally satisfied 12.1
22.5 18.2 Very satisfied 1. 7 3.4 3. 3

13. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the types of cultural
opportunities (e. g., courses related to the arts, opportunities to
participate in the arts, and attending such events) available to Academy
students on or off Academy grounds?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very dissatisfied 14.6 9. 9 18.8 Generally dissatisfied 29.4 23.5 34.2
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 31.0 30.4 28.9 Generally satisfied 20.8
28.3 15.1 Very satisfied 4. 2 7.9 2. 9

14. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with opportunities to
participate in religious services and activities?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very dissatisfied 2. 2 1.4 1. 9 Generally dissatisfied 3. 9 2.9 5. 5
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 17.5 17.3 17.9 Generally satisfied 38.5
40.2 39.4 Very satisfied 38.0 38.2 35.4

Harassment, Discrimination, and Preferential Treatment

Discrimination: Academy policies or practices that lead to unfair adverse
treatment of a person or group based on race, ethnicity, gender or
religion.

Harassment: Derogatory comments, gestures or other actions aimed at race,
gender, religion, or ethnicity that interfere with an individual*s
performance or create an intimidating, offensive or hostile environment,
including unwanted sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other
verbal or

physical conduct of a sexual nature. 15. How much emphasis does the
Academy place on the prevention of sexual harassment, relative to what you
think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 1.2 .7 2. 7 Generally underemphasized 6.4 6. 3
11.5 Emphasis is about right 54. 0 48.9 52.1 Generally overemphasized 26.
3 29.8 23.3 Greatly overemphasized 12.1 14.3 10.3

16. How much emphasis does the Academy place on the prevention of gender-
based discrimination, relative to what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 2.0 2. 5 4.3 Generally underemphasized 10. 3 13.7
18.1 Emphasis is about right 47. 1 45.1 51.0 Generally overemphasized 26.
5 23.2 17.2 Greatly overemphasized 14.2 15.4 9. 3

17. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall Academy
atmosphere for women?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor 3.9 6. 6 4.9 Below average 16.5 19.2 16.6 Average 22. 2 25.0 21.5
Good 39. 9 32.6 38.5 Excellent 17. 4 16.7 18.6

18. How much emphasis does the Academy place on the prevention of race-/
ethnicity- based harassment, relative to what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized .9 .9 1.7 Generally underemphasized 5.0 7. 3 9.6
Emphasis is about right 64. 7 76.5 71.4 Generally overemphasized 19. 6
10.4 11.9 Greatly overemphasized 9. 9 5.0 5. 4

19. How much emphasis does the Academy place on the prevention of race-/
ethnicity- based discrimination, relative to what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized .9 1.1 1. 6 Generally underemphasized 5.9 7. 3
10.4 Emphasis is about right 61. 6 75.0 68.0 Generally overemphasized 21.
3 11.8 13.5 Greatly overemphasized 10.3 4. 8 6.6

20. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall Academy
atmosphere for members of racial/ ethnic minorities?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor .8 .6 1.2 Below average 3. 4 3.6 4. 3 Average 12. 8 14.4 16.0 Good
44. 6 45.0 44.6 Excellent 38. 4 36.4 33.9

21. Based on your perception, how were your classmates in the following
groups treated during the admissions process relative to other applicants?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Males Preferential treatment 5.0 3. 2 3.0 Same treatment 71.4 75.6 78.8
Discriminatory treatment 7.2 8. 3 7.1 Do not know 16.4 13.0 11.1

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Females Preferential treatment 44.5 50.4 43.3 Same treatment 34.9 34.7
42.7 Discriminatory treatment 3.7 2. 2 3.3 Do not know 16.8 12.8 10.8

Whites/ Caucasians Preferential treatment 4.4 3. 6 3.1 Same treatment 68.8
73.2 76.2 Discriminatory treatment 10.1 9. 8 9.5 Do not know 16.7 13.3
11.2

Blacks/ AfricanAmericans

Preferential treatment 35.7 34.4 34.4 Same treatment 43.4 47.5 48.8
Discriminatory treatment 1.9 1. 6 2.0 Do not know 19.0 16.5 14.8

Spanish/ Hispanics/ Preferential treatment 27.1 25.3 23.5

Latinos Same treatment 49.6 53.3 57.4 Discriminatory treatment 1.6 1. 4
1.9 Do not know 21.7 19.9 17.3

Asians Preferential treatment 19.1 16.9 17.8 Same treatment 57.0 59.3 62.6
Discriminatory treatment 1.5 1. 3 1.3 Do not know 22.4 22.5 18.3

American

Preferential treatment 18.2 15.7 16.5

Indians/ Alaska Natives

Same treatment 49.9 53.2 58.3 Discriminatory treatment 1.2 1. 0 1.3 Do not
know 30.6 30.0 23.8

Native Hawaiians/

Preferential treatment 16.0 14.4 14.7

Other Pacific Islanders

Same treatment 52.3 56.6 62.3 Discriminatory treatment 1.1 1. 0 1.0 Do not
know 30.6 27.9 22.0

Recruited

Preferential treatment 73.5 72.5 76.8

Intercollegiate Athletes

Same treatment 15.3 17.4 14.3 Discriminatory treatment 1.6 2. 4 4.1

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Do not know 9.6 7. 8 4.8

Prior Enlisted Preferential treatment 32.1 21.4 16.4 Same treatment 47.2
59.9 66.1 Discriminatory treatment 1.8 2. 6 3.2 Do not know 18.9 16.2 14.3

Students with

Preferential treatment 48.4 49.2 41.1

Military Parents Same treatment 36.8 38.4 49.1 Discriminatory treatment .5
.3 .5 Do not know 14.2 12.1 9. 2

Preparatory School

Preferential treatment 40.8 32.1 35.3

Graduates Same treatment 42.4 53.3 52.4 Discriminatory treatment 1.6 1. 9
2.0 Do not know 15.3 12.8 10.3

22. To your knowledge, how are members of the following groups treated at
the Academy in general, relative to other students?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Males Preferential treatment 8.7 8. 2 5.7 Same treatment 84.3 84.6 87.1
Discriminatory treatment 4.4 6. 0 5.4 Do not know 2.7 1. 2 1.8

