North Carolina State University
2010 Campus Climate Survey (Undergraduate)
Section F: Shaping Attitudes about Diversity

Tables of Results
by Student Demographic Profile

The following tables provide results to questions in Section F: Shaping Attitudes about Diversity, broken down by academic class, gender, race/ethnicity, residency, socioeconomic background, college generation, sexual orientation, disability status, and age1. Statistically significant differences (p>.05) between groups (e.g., between women and men) are noted with an asterisk (*). For exact question wording for this section, click here.

To download an MS Word document with results by demographic profile, click here.

Campus Climate Survey Table of Contents | Annotated Questionnaire | Section F by Academic College

F1a-d: Influences on thinking about diversity: Interactions at NC State	F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff/administrators'
F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from administration
F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences
F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity
F1h-i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs/activities/events	F3a-f: Influence of NC State understanding of diversity and behavior related to diversity
F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	F3g-l: Influence of NC State: Working/interacting with people of diverse backgrounds

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	23.5%	48.2%	25.5%	2.2%	0.6%	2,618

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	4.0	25.4%	47.0%	26.1%	1.3%	0.3%	690
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	24.5%	47.9%	24.8%	1.9%	0.9%	576
.....Junior	3.9	22.5%	50.3%	25.1%	1.6%	0.5%	573
.....Senior	3.9	22.0%	47.9%	25.8%	3.7%	0.6%	779

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	19.8%	47.2%	29.8%	2.3%	0.9%	1,169
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	26.6%	48.9%	22.1%	2.1%	0.3%	1,449

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	28.5%	47.2%	20.7%	2.6%	1.0%	193
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.1	32.4%	49.3%	15.4%	2.2%	0.7%	136
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.0	28.8%	45.8%	25.4%	.	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	22.2%	48.7%	26.6%	2.1%	0.5%	2,081
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.9	24.8%	46.3%	24.8%	3.3%	0.8%	121
.....Other/Unknown	3.6	28.6%	25.0%	32.1%	10.7%	3.6%	28

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	23.5%	48.1%	25.5%	2.2%	0.5%	2,591
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.9	22.2%	51.9%	22.2%	.	3.7%	27

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	22.4%	47.1%	26.6%	2.6%	1.2%	575
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	23.6%	49.5%	24.8%	1.8%	0.3%	1,269
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	24.3%	47.1%	25.7%	2.5%	0.4%	760

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	25.1%	49.7%	22.6%	1.5%	1.0%	195
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	23.4%	48.2%	25.7%	2.2%	0.5%	2,393

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.9	23.5%	48.2%	25.7%	2.0%	0.5%	2,412
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	24.5%	48.3%	22.4%	3.5%	1.4%	143
.....Prefer not to answer	3.8	20.8%	47.2%	26.4%	5.7%	.	53

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.9	23.6%	48.9%	24.9%	2.1%	0.4%	2,337
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	22.8%	42.0%	30.6%	2.8%	1.8%	281

F1a: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interacation with students in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.9	23.5%	48.4%	25.4%	2.2%	0.5%	2,478
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.9	23.6%	44.3%	27.9%	2.9%	1.4%	140

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	24.9%	46.8%	24.5%	2.8%	1.0%	2,592

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.9	25.3%	46.8%	25.4%	1.9%	0.6%	688
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	26.2%	46.6%	23.6%	2.3%	1.4%	569
.....Junior	3.9	23.8%	46.3%	25.7%	3.2%	1.1%	568
.....Senior	3.9	24.4%	47.3%	23.5%	3.8%	1.0%	767

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	22.2%	44.8%	28.0%	3.5%	1.4%	1,160
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	27.0%	48.4%	21.6%	2.2%	0.7%	1,432

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.9	32.3%	40.7%	20.1%	2.6%	4.2%	189
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.1	33.3%	49.6%	14.8%	0.7%	1.5%	135
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.0	27.1%	50.8%	20.3%	1.7%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	23.4%	47.3%	25.8%	2.9%	0.7%	2,062
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.0	27.5%	46.7%	21.7%	3.3%	0.8%	120
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	29.6%	25.9%	29.6%	11.1%	3.7%	27

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	24.8%	46.8%	24.6%	2.8%	1.0%	2,566
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.0	30.8%	46.2%	19.2%	.	3.8%	26