Females Preferential treatment 39.9 42.6 40.9 Same treatment 42.5 37.8
44.5 Discriminatory treatment 14.2 17.9 12.4 Do not know 3.4 1. 7 2.1

Whites/ Caucasians Preferential treatment 4.8 3. 8 3.6 Same treatment 87.6
90.7 89.0 Discriminatory treatment 4.3 3. 4 4.8 Do not know 3.4 2. 1 2.6

Blacks/ AfricanAmericans

Preferential treatment 16.3 14.8 20.1 Same treatment 76.1 78.6 73.2
Discriminatory treatment 3.2 3. 4 2.8 Do not know 4.3 3. 2 3.9

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Spanish/ Hispanics/ Preferential treatment 7.4 6.8 8.2

Latinos Same treatment 84.6 86.0 84.3 Discriminatory treatment 1.9 1. 9
2.3 Do not know 6.1 5. 3 5.2

Asians Preferential treatment 6.9 4. 7 6.2 Same treatment 85.4 88.1 86.1
Discriminatory treatment 1.8 1. 3 1.9 Do not know 6.0 6. 0 5.8

American

Preferential treatment 4.5 3.7 4.4

Indians/ Alaska Natives

Same treatment 83.3 85.1 84.5 Discriminatory treatment .9 .9 1.3 Do not
know 11.3 10.3 9. 7

Native Hawaiians/

Preferential treatment 4.0 3.7 4.3

Other Pacific Islanders

Same treatment 84.1 86.4 86.2 Discriminatory treatment 1.0 .9 1. 1 Do not
know 10.9 9. 0 8.4

Varsity Athletes Preferential treatment 64.2 59.5 70.4 Same treatment 26.4
25.9 18.2 Discriminatory treatment 7.1 13.3 10.1 Do not know 2.2 1. 3 1.3

Non- Varsity

Preferential treatment 4.6 3.1 20.0

Athletes Same treatment 77.8 84.8 61.5 Discriminatory treatment 14.2 10.2
16.1 Do not know 3.4 1. 9 2.4

Prior Enlisted Preferential treatment 32.2 18.6 9. 3 Same treatment 62.3
75.3 84.9 Discriminatory treatment 2.0 3. 2 2.5 Do not know 3.6 2. 9 3.3

Students with

Preferential treatment 25.2 25.5 19.2

Military Parents Same treatment 70.3 71.0 77.0 Discriminatory treatment .6
.6 .7

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Do not know 3.9 2. 8 3.2

Preparatory School

Preferential treatment 18.2 9.2 10.4

Graduates Same treatment 75.1 84.9 84.4 Discriminatory treatment 2.9 3. 0
2.1 Do not know 3.8 3. 0 3.0

Foreign Students Preferential treatment 21.3 11.0 20.3 Same treatment 70.4
78.6 70.4 Discriminatory treatment 2.0 3. 1 3.5 Do not know 6.3 7. 3 5.9

Moral Climate and Honor Code/ Concept 23. How much emphasis does the
Academy place on the moral/ ethical development of students, relative to
what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 1.0 1. 6 3.5 Generally underemphasized 5.9 9. 7
15.4 Emphasis is about right 61. 5 59.7 61.3 Generally overemphasized 22.
4 21.6 14.9 Greatly overemphasized 9. 2 7.4 4. 9

24. To what extent is the Honor Code/ Concept practiced as it is taught?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

To little or no extent 2.2 6. 1 6.0 To some extent 12. 5 24.8 22.1 To a
moderate extent 23. 3 32.4 29.3 To a great extent 40. 1 28.9 32.2 To a
very great extent 22. 0 7.9 10.4

25. To what extent is the Honor Code/ Concept fairly applied to students
with similar violations?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

To little or no extent 9.5 13.7 12.2 To some extent 21. 2 26.5 23.0 To a
moderate extent 26. 4 30.8 27.4 To a great extent 29. 6 22.8 26.9 To a
very great extent 13. 3 6.3 10.4

26. How frequently have you witnessed academic cheating at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Seldom or never 89.1 76.1 69.0 On occasion 8.0 18.8 20.7 Often 2. 1 3.1 5.
9 Very often .7 1. 6 3.4 All or almost all the time .2 .4 1.1

Intercollegiate and Intramural Athletics 27. When you were applying to the
Academy, were you recruited to be an athlete for one of the Academy*s
varsity intercollegiate athletic teams?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 75. 9 73.3 74.9 Yes 24.1 26.7 25.1

28. Are you an athlete on one of the Academy*s varsity intercollegiate
teams?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 80. 4 71.9 81.8 Yes 19.6 28.1 18.2

29. How much emphasis does the Academy place on varsity intercollegiate
athletics?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 5.8 4. 9 3.5 Generally underemphasized 14. 5 15.0
10.6 Emphasis is about right 25. 8 41.3 22.0 Generally overemphasized 28.
7 26.1 29.5 Greatly overemphasized 25.2 12.7 34.3

30. How much emphasis does the Academy place on intramural athletics?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 5.7 3. 6 2.1 Generally underemphasized 23. 0 19.6
10.0 Emphasis is about right 52. 3 59.2 35.8 Generally overemphasized 13.
5 13.6 28.8 Greatly overemphasized 5. 5 4.0 23.2

31. How much emphasis does the Academy place on club athletics?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 11. 5 11.6 44.4 Generally underemphasized 36. 8
37.7 39.6 Emphasis is about right 45. 2 48.1 13.5 Generally overemphasized
5.4 2. 1 1.9 Greatly overemphasized 1. 2 .5 .7

Services 32. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with the following
housing conditions, food services and other services/ facilities at the
Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Physical condition

Very dissatisfied 4.5 1.6 1.0

of housing Generally dissatisfied 16.2 7. 9 8.8

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Neither satisfied nor 20.3 14.6 15.5

dissatisfied Generally satisfied 50.0 57.3 55.9 Very satisfied 9. 0 18.6
18.7

Maintenance of

Very dissatisfied 5.4 3.3 2.8

housing Generally dissatisfied 19.6 16.9 13.6 Neither satisfied nor

20.0 17.6 17.1 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 46.3 48.9 49.6

Very satisfied 8. 7 13.2 16.9

Total amount of

Very dissatisfied 5.8 6.4 4.8

living area Generally dissatisfied 17.8 22.8 18.6 Neither satisfied nor

17.2 21.9 18.1 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 45.9 39.2 43.5

Very satisfied 13.3 9. 6 15.0

Study conditions Very dissatisfied 2.9 2. 4 3.7 Generally dissatisfied
10.5 11.9 12.9 Neither satisfied nor

19.1 22.5 21.0 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 54.5 51.1 48.9

Very satisfied 13.1 12.2 13.5

Personal storage

Very dissatisfied 12.2 13.8 11.4

area Generally dissatisfied 35.2 37.3 33.1 Neither satisfied nor

17.8 18.9 20.1 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 29.8 25.2 29.2

Very satisfied 5. 0 4.8 6. 2

Restrooms Very dissatisfied 7.1 5. 6 5.3 Generally dissatisfied 18.8 14.8
17.3 Neither satisfied nor

21.4 23.2 25.6 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 44.3 45.8 42.6

Very satisfied 8. 4 10.6 9. 2

Available Very dissatisfied 1.8 8.1 1.1 technology

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Generally dissatisfied 5.9 11.8 4. 3 Neither satisfied nor

11.1 11.2 11.4 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 49.6 41.8 48.0

Very satisfied 31.5 27.2 35.3

Security of personal Very dissatisfied 4.3 15.1 3.3

effects Generally dissatisfied 8.4 23.6 9. 6 Neither satisfied nor

15.4 21.0 18.4 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 45.8 31.2 48.7

Very satisfied 26.1 9. 2 20.0

Personal safety Very dissatisfied 1.3 1. 1 1.2 Generally dissatisfied 1.6
1. 8 2.3 Neither satisfied nor

8.5 12.2 12.5 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 36.0 40.8 44.9

Very satisfied 52.6 44.1 39.0

Quality of mess hall Very dissatisfied 12.4 11.2 22.8

food Generally dissatisfied 26.3 26.4 34.2 Neither satisfied nor

21.1 23.7 18.9 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 35.7 34.4 21.6

Very satisfied 4. 5 4.3 2. 4

Laundry service Very dissatisfied 18.2 19.6 24.9 Generally dissatisfied
31.1 27.0 31.2 Neither satisfied nor

19.9 23.8 25.4 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 27.1 26.4 16.4

Very satisfied 3. 6 3.2 2. 0

Medical care Very dissatisfied 6.8 4. 8 15.0 Generally dissatisfied 14.2
15.9 28.0 Neither satisfied nor

21.4 23.6 20.8 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 44.2 42.4 28.3

Very satisfied 13.4 13.3 7. 9

Shopping facilities Very dissatisfied 11.0 3. 4 7.9 Generally dissatisfied
27.5 9. 4 19.8

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Neither satisfied nor 24.4 22.5 30.3

dissatisfied Generally satisfied 32.7 52.2 37.6 Very satisfied 4. 4 12.5
4. 4

Off- installation

Very dissatisfied 35.3 26.3 41.8

transportation Generally dissatisfied 34.2 36.0 31.0 Neither satisfied nor

16.8 23.7 19.6 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 12.0 12.0 6. 6

Very satisfied 1. 8 2.0 1. 1

Phone service Very dissatisfied 10.5 6. 7 20.7 Generally dissatisfied 17.0
12.6 24.5 Neither satisfied nor

24.1 24.0 35.4 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 40.5 46.2 17.1

Very satisfied 7. 8 10.5 2. 3

Cable service Very dissatisfied 17.2 25.3 29.1 Generally dissatisfied 24.0
19.8 27.0 Neither satisfied nor

21.6 30.6 29.8 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 31.1 20.5 12.0

Very satisfied 6. 1 3.7 2. 0

Updating of

Very dissatisfied 6.2 9.4 4.1

school computer equipment

Generally dissatisfied 11.7 12.8 9. 7 Neither satisfied nor

25.3 24.6 25.9 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 42.6 40.0 43.5

Very satisfied 14.2 13.2 16.8

Condition of

Very dissatisfied 34.4 3.5 9.5

athletic facilities that all students can use

Generally dissatisfied 24.1 10.2 19.2 Neither satisfied nor

14.1 14.0 14.8 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 22.2 50.6 38.4

Very satisfied 5. 2 21.7 18.1

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Club sports

Very dissatisfied 5.8 3.3 18.7

(number, diversity, participation, etc.)

Generally dissatisfied 11.5 8. 7 23.4 Neither satisfied nor

32.2 30.9 27.3 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 40.0 45.4 24.4

Very satisfied 10.5 11.8 6. 2

Personal privacy Very dissatisfied 23.2 16.5 16.0 Generally dissatisfied
30.7 29.6 26.5 Neither satisfied nor

22.0 27.8 27.4 dissatisfied Generally satisfied 20.6 23.2 25.4

Very satisfied 3. 5 2.9 4. 7 Personal Affairs 33. How adequate or
inadequate is the amount of time you have to handle your personal affairs?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very inadequate 18.5 12.3 20. 8 Generally inadequate 48.2 46.0 51. 7
Adequate 31.0 38.7 26. 5 Generally more than adequate 2.1 2. 8 1. 1 Much
more than adequate .3 .1 0. 0

34. How satisfied or dissatisfied are you with opportunities to use
personal time as you would like to use it?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very dissatisfied 28.5 14.9 27. 0 Generally dissatisfied 42.1 37.8 42. 3
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 17.7 23.1 17. 3 Generally satisfied
11.2 22.8 12. 7 Very satisfied .5 1. 4 .7

General 35. Considering everything, how would you rate your overall
satisfaction with the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very dissatisfied 4. 0 4.2 5. 8 Generally dissatisfied 15.9 14.7 18. 1
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 18.5 16.7 17. 5 Generally satisfied
49.0 50.1 47. 1 Very satisfied 12.6 14.3 11. 5

36. To what extent are quality of life problems at the Academy openly
confronted and/ or solved?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

To little or no extent 24.3 25.3 39. 0 To some extent 35.0 33.8 32. 2 To a
moderate extent 30.5 32.2 22. 6 To a great extent 8. 8 7. 5 5.3 To a very
great extent 1.3 1. 2 .8

37. Which of the following best describes your career intentions at the
present time?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

I plan to stay in the military until 15.4 15.3 25. 6

retirement. I plan to stay in the military 24.8 28.9 29. 5 beyond my
obligation, but am undecided about staying until retirement.