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	23.2%	46.3%	25.7%	3.2%	1.6%	564
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	4.0	25.5%	48.5%	22.7%	2.6%	0.6%	1,258
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	25.1%	44.7%	26.3%	2.8%	1.1%	756

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	27.2%	46.1%	22.0%	3.1%	1.6%	191
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	24.7%	47.0%	24.7%	2.7%	0.9%	2,372

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.9	24.4%	47.1%	24.9%	2.7%	0.9%	2,389
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.0	33.3%	39.7%	21.3%	2.8%	2.8%	141
.....Prefer not to answer	3.9	21.2%	55.8%	15.4%	5.8%	1.9%	52

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.9	25.0%	47.3%	24.0%	2.9%	0.8%	2,316
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	23.9%	42.4%	29.0%	2.2%	2.5%	276

F1b: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.9	24.9%	47.2%	24.2%	2.7%	0.9%	2,462
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	23.8%	38.5%	30.8%	4.6%	2.3%	130

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	21.2%	45.7%	30.8%	1.9%	0.4%	2,603

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.9	22.1%	45.2%	31.4%	1.3%	.	679
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	23.5%	43.5%	31.1%	1.4%	0.5%	575
.....Junior	3.8	20.0%	44.6%	32.8%	2.5%	0.2%	570
.....Senior	3.8	19.5%	48.5%	28.6%	2.4%	0.9%	779

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	17.2%	43.3%	36.3%	2.6%	0.7%	1,163
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	24.4%	47.6%	26.4%	1.4%	0.2%	1,440

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.9	27.0%	42.9%	27.0%	1.6%	1.6%	189
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.1	27.4%	53.3%	19.3%	.	.	135
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.9	22.0%	49.2%	27.1%	1.7%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	20.3%	45.7%	31.7%	2.1%	0.3%	2,069
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.8	20.3%	44.7%	32.5%	1.6%	0.8%	123
.....Other/Unknown	3.6	21.4%	25.0%	50.0%	.	3.6%	28

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	21.2%	45.7%	30.8%	1.9%	0.4%	2,576
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.8	22.2%	40.7%	33.3%	.	3.7%	27

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	19.8%	46.2%	31.0%	1.9%	1.1%	567
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	21.6%	45.3%	31.5%	1.4%	0.2%	1,265
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	21.7%	46.1%	29.3%	2.6%	0.3%	757

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	22.8%	48.2%	25.4%	2.6%	1.0%	193
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	21.0%	45.7%	31.2%	1.8%	0.3%	2,380

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.9	21.1%	45.8%	30.9%	1.9%	0.4%	2,397
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	25.9%	42.0%	31.5%	.	0.7%	143
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	11.3%	52.8%	28.3%	5.7%	1.9%	53

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.9	21.4%	46.4%	30.0%	1.8%	0.4%	2,323
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	19.6%	40.0%	37.1%	2.9%	0.4%	280

F1c: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.9	21.1%	45.9%	30.7%	1.9%	0.4%	2,463
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	22.9%	41.4%	32.1%	2.1%	1.4%	140

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	20.7%	42.4%	35.5%	1.2%	0.3%	2,396

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.8	20.9%	40.2%	38.1%	0.8%	.	599
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	23.8%	40.4%	34.5%	0.8%	0.6%	525
.....Junior	3.8	19.4%	42.8%	36.6%	0.9%	0.2%	535
.....Senior	3.8	19.1%	45.2%	33.2%	1.9%	0.5%	737

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	17.3%	40.9%	39.4%	1.8%	0.6%	1,075
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	23.4%	43.5%	32.2%	0.7%	0.2%	1,321

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	29.8%	41.6%	26.4%	1.1%	1.1%	178
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	25.8%	52.4%	21.0%	0.8%	.	124
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.8	21.8%	38.2%	36.4%	3.6%	.	55
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	19.4%	42.2%	37.2%	1.1%	0.2%	1,905
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.8	21.5%	42.1%	35.5%	.	0.9%	107
.....Other/Unknown	3.6	22.2%	25.9%	40.7%	7.4%	3.7%	27

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*	3.8	20.7%	42.4%	35.4%	1.2%	0.3%	2,370
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.7	15.4%	42.3%	38.5%	.	3.8%	26