I am undecided whether I will 40.8 38.8 30. 9

stay in the military beyond my obligation. I will probably leave the
military

12.6 11.9 10. 0 upon completion of my obligation.

I will definitely leave the military 6.4 5. 1 4. 0 upon completion of my
obligation.

Background Information 38. Which Academy do you attend?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

U. S. Military Academy 100.0 0. 0 0. 0 U. S. Naval Academy 0. 0 100.0 0. 0
U. S. Air Force Academy 0. 0 0.0 100. 0

39. What is your year class?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

First Class (class of 2003) 21. 4 22. 2 25.6 Second Class (class of 2004)
24. 4 24. 7 23.9 Third Class (class of 2005) 26. 0 26. 1 27.0 Fourth Class
(class of 2006) 28. 2 27. 1 23.5

40. What is your gender?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Male 84.7 84.4 82. 0 Female 15.3 15.6 18. 0

41. Are you either Spanish, Hispanic, or Latino?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 91.1 90.3 92. 1 Ye s 8 . 9 9 . 7 7 . 9

42. What is your race?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

White/ Caucasian Not checked 22.4 18.7 17.8 Checked 77.6 81.3 82.2

Black/ AfricanAmerican

Not checked 93.8 94.9 95.4

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Checked 6. 2 5.1 4. 6

Asian Not checked 92.4 95.6 95.6 Checked 7. 6 4.4 4. 4

American

Not checked 98.1 97.8 97.7

Indian/ Alaska Native

Checked 1. 9 2.2 2. 3

Native

Not checked 98.9 98.5 99.1

Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander

Checked 1. 1 1. 5 .9

No response Not checked 90.6 90.4 91.1 Checked 9. 4 9.6 8. 9

43. Were you prior enlisted before enrolling in the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 90.1 89.9 95. 4 Yes 9. 9 10.1 4. 6

44. Did you attend the Academy*s preparatory school before enrolling in
the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 86.2 84.1 88. 4 Yes 13.8 15.9 11. 6

45. Is either of your parents a graduate of a military academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 93.4 93.4 91. 4 Ye s 6 . 6 6 . 6 8 . 6

46. Is either of your parents currently serving in the active services or
Guard/ Reserves?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 92.1 93.7 91. 1 Ye s 7 . 9 6 . 3 8 . 9

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Aspects of Student Life at the Academies:

Appendi x III

Faculty Survey and Responses Academic Climate 1. Considering all the
students* responsibilities, how would you characterize their academic
workload at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Definitely too light 1.5 .6 1. 6 Probably too light 7.6 7. 6 7. 8 About
right 55.1 60.3 58. 2 Probably too heavy 29.2 22.9 25. 1 Definitely too
heavy 6. 6 8.5 7. 2

2. How much emphasis does the Academy place on academics, relative to what
you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 2.5 2. 1 5. 8 Generally underemphasized 30.4 32.4
37. 1 Emphasis is about right 54.8 55.4 50. 0 Generally overemphasized
10.3 7. 7 5. 2 Greatly overemphasized 2. 0 2.3 1. 8

3. How would you characterize the level of academic competition among
Academy students?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Definitely too little 3.5 4. 3 3. 9 Probably too little 28.7 27.0 21. 1
About right 54.5 56.4 60. 7 Probably too much 10.3 10.9 12. 1 Definitely
too much 3.0 1. 3 2.2

4. How effective or ineffective is additional instruction available
outside the normal class meeting time for students who need it?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 4. 1 3.8 3. 1 Generally ineffective 2. 2 1.9 4. 1 Neither
effective nor ineffective 1. 2 1.7 2. 5 Generally effective 35.5 38.3 33.
1

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very effective 57.0 54.2 57. 3 5. How would you rate the academic
preparedness of students who attended the Academy Preparatory School
relative to their classmates at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Much more prepared 1. 3 1.6 1. 9 Somewhat more prepared 14.6 16.8 20. 3
About the same 40.3 40.5 42. 0 Somewhat less prepared 35.4 33.7 28. 3 Much
less prepared 8. 4 7.4 7. 4

6. Overall, how effective or ineffective are Academy instructors as
teachers?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 2. 4 1.9 2. 3 Generally ineffective 2. 4 1.7 1. 0 Neither
effective nor ineffective 1. 2 2.8 1. 9 Generally effective 45.2 45.8 41.
8 Very effective 48.7 47.7 52. 9

7. Who among the following have ever tried to improperly influence you to
modify the grades in any of your Academy courses?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent) Fellow faculty Not
checked 97.8 97.9 97. 8

Checked 2. 2 2. 1 2. 2

Course director Not checked 96.0 99.4 96. 0 Checked 4. 0 .6 4.0

Department head or

Not checked 94.0 96.9 96. 0

deputy department head

Checked 6. 0 3. 1 4. 0

Dean or someone Not checked 100.0 99.2 98. 6

on his/ her staff Checked 0. 0 .8 1.4

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent) Coach or other Not
checked 98.8 97.7 98. 0

athletic department or association official

Checked 1. 2 2. 3 2. 0

Someone on Not checked 100.0 98.1 99. 6

Commandant*s staff

Checked 0. 0 1. 9 .4

Someone on Not checked 99.8 99.8 99. 6

Superintendent*s staff

Checked .2 .2 .4

Other Not checked 99.3 97.1 98. 8 Checked .7 2. 9 1. 2

No one at the Not checked 14.1 12.6 18. 0

Academy has ever tried to improperly influence me to modify grades

Checked 85.9 87.4 82. 0

No basis to judge Not checked 96.8 97.7 91. 9 Checked 3. 2 2. 3 8. 1

8. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall academic
program at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor .5 0. 0 .6 Below average 2. 4 2.7 3. 4 Average 9.4 10.6 4. 6 Good
30.3 32.9 33. 3 Excellent 57.4 53.8 58. 1