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	19.7%	43.1%	34.9%	1.5%	0.8%	522
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	21.0%	42.0%	36.1%	0.8%	0.1%	1,164
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	20.9%	42.6%	34.7%	1.4%	0.3%	697

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.8	22.2%	43.8%	31.3%	1.7%	1.1%	176
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	20.5%	42.5%	35.7%	1.1%	0.2%	2,194

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.8	20.6%	42.1%	35.9%	1.1%	0.3%	2,212
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	25.0%	45.3%	27.3%	1.6%	0.8%	128
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	10.6%	48.9%	38.3%	2.1%	.	47

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.8	20.7%	43.0%	35.0%	1.1%	0.3%	2,139
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	20.6%	37.4%	39.7%	1.9%	0.4%	257

F1d: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	20.5%	42.6%	35.3%	1.2%	0.3%	2,268
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	22.7%	37.5%	38.3%	.	1.6%	128

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.7	15.9%	40.5%	40.7%	2.1%	0.7%	2,540

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.8	17.9%	41.3%	39.3%	1.2%	0.3%	666
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.7	17.6%	39.4%	40.4%	2.0%	0.7%	564
.....Junior	3.6	13.6%	40.0%	43.7%	1.6%	1.1%	558
.....Senior	3.6	14.6%	41.0%	40.0%	3.5%	0.9%	752

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.5	12.1%	35.5%	48.2%	2.8%	1.4%	1,127
.....Male
.....Female	3.8	19.0%	44.4%	34.8%	1.6%	0.2%	1,413

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.8	21.0%	40.9%	34.9%	2.7%	0.5%	186
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	3.9	24.2%	46.1%	27.3%	2.3%	.	128
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.7	15.3%	45.8%	35.6%	1.7%	1.7%	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.7	14.9%	40.3%	42.1%	2.1%	0.7%	2,019
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.7	15.6%	38.5%	43.4%	0.8%	1.6%	122
.....Other/Unknown	3.5	23.1%	23.1%	42.3%	7.7%	3.8%	26

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.7	16.0%	40.5%	40.6%	2.1%	0.8%	2,514
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.6	11.5%	34.6%	53.8%	.	.	26

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.7	15.5%	42.2%	38.4%	2.9%	0.9%	554
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.7	16.7%	40.8%	40.6%	1.3%	0.6%	1,235
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.6	14.9%	38.5%	43.0%	2.8%	0.7%	737

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.7	16.5%	42.0%	36.7%	3.2%	1.6%	188
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.7	15.8%	40.4%	41.1%	2.0%	0.6%	2,323

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.7	16.0%	40.4%	40.9%	2.1%	0.7%	2,339
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.7	18.7%	38.1%	38.8%	2.9%	1.4%	139
.....Prefer not to answer	3.5	3.8%	48.1%	44.2%	1.9%	1.9%	52

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.7	16.2%	40.5%	40.7%	1.9%	0.7%	2,263
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.6	13.7%	40.1%	40.8%	4.3%	1.1%	277

F1e: Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.7	15.6%	40.7%	40.9%	2.0%	0.7%	2,404
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.7	20.6%	36.8%	38.2%	3.7%	0.7%	136

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	4.1	33.7%	46.9%	18.2%	0.9%	0.3%	2,611

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	4.1	31.3%	48.0%	19.7%	0.9%	0.1%	690
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	4.1	35.4%	45.0%	18.5%	0.7%	0.3%	573
.....Junior	4.1	33.9%	45.4%	19.6%	1.1%	.	570
.....Senior	4.2	34.6%	48.3%	15.6%	0.9%	0.6%	778

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	4.0	29.9%	45.9%	22.2%	1.5%	0.5%	1,167
.....Male
.....Female	4.2	36.8%	47.6%	15.0%	0.4%	0.1%	1,444

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.2	38.7%	45.0%	14.7%	1.0%	0.5%	191
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.3	40.1%	50.4%	8.8%	.	0.7%	137
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.3	48.3%	34.5%	17.2%	.	.	58
.....White/Caucasian	4.1	32.2%	47.5%	19.2%	0.9%	0.2%	2,076
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.2	38.5%	45.1%	14.8%	0.8%	0.8%	122
.....Other/Unknown	3.9	33.3%	29.6%	29.6%	3.7%	3.7%	27

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	4.1	33.7%	46.9%	18.2%	0.9%	0.3%	2,584
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.2	37.0%	44.4%	18.5%	.	.	27

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	4.1	33.0%	48.9%	16.8%	0.7%	0.5%	570
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	4.1	33.2%	47.9%	18.2%	0.6%	0.1%	1,268
.....Upper middle/Upper class	4.1	35.4%	44.0%	18.8%	1.3%	0.4%	759

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	30.1%	48.2%	19.2%	1.6%	1.0%	193
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	4.1	34.1%	47.0%	17.9%	0.8%	0.2%	2,388

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	4.1	33.2%	47.2%	18.5%	0.8%	0.2%	2,407
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.2	43.4%	39.2%	14.7%	1.4%	1.4%	143
.....Prefer not to answer	4.2	33.3%	54.9%	11.8%	.	.	51

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	4.1	34.2%	47.2%	17.5%	0.9%	0.2%	2,333
.....No disability
.....Disability	4.0	30.2%	44.2%	24.1%	0.4%	1.1%	278

F1f: Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	4.1	34.0%	46.9%	17.8%	0.9%	0.3%	2,473
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	4.0	28.3%	45.7%	25.4%	.	0.7%	138

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	25.7%	42.1%	26.8%	4.0%	1.4%	2,202

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class*	4.0	29.2%	43.2%	23.8%	3.0%	0.8%	643
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	29.2%	40.2%	25.6%	3.8%	1.2%	497
.....Junior	3.8	22.5%	43.4%	27.3%	5.0%	1.7%	458
.....Senior	3.8	21.4%	41.4%	30.8%	4.6%	1.8%	604

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	22.0%	41.7%	30.9%	4.1%	1.3%	985
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	28.6%	42.4%	23.6%	4.0%	1.4%	1,217

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.9	28.4%	43.8%	17.0%	8.5%	2.3%	176
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	25.0%	54.5%	18.8%	1.8%	.	112
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.0	36.2%	38.3%	21.3%	.	4.3%	47
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	25.3%	41.1%	28.5%	3.9%	1.2%	1,739
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.9	23.8%	47.6%	23.8%	2.9%	1.9%	105
.....Other/Unknown	3.6	21.7%	26.1%	43.5%	4.3%	4.3%	23

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	25.6%	42.2%	26.8%	4.1%	1.4%	2,180
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.0	31.8%	36.4%	31.8%	.	.	22

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	23.8%	43.0%	26.5%	5.4%	1.3%	446
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	25.6%	42.3%	27.4%	3.6%	1.1%	1,071
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	27.4%	41.4%	25.8%	3.7%	1.6%	674

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	29.5%	39.6%	27.5%	2.0%	1.3%	149
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	25.5%	42.3%	26.7%	4.1%	1.3%	2,030

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.9	25.9%	42.4%	27.0%	3.5%	1.3%	2,041
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.7	28.4%	29.4%	26.6%	11.9%	3.7%	109
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	11.1%	60.0%	20.0%	8.9%	.	45

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.9	25.9%	42.7%	26.3%	3.8%	1.3%	1,990
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	23.6%	36.3%	31.6%	6.6%	1.9%	212

F1g: Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*	3.9	25.8%	42.3%	26.5%	4.1%	1.3%	2,167
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.6	17.1%	31.4%	48.6%	.	2.9%	35

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	26.6%	42.2%	28.3%	2.3%	0.6%	2,320

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class*	4.0	29.4%	42.3%	26.8%	1.4%	0.2%	639
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	27.0%	43.2%	27.4%	1.1%	1.1%	525
.....Junior	3.9	22.8%	44.3%	29.3%	3.0%	0.6%	492
.....Senior	3.9	26.4%	39.6%	29.8%	3.5%	0.8%	664

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	21.4%	38.3%	36.1%	3.1%	1.1%	1,027
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	30.7%	45.2%	22.1%	1.6%	0.3%	1,293

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	32.8%	43.5%	19.2%	3.4%	1.1%	177
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.1	33.9%	48.8%	14.2%	3.1%	.	127
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.1	38.0%	40.0%	20.0%	2.0%	.	50
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	24.9%	41.7%	30.6%	2.2%	0.6%	1,839
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.1	32.4%	45.1%	20.6%	1.0%	1.0%	102
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	24.0%	28.0%	44.0%	.	4.0%	25