Military/ Professional Development 9. Considering all the students*
responsibilities, how would you characterize their military development
workload during the academic year?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Definitely too light 13.0 2. 4 2. 8 Probably too light 27.1 12.5 11. 2
About right 28.6 53.3 36. 1 Probably too heavy 22.1 26.2 34. 3 Definitely
too heavy 9. 1 5.7 15.6

10. How would you rate the Academy*s performance standards for developing
students as officers?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Much too low 2. 8 2.1 3. 9 Generally too low 23.4 20.2 27. 9 About right
70.3 74.2 60. 5 Generally too high 3.5 2. 8 6. 0 Much too high 0.0 .7 1. 7

11. How effective or ineffective is the four- year class system for
developing students as officers?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 3. 4 4.4 9. 5 Generally ineffective 10.7 15.1 21. 9
Neither effective nor ineffective 7. 9 11.4 12. 7 Generally effective 66.9
56.9 49. 2 Very effective 11.1 12.2 6. 7

12. How effective or ineffective are the summer military development
activities (not including initial entry summer training) for providing
students with the skills needed to be an officer?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Very ineffective 1. 6 1.8 1. 7 Generally ineffective 5. 5 9.3 8. 0 Neither
effective nor ineffective 2. 0 9.9 7. 5

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Generally effective 53.9 52.8 52. 3 Very effective 36.9 26.3 30. 5

13. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall military
development program at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor .9 1. 0 4. 5 Below average 8. 7 5.1 14. 0 Average 17.4 17.3 21. 3
Good 49.5 47.0 41. 3 Excellent 23.6 29.7 18. 9

Harassment, Discrimination, and Preferential Treatment

Discrimination: Academy policies or practices that lead to unfair adverse
treatment of a person or group based on race, ethnicity, gender or
religion.

Harassment: Derogatory comments, gestures or other actions aimed at race,
gender, religion, or ethnicity that interfere with an individual*s
performance or create an intimidating, offensive or hostile environment,
including unwanted sexual advances, requests for sexual favors and other
verbal or

physical conduct of a sexual nature. 14. How much emphasis does the
Academy place on the prevention of sexual harassment of students, relative
to what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 3.2 1. 9 4. 8 Generally underemphasized 9.8 14.4
18. 7 Emphasis is about right 75.0 75.0 65. 1 Generally overemphasized 9.2
6. 3 8. 6 Greatly overemphasized 2. 8 2.5 2. 7

15. How much emphasis does the Academy place on the prevention of gender-
based discrimination of students, relative to what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 2.1 2. 4 3. 0 Generally underemphasized 13.4 15.6
18. 4 Emphasis is about right 70.2 72.3 68. 9 Generally overemphasized
11.1 7. 3 6. 4 Greatly overemphasized 3. 2 2.4 3. 4

16. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall Academy
atmosphere for women students?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor 3. 6 3. 0 6.2 Below average 14.3 20.0 19. 1 Average 23.8 22.2 24. 0
Good 39.8 37.8 34. 3 Excellent 18.4 17.0 16. 4

17. How much emphasis does the Academy place on the prevention of race-/
ethnicity- based harassment of students, relative to what you think it
should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 1.1 1. 2 0. 0 Generally underemphasized 5.9 8. 4
8. 2 Emphasis is about right 79.8 83.2 82. 1 Generally overemphasized 10.0
4. 8 8. 0 Greatly overemphasized 3. 2 2.4 1. 7

18. How much emphasis does the Academy place on the prevention of race-/
ethnicity- based discrimination of students, relative to what you think it
should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 1.1 1. 2 .4 Generally underemphasized 5.3 9. 3 8.
2 Emphasis is about right 78.3 81.4 82. 0 Generally overemphasized 11.7 5.
7 8. 2 Greatly overemphasized 3. 6 2.4 1. 3

19. Based on your experiences, how would you rate the overall Academy
atmosphere for members of racial/ ethnic minorities?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Poor .9 1. 3 0. 0 Below average 3. 3 5.5 4. 9 Average 16.4 19.4 18. 2 Good
43.0 42.4 41. 4 Excellent 36.4 31.4 35. 5

20. Based on your perception, how were students in the following groups
treated during the admissions process relative to other applicants?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent) Males Preferential

2.2 2. 8 3.7 treatment Same

49. 5 48. 2 48. 3 treatment Discriminatory

4.3 3.7 1.3 treatment Do not know 44. 0 45. 4 46. 7

Females Preferential 17. 2 17. 0 11. 8

treatment Same 37. 7 36. 1 39. 2 treatment Discriminatory

2.5 3.6 2.6 treatment Do not know 42. 5 43. 3 46. 4

Whites/ Caucasians Preferential 1.8 1. 2 2.8

treatment Same 46. 9 46. 3 46. 3 treatment Discriminatory

8.0 7.2 4.1 treatment Do not know 43. 3 45. 4 46. 7

Blacks/ AfricanAmericans

Preferential 42. 0 40. 5 19. 1 treatment Same

16. 5 17. 0 33. 4 treatment Discriminatory

.5 .9 .9 treatment Do not know 40. 9 41. 6 46. 6

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent) Spanish/ Hispanics/
Preferential

30. 3 32. 2 13. 6 Latinos treatment Same 25. 0 22. 3 37. 2 treatment
Discriminatory