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	26.6%	42.3%	28.3%	2.3%	0.6%	2,298
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.7	27.3%	31.8%	31.8%	4.5%	4.5%	22

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	24.8%	42.0%	29.6%	2.3%	1.2%	483
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	27.1%	43.5%	26.8%	2.3%	0.3%	1,117
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	27.0%	40.5%	29.7%	2.1%	0.7%	708

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	28.5%	43.7%	25.9%	0.6%	1.3%	158
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	26.3%	42.3%	28.5%	2.4%	0.6%	2,137

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.9	26.3%	42.3%	28.5%	2.3%	0.7%	2,140
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.0	32.8%	40.0%	25.6%	0.8%	0.8%	125
.....Prefer not to answer	3.8	19.6%	47.8%	30.4%	2.2%	.	46

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.9	27.3%	42.8%	27.2%	2.1%	0.6%	2,079
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	20.7%	36.9%	37.8%	3.7%	0.8%	241

F1h: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*	3.9	26.7%	42.5%	27.9%	2.3%	0.6%	2,247
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.7	23.3%	32.9%	39.7%	1.4%	2.7%	73

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	23.0%	42.9%	31.5%	2.0%	0.6%	2,387

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class*	3.9	26.1%	43.7%	28.1%	2.0%	0.2%	662
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	26.4%	42.0%	29.9%	1.1%	0.6%	531
.....Junior	3.8	20.2%	43.5%	34.3%	1.4%	0.6%	504
.....Senior	3.8	19.6%	42.3%	34.1%	3.0%	1.0%	690

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	17.2%	39.7%	39.0%	3.0%	1.0%	1,061
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	27.7%	45.4%	25.6%	1.1%	0.2%	1,326

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	31.5%	43.8%	21.9%	1.7%	1.1%	178
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.1	30.7%	47.2%	20.5%	1.6%	.	127
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.1	30.2%	49.1%	20.8%	.	.	53
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	21.2%	41.9%	34.2%	2.1%	0.5%	1,896
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.0	28.4%	49.5%	20.2%	0.9%	0.9%	109
.....Other/Unknown	3.8	25.0%	41.7%	25.0%	4.2%	4.2%	24

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	23.0%	43.0%	31.6%	1.9%	0.6%	2,363
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.8	29.2%	33.3%	29.2%	4.2%	4.2%	24

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	20.4%	45.3%	30.6%	2.5%	1.2%	510
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	23.7%	43.3%	30.8%	1.9%	0.3%	1,148
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	23.9%	40.8%	33.2%	1.5%	0.6%	716

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	24.6%	43.3%	29.2%	1.8%	1.2%	171
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	22.9%	43.0%	31.7%	1.9%	0.5%	2,190

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.9	23.1%	43.2%	31.6%	1.6%	0.5%	2,195
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.8	25.0%	37.9%	28.8%	6.8%	1.5%	132
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	12.0%	46.0%	40.0%	2.0%	.	50

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.9	23.7%	43.0%	30.8%	1.9%	0.6%	2,144
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	17.3%	41.6%	37.9%	2.9%	0.4%	243

F1i: Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*	3.9	23.2%	43.2%	31.2%	1.9%	0.5%	2,301
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.6	18.6%	34.9%	39.5%	4.7%	2.3%	86

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	20.6%	42.2%	35.5%	1.2%	0.4%	2,352

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class*	3.9	23.4%	44.2%	31.5%	0.9%	.	650
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	23.4%	40.7%	34.9%	0.6%	0.4%	518
.....Junior	3.7	17.7%	41.0%	39.4%	1.2%	0.6%	502
.....Senior	3.8	18.0%	42.4%	37.0%	1.9%	0.7%	682

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	15.4%	37.8%	44.4%	1.8%	0.6%	1,050
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	24.8%	45.8%	28.4%	0.7%	0.3%	1,302