.4 .5 1. 1 treatment Do not know 44. 3 45. 1 48. 1

Asians Preferential 10. 3 8. 8 4. 4

treatment Same 42. 0 41. 9 45. 0 treatment Discriminatory

1.1 .9 1.3 treatment Do not know 46. 6 48. 4 49. 3

American

Preferential 18. 8 22. 0 8. 8 Indians/ Alaska

treatment Natives

Same 26. 8 22. 2 37. 4

treatment Discriminatory .5 .7 .9 treatment Do not know 53. 8 55. 1 52. 9

Native Hawaiians/

Preferential 13. 9 15. 3 5. 7 Other Pacific Islanders treatment Same

30. 3 27. 2 38. 9 treatment Discriminatory

.4 .5 .4 treatment Do not know 55. 4 57. 0 54. 9

Recruited

Preferential 55. 9 54. 7 56. 3 Intercollegiate

treatment Athletes

Same 7. 5 7. 9 11. 2

treatment Discriminatory .2 .2 .9 treatment Do not know 36. 5 37. 2 31. 6

Prior Enlisted Preferential 12. 4 24. 8 7. 7

treatment Same 40. 6 29. 0 43. 0 treatment

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Discriminatory .7 1.1 .4

treatment Do not know 46. 3 45. 1 48. 9

Students with Military Preferential 20. 0 30. 0 18. 7 Parents treatment
Same

34. 7 24. 8 35. 7 treatment Discriminatory

0. 0 .2 .4 treatment Do not know 45. 3 45. 0 45. 1

Preparatory School

Preferential 23. 4 35. 7 24. 6 Graduates treatment Same

31. 7 21. 9 31. 5 treatment Discriminatory

.4 .2 .2 treatment Do not know 44. 5 42. 1 43. 7 21. To your knowledge,
how are members of the following groups treated at the Academy in general,
relative to other students?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent) Males Preferential

4.9 7. 1 9. 5 treatment Same 87.3 82.9 81. 5

treatment Discriminatory 1. 0 1.3 1.2 treatment Do not know 6.8 8. 7 7. 8

Females Preferential 11.3 9. 8 9. 7

treatment Same 70.9 67.1 68. 2 treatment Discriminatory

10.3 13. 8 14. 4 treatment Do not know 7.5 9. 3 7. 6

Whites/ Caucasians Preferential 3.5 3. 1 4. 1

treatment Same 87.8 85.9 84. 6 treatment Discriminatory

1. 4 2.0 1.7 treatment

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Do not know 7.3 8. 9 9. 5

Blacks/ AfricanAmericans

Preferential 11. 7 9.6 6.2

treatment Same 77.2 76.7 81. 4 treatment Discriminatory

3. 0 3.8 3.1 treatment Do not know 8.2 10. 0 9. 3

Spanish/ Hispanics/ Preferential 4. 0 5.1 3.3

Latinos treatment Same 85.4 81.3 83. 9 treatment Discriminatory

1. 4 2.9 1.7 treatment Do not know 9.1 10. 7 11. 1

Asians Preferential 1.1 1. 8 1. 3

treatment Same 88.1 84.7 86. 4 treatment Discriminatory

1.4 1. 8 .6 treatment Do not know 9.5 11. 7 11. 7

American

Preferential 1. 6 3.2 2.1

Indians/ Alaska

treatment Natives

Same 82.4 75.5 81. 9 treatment Discriminatory

1. 1 1.6 1.1 treatment Do not know 14.9 19. 8 14. 9

Native Hawaiians/

Preferential 1. 2 2.3 1.3

Other Pacific

treatment Islanders

Same 82.9 76.1 82. 8 treatment Discriminatory

.9 1.4 .6 treatment Do not know 14.9 20. 2 15. 3

Varsity Athletes Preferential 56.4 55.2 62. 9

treatment Same 34.8 32.3 27. 7 treatment

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Discriminatory 1. 7 3.3 3.5

treatment Do not know 7.1 9. 2 5. 9

Non- Varsity Athletes Preferential 2. 5 1.3 5.6

treatment Same 83.7 84.1 77. 0 treatment Discriminatory

5. 8 4.0 9.1 treatment Do not know 8.1 10. 5 8. 3

Prior Enlisted Preferential 6.5 2. 4 .2

treatment Same 82.8 83.6 84. 6 treatment Discriminatory

1. 1 1.8 2.1 treatment Do not know 9.7 12. 2 13. 1

Students with

Preferential 10. 7 7.2 8.7

Military Parents treatment Same 79.1 79.5 78. 0 treatment Discriminatory

0.0 .2 .2 treatment Do not know 10.2 13. 1 13. 1

Preparatory School

Preferential 4. 4 2.7 3.1

Graduates treatment Same 85.1 84.3 82. 9 treatment Discriminatory

.5 .7 .6 treatment Do not know 10.0 12. 3 13. 3

Foreign Students Preferential 18.4 9. 0 19. 5

treatment Same 67.3 73.6 66. 5 treatment Discriminatory

2. 1 1.4 2.1 treatment Do not know 12.3 16. 0 11. 9

Moral Climate and Honor Code/ Concept 22. How much emphasis does the
Academy place on the moral/ ethical development of students, relative to
what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized .7 .8 2.6 Generally underemphasized 8. 6 8. 6 14.5
Emphasis is about right 78. 8 72. 7 72.5 Generally overemphasized 9. 8
13.2 8. 1 Greatly overemphasized 2. 2 4.6 2. 2

23. To what extent is the Honor Code/ Concept practiced as it is taught?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

To little or no extent 2.6 7. 3 6. 5 To some extent 19.8 24.5 29. 1 To a
moderate extent 26.7 27.0 30. 8 To a great extent 39.0 36.9 27. 9 To a
very great extent 11.9 4. 3 5. 7

24. To what extent is the Honor Code/ Concept fairly applied to students
with similar violations?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

To little or no extent 4.2 7. 9 8. 9 To some extent 19.0 23.1 23. 6 To a
moderate extent 23.9 27.8 26. 4 To a great extent 40.8 34.5 34. 8 To a
very great extent 12.1 6. 7 6. 3

25. How frequently have you witnessed academic cheating at the Academy?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Seldom or never 82.7 65.9 61. 8 On occasion 16.4 30.1 34. 6 Often .7 3. 4
2.7 Ver y of t en . 2 . 6 . 8 All or almost all the time 0.0 0. 0 0. 0

Intercollegiate and Intramural Athletics 26. How much emphasis does the
Academy place on varsity intercollegiate athletics, relative to what you
think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized .5 .6 .6 Generally underemphasized 6.4 5. 2 2. 2
Emphasis is about right 36.6 42.8 28. 0 Generally overemphasized 33.6 35.1
36. 4 Greatly overemphasized 22.9 16.3 32. 7

27. How much emphasis does the Academy place on intramural athletics,
relative to what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 1.8 2. 0 2. 3 Generally underemphasized 18.5 14.6
17. 8 Emphasis is about right 66.1 73.0 60. 4 Generally overemphasized 9.8
8. 5 13. 6 Greatly overemphasized 3. 9 1.8 5. 9

28. How much emphasis does the Academy place on club athletics, relative
to what you think it should be?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Greatly underemphasized 5.7 3. 2 15. 8 Generally underemphasized 22.0 20.6
28. 4 Emphasis is about right 59.1 66.6 45. 9

(Continued From Previous Page)

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Generally overemphasized 9.6 7. 4 7. 9 Greatly overemphasized 3. 6 2.1 2.
0

General 29. To what extent are quality of life problems at the Academy
openly confronted and/ or solved?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

To little or no extent 10.8 10.4 18. 7 To some extent 27.5 34.9 27. 2 To a
moderate extent 33.1 31.9 31. 3 To a great extent 24.1 19.6 18. 3 To a
very great extent 4.5 3. 2 4. 6

Background Information 30. At which Academy do you teach?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

U. S. Military Academy 100.0 0. 0 0. 0 U. S. Naval Academy 0. 0 100.0 0. 0
U. S. Air Force Academy 0. 0 0.0 100. 0

31. Are you a military or civilian member of the Academy faculty?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

Military 79. 0 43.1 71.6 Civilian 15. 4 44.0 13.9 Civilian with prior
military service 5. 6 12. 9 14.5

32. Are you a graduate of one of the military academies?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 51. 5 70.5 64.4 Yes 48.5 29.5 35.6

33. Are you a tactical officer (USMA), company officer (USNA), or air
officer commanding (USAFA)?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 93. 9 93.5 90. 4 Yes 6. 1 6.5 9. 6

34. In the past 4 years, have you participated in the admissions process?

U. S. Military Academy U. S. Naval Academy

U. S. Air Force Academy (percent) (percent) (percent)

No 85.6 91.4 89. 8 Yes 14.4 8. 6 10. 2

35. How many years of full- time college teaching have you completed total
and at the Academy specifically? Do not count teaching as a graduate
student. Write the numbers of years in the space provided. _____ Total
years of full- time college teaching _____ Years of full- time college
teaching at the Academy

Note: Percentages may not add to 100 due to rounding.

Appendi x IV

GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments GAO Contact Sandra F. Bell (202)
512- 8981 Acknowledgments In addition to the individual named above,
Gabrielle M. Anderson, Nancy L.

Benco, Carolyn M. Boyce, Brian G. Hackett, and Joseph W. Kirschbaum also
made key contributions to this report.

Related GAO Products

Military Education: DOD Needs to Enhance Performance Goals and Measures to
Improve Oversight of the Military Academies. GAO- 03- 1000. Washington, D.
C.: September 10, 2003.

Military Education: DOD Needs to Align Academy Preparatory Schools*
Mission Statements with Overall Guidance and Establish Performance Goals.
GAO- 03- 1017. Washington, D. C.: September 10, 2003.

DOD Service Academies: Problems Limit Feasibility of Graduates Directly
Entering the Reserves. GAO/ NSIAD- 97- 89. Washington, D. C.: March 24,
1997.

DOD Service Academies: Comparison of Honor and Conduct Adjudicatory
Processes. GAO/ NSIAD- 95- 49. Washington, D. C.: April 25, 1995.

DOD Service Academies: Academic Review Processes. GAO/ NSIAD- 95- 57.
Washington, D. C.: April 5, 1995.

DOD Service Academies: Update on Extent of Sexual Harassment.

GAO/ NSIAD- 95- 58. Washington, D. C.: March 31, 1995.

Coast Guard: Cost for the Naval Academy Preparatory School and Profile of
Minority Enrollment. GAO/ RCED- 94- 131. Washington, D. C.: April 12,
1994.

Military Academy: Gender and Racial Disparities. GAO/ NSIAD- 94- 95.
Washington, D. C.: March 17, 1994.

DOD Service Academies: Further Efforts Needed to Eradicate Sexual
Harassment. GAO/ T- NSIAD- 94- 111. Washington, D. C.: February 3, 1994.

DOD Service Academies: More Actions Needed to Eliminate Sexual Harassment.
GAO/ NSIAD- 94- 6. Washington, D. C.: January 31, 1994.

Academy Preparatory Schools. GAO/ NSIAD- 94- 56R. Washington, D. C.:
October 5, 1993.

Air Force Academy: Gender and Racial Disparities. GAO/ NSIAD- 93- 244.
Washington, D. C.: September 24, 1993.

Military Education: Information on Service Academies and Schools.

GAO/ NSIAD- 93- 264BR. Washington, D. C.: September 22, 1993.

Naval Academy: Gender and Racial Disparities. GAO/ NSIAD- 93- 54.
Washington, D. C.: April 30, 1993.

DOD Service Academies: More Changes Needed to Eliminate Hazing.

GAO/ NSIAD- 93- 36. Washington, D. C.: November 16, 1992.

DOD Service Academies: Status Report on Reviews of Student Treatment.

GAO/ T- NSIAD- 92- 41. Washington, D. C.: June 2, 1992.

Service Academies: Historical Proportion of New Officers During Benchmark
Periods. GAO/ NSIAD- 92- 90. Washington, D. C.: March 19, 1992.

DOD Service Academies: Academy Preparatory Schools Need a Clearer Mission
and Better Oversight. GAO/ NSIAD- 92- 57. Washington, D. C.: March 13,
1992.

Naval Academy: Low Grades in Electrical Engineering Courses Surface
Broader Issues. GAO/ NSIAD- 91- 187. Washington, D. C.: July 22, 1991.

DOD Service Academies: Improved Cost and Performance Monitoring Needed.
GAO/ NSIAD- 91- 79. Washington, D. C.: July 16, 1991.