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	27.0%	46.6%	24.7%	1.1%	0.6%	178
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	27.3%	47.7%	22.7%	2.3%	.	128
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.9	22.4%	46.9%	30.6%	.	.	49
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	19.3%	41.3%	38.0%	1.1%	0.4%	1,869
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.9	24.8%	44.8%	27.6%	1.9%	1.0%	105
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	21.7%	34.8%	39.1%	.	4.3%	23

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	20.7%	42.3%	35.5%	1.2%	0.4%	2,329
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.7	17.4%	34.8%	43.5%	4.3%	.	23

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	18.6%	44.1%	34.9%	1.4%	1.0%	499
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	21.0%	42.7%	35.0%	1.2%	0.1%	1,140
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	21.4%	40.4%	36.9%	0.9%	0.4%	701

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	22.9%	45.2%	29.5%	1.2%	1.2%	166
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	20.4%	42.1%	36.0%	1.2%	0.3%	2,160

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.8	20.9%	42.3%	35.4%	1.0%	0.4%	2,168
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.7	18.5%	39.5%	37.9%	2.4%	1.6%	124
.....Prefer not to answer	3.6	8.0%	48.0%	38.0%	6.0%	.	50

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.8	21.4%	42.3%	35.0%	1.0%	0.4%	2,113
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.6	13.8%	41.8%	40.6%	2.9%	0.8%	239

F1j: Influence on thinking about diversity: College/department activities/events	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	20.6%	42.6%	35.2%	1.1%	0.4%	2,262
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.7	20.0%	32.2%	44.4%	2.2%	1.1%	90

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	19.0%	42.2%	37.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,506

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.8	19.8%	39.9%	39.2%	0.8%	0.3%	646
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.8	22.2%	40.4%	35.1%	1.8%	0.5%	555
.....Junior	3.8	17.9%	42.4%	38.8%	0.9%	.	552
.....Senior	3.8	16.7%	45.3%	35.5%	1.7%	0.8%	753

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	16.0%	39.6%	42.0%	1.7%	0.7%	1,120
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	21.4%	44.2%	33.1%	1.0%	0.2%	1,386

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.9	22.4%	48.1%	27.3%	1.6%	0.5%	183
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	27.7%	46.2%	24.6%	0.8%	0.8%	130
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.8	19.6%	44.6%	33.9%	1.8%	.	56
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	17.9%	41.5%	38.9%	1.4%	0.4%	1,991
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.8	22.9%	40.7%	34.7%	0.8%	0.8%	118
.....Other/Unknown	3.6	17.9%	35.7%	42.9%	.	3.6%	28

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	19.0%	42.2%	37.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,481
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.8	20.0%	44.0%	32.0%	4.0%	.	25

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	18.4%	42.2%	37.6%	0.9%	0.9%	543
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	18.4%	42.7%	37.4%	1.3%	0.1%	1,210
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	20.4%	41.4%	36.2%	1.5%	0.5%	741

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.8	16.6%	46.4%	34.3%	1.7%	1.1%	181
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	19.1%	42.0%	37.3%	1.3%	0.3%	2,298

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.8	19.0%	42.0%	37.3%	1.3%	0.4%	2,311
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.8	22.6%	40.9%	33.6%	1.5%	1.5%	137
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	6.1%	55.1%	36.7%	2.0%	.	49

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.8	19.0%	42.8%	36.6%	1.3%	0.4%	2,228
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	18.7%	37.4%	41.0%	1.8%	1.1%	278

F1k: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	19.0%	42.3%	37.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,372
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.7	19.4%	40.3%	36.6%	2.2%	1.5%	134

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.7	16.9%	35.1%	45.2%	1.9%	0.9%	2,463

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class*	3.8	20.2%	37.4%	40.7%	1.4%	0.3%	642
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.7	20.5%	33.0%	44.8%	0.7%	0.9%	542
.....Junior	3.6	14.1%	33.7%	48.9%	2.4%	0.9%	540
.....Senior	3.6	13.4%	35.6%	46.8%	2.8%	1.4%	739

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.5	12.6%	31.4%	51.4%	3.1%	1.6%	1,106
.....Male
.....Female	3.8	20.4%	38.1%	40.2%	1.0%	0.3%	1,357