Review of the Cost and Operations of DOD*s Service Academies. GAO/ T-
NSIAD- 90- 28. Washington, D. C.: April 4, 1990.

(350373)

GAO*s Mission The General Accounting Office, the audit, evaluation and
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its
constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance and
accountability of the

federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use of public
funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides analyses,
recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make informed
oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO*s commitment to good
government is reflected in its core values of accountability, integrity,
and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO
documents at no cost is

through the Internet. GAO*s Web site (www. gao. gov) contains abstracts
and fulltext GAO Reports and

files of current reports and testimony and an expanding archive of older
Testimony

products. The Web site features a search engine to help you locate
documents using key words and phrases. You can print these documents in
their entirety, including charts and other graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as *Today*s Reports,* on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full- text document files.
To have GAO e- mail

this list to you every afternoon, go to www. gao. gov and select
*Subscribe to e- mail alerts* under the *Order GAO Products* heading.
Order by Mail or Phone The first copy of each printed report is free.
Additional copies are $2 each. A

check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent of
Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or more
copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. Orders should
be sent to:

U. S. General Accounting Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM Washington, D. C.
20548 To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512- 6000 TDD: (202) 512- 2537 Fax:
(202) 512- 6061

To Report Fraud, Contact:

Waste, and Abuse in Web site: www. gao. gov/ fraudnet/ fraudnet. htm E-
mail: fraudnet@ gao. gov Federal Programs

Automated answering system: (800) 424- 5454 or (202) 512- 7470 Public
Affairs Jeff Nelligan, Managing Director, NelliganJ@ gao. gov (202) 512-
4800 U. S. General Accounting Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149
Washington, D. C. 20548

a

GAO United States General Accounting Office

The majority of students who responded to GAO*s survey expressed overall
satisfaction with their academy, although students gave wide- ranging
responses to a variety of quality- of- life questions. About 59 percent of
students at the Military and Naval Academies and 71 percent at the Air
Force Academy reported that quality- of- life problems are openly
confronted and/ or solved to some, little, or no extent. Over 90 percent
of students rated their academic programs as good or excellent. About a
quarter to a third of students rated their academy*s performance standards
for developing military officers as too low. Most differences in student
responses on academy emphasis on prevention of gender- and race-/
ethnicity- based discrimination and harassment were generally between male
and female students and minorities and nonminority students. Over 80
percent of students who were not recruited as athletes responded that
recruited athletes receive preferential treatment during the admissions
process.

The faculty members who responded to the survey generally agreed with the
students* perceptions of student life at the academies, but they were less
likely than students to say that quality- of- life problems are seldom
openly

confronted and/ or solved. About a quarter to a third of faculty agreed
with student perceptions that performance standards for developing
military officers were too low. Faculty perceptions varied on issues
associated with gender- and race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination and
harassment and preferential treatment. More than 90 percent of faculty who
participated in the admissions process in the past 4 years at the Military
and Naval Academies and 72 percent at the Air Force Academy responded that
recruited athletes receive preferential treatment during the admissions
process.

Student Rating of Overall Satisfaction with Academies

The Army, Navy, and Air Force each operate an academy to educate and train
young men and

women to become leaders and effective junior officers in the military
services. The approximately 4,000 students who attend each academy undergo
a

challenging 4- year program of academic, physical, and military education
that culminates in a bachelor*s degree and a

commission as a military officer. In addition to completing academic
course work, students must

participate in rigorous military training and in mandatory athletic
activities. In return for their free education, these students must serve
on active duty for 5 years after graduation. In two reports, GAO reviewed
all three service academies and their preparatory schools. In this report,
GAO

surveyed students and faculty to obtain their perceptions of various
aspects of student life at the academies.

GAO conducted a Web- based survey of 12, 264 students and 2,065 faculty
members at the three service academies on questions related to such
student life issues as academic and military programs;

gender- and race-/ ethnicity- based discrimination and harassment; and
preferential treatment. GAO*s survey did not query students and faculty on
specific incidents of alleged sexual assault at the academies. We are
making no recommendations in this report. DOD reviewed a draft of this
report and had no comments. www. gao. gov/ cgi- bin/ getrpt? GAO- 03-
1001.

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on
the link above. For more information, contact Derek Stewart at (202) 512-
5559 or stewartd@ gao. gov. Highlights of GAO- 03- 1001, a report to the

Subcommittee on Defense, Committee on Appropriations, House of
Representatives September 2003

MILITARY EDUCATION

Student and Faculty Perceptions of Student Life at the Military Academies

Page i GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Contents

Page ii GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Contents

Page iii GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Contents

Page iv GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 1 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education United States General Accounting
Office Washington, D. C. 20548

Page 1 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

A

Page 2 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 3 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 4 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 5 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 6 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 7 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 8 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 9 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 10 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 11 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 12 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 13 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 14 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 15 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 16 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 17 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 18 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 19 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 20 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 21 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 22 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 23 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 24 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 25 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 26 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 27 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 28 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 29 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 30 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 31 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 32 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 33 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 34 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 35 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 36 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 37 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 38 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 39 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 40 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 41 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 42 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 43 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 44 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 45 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 46 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 47 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 48 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 49 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 50 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 51 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 52 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 53 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 54 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix I

Appendix I Scope and Methodology

Page 55 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix I Scope and Methodology

Page 56 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix I Scope and Methodology

Page 57 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 58 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 59 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 60 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 61 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 62 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 63 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 64 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 65 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 66 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 67 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 68 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 69 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 70 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 71 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 72 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 73 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 74 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 75 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 76 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix II Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Student Survey and
Responses

Page 77 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 78 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 79 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 80 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 81 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 82 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 83 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 84 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 85 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 86 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 87 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 88 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 89 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 90 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 91 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix III Aspects of Student Life at the Academies: Faculty Survey and
Responses

Page 92 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Page 93 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Appendix IV

Page 94 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

Related GAO Products Page 95 GAO- 03- 1001 Military Education

United States General Accounting Office Washington, D. C. 20548- 0001
Official Business Penalty for Private Use $300 Address Service Requested

Presorted Standard Postage & Fees Paid

GAO Permit No. GI00
*** End of document. ***