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.8	24.6%	33.3%	37.7%	2.7%	1.6%	183
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	3.8	21.3%	40.2%	37.7%	0.8%	.	122
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.8	18.9%	39.6%	41.5%	.	.	53
.....White/Caucasian	3.6	15.6%	35.0%	46.6%	2.0%	0.8%	1,962
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.7	20.0%	33.9%	44.3%	.	1.7%	115
.....Other/Unknown	3.5	21.4%	25.0%	42.9%	3.6%	7.1%	28

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.7	16.9%	35.1%	45.1%	1.9%	0.9%	2,439
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.6	16.7%	29.2%	54.2%	.	.	24

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.6	16.4%	34.8%	46.2%	1.1%	1.5%	535
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.7	17.0%	34.9%	45.3%	2.1%	0.7%	1,194
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.7	17.2%	35.7%	44.4%	1.9%	0.7%	720

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.7	20.1%	37.5%	40.2%	0.5%	1.6%	184
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.6	16.6%	34.9%	45.8%	1.9%	0.8%	2,252

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.7	16.9%	35.1%	45.5%	1.7%	0.8%	2,275
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.7	20.9%	33.3%	41.9%	3.1%	0.8%	129
.....Prefer not to answer	3.3	6.1%	34.7%	49.0%	4.1%	6.1%	49

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.7	17.0%	35.1%	45.2%	1.9%	0.8%	2,197
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.6	15.8%	34.6%	45.9%	2.3%	1.5%	266

F1l: Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with/messages from admin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.6	16.8%	35.1%	45.2%	2.0%	0.9%	2,335
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.7	18.8%	34.4%	46.1%	.	0.8%	128

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	28.3%	37.9%	24.4%	7.3%	2.2%	2,623

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.9	30.7%	39.1%	22.9%	5.4%	1.9%	698
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.8	30.6%	34.2%	26.1%	6.9%	2.2%	579
.....Junior	3.8	27.8%	39.0%	23.7%	8.0%	1.6%	575
.....Senior	3.7	24.8%	38.7%	24.9%	8.8%	2.9%	771

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	26.7%	35.4%	28.4%	6.9%	2.6%	1,172
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	29.6%	39.8%	21.1%	7.6%	1.9%	1,451

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.1	37.9%	40.5%	18.4%	2.1%	1.1%	190
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.3	41.9%	42.6%	14.7%	0.7%	.	136
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.3	47.5%	35.6%	13.6%	3.4%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	25.5%	37.5%	26.1%	8.5%	2.4%	2,088
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.9	32.8%	38.5%	20.5%	5.7%	2.5%	122
.....Other/Unknown	4.0	42.9%	28.6%	21.4%	3.6%	3.6%	28

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	28.1%	37.9%	24.4%	7.4%	2.2%	2,598
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.3	48.0%	32.0%	20.0%	.	.	25

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	29.4%	33.9%	25.0%	9.4%	2.3%	572
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	27.7%	39.3%	24.8%	6.5%	1.7%	1,276
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	28.6%	38.5%	23.1%	7.0%	2.8%	761

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	28.4%	38.7%	25.3%	5.7%	2.1%	194
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	28.1%	38.0%	24.3%	7.5%	2.2%	2,398

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.8	28.6%	38.2%	24.4%	7.0%	1.8%	2,420
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.6	26.1%	31.0%	23.9%	10.6%	8.5%	142
.....Prefer not to answer	3.6	17.6%	43.1%	23.5%	11.8%	3.9%	51

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.8	28.9%	37.9%	23.9%	7.2%	2.0%	2,342
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	23.1%	37.4%	28.1%	8.2%	3.2%	281

F1m: Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	28.2%	37.6%	24.8%	7.3%	2.1%	2,484
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.9	30.2%	42.4%	17.3%	7.2%	2.9%	139

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)

	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Total (N)	15.6%	30.6%	29.2%	1.8%	1.2%	21.7%	2,053

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Classification*	22.9%	37.0%	24.1%	2.6%	1.0%	12.5%	690
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	17.5%	33.0%	29.6%	1.8%	1.2%	16.9%	497
.....Junior	8.5%	25.5%	31.2%	1.0%	1.8%	32.0%	388
.....Senior	8.8%	23.2%	34.5%	1.0%	0.8%	31.6%	478

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Gender*	10.4%	26.1%	30.3%	2.9%	2.2%	28.0%	893
.....Male
.....Female	19.6%	34.1%	28.3%	0.9%	0.3%	16.8%	1,160

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity	20.3%	28.8%	28.1%	.	2.0%	20.9%	153
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	23.3%	35.0%	22.3%	1.0%	.	18.4%	103
.....Hispanic/Latino	15.2%	32.6%	26.1%	2.2%	.	23.9%	46
.....White/Caucasian	15.0%	30.3%	29.7%	2.1%	1.2%	21.8%	1,647
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	8.1%	34.9%	30.2%	.	2.3%	24.4%	86
.....Other/Unknown	22.2%	27.8%	33.3%	.	.	16.7%	18

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Residency	15.6%	30.7%	29.1%	1.8%	1.2%	21.6%	2,040
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	7.7%	23.1%	38.5%	.	.	30.8%	13

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	16.8%	28.6%	29.1%	1.0%	0.5%	24.1%	399
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	16.4%	31.5%	29.3%	1.9%	1.3%	19.6%	1,008
.....Upper middle/Upper class	13.7%	30.7%	28.9%	1.9%	1.4%	23.4%	636

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	13.3%	41.3%	24.5%	.	1.4%	19.6%	143
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	15.7%	29.9%	29.5%	1.9%	1.1%	22.0%	1,887

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	15.7%	30.8%	29.2%	1.6%	1.2%	21.5%	1,908
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	13.2%	30.2%	26.4%	3.8%	1.9%	24.5%	106
.....Prefer not to answer	15.2%	24.2%	39.4%	.	.	21.2%	33

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Disability Status*	15.7%	30.9%	29.1%	1.6%	0.9%	21.7%	1,872
.....No disability
.....Disability	14.4%	27.6%	29.8%	3.3%	3.9%	21.0%	181

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who were assigned a Common Reading)	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Did not read the book for my year	Total (N)
Age	15.5%	30.7%	29.3%	1.8%	1.1%	21.5%	2,033
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	20.0%	25.0%	15.0%	.	5.0%	35.0%	20

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.7	19.9%	39.1%	37.3%	2.2%	1.5%	1,608

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class*	3.9	26.2%	42.2%	27.5%	3.0%	1.2%	604
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.8	21.1%	39.7%	35.6%	2.2%	1.5%	413
.....Junior	3.6	12.5%	37.5%	45.8%	1.5%	2.7%	264
.....Senior	3.6	12.8%	33.9%	50.5%	1.5%	1.2%	327

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.5	14.5%	36.2%	42.1%	4.0%	3.1%	643
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	23.5%	41.0%	34.0%	1.0%	0.4%	965

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity	3.8	25.6%	36.4%	35.5%	.	2.5%	121
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	28.6%	42.9%	27.4%	1.2%	.	84
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.8	20.0%	42.9%	34.3%	2.9%	.	35
.....White/Caucasian	3.7	19.2%	38.7%	38.0%	2.6%	1.5%	1,288
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.6	10.8%	46.2%	40.0%	.	3.1%	65
.....Other/Unknown	3.9	26.7%	33.3%	40.0%	.	.	15

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.7	19.9%	39.1%	37.1%	2.3%	1.5%	1,599
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.6	11.1%	33.3%	55.6%	.	.	9

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	22.1%	37.6%	38.3%	1.3%	0.7%	303
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.7	20.4%	39.3%	36.4%	2.3%	1.6%	810
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.7	17.9%	40.0%	37.8%	2.5%	1.8%	487

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*	3.8	16.5%	51.3%	30.4%	.	1.7%	115
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.7	20.1%	38.3%	37.8%	2.4%	1.4%	1,472

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.7	20.0%	39.3%	37.2%	2.1%	1.5%	1,497
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.7	17.5%	40.0%	35.0%	5.0%	2.5%	80
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	19.2%	30.8%	50.0%	.	.	26

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.8	20.1%	39.5%	37.2%	2.0%	1.2%	1,465
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.6	18.2%	35.0%	37.8%	4.2%	4.9%	143

F2: Extent to which Common Reading contrib to appreciation/awareness of diversity (among those who read book)	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.7	19.8%	39.1%	37.4%	2.3%	1.4%	1,595
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	30.8%	38.5%	23.1%	.	7.7%	13

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	20.8%	40.9%	35.7%	2.0%	0.5%	2,648

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.8	20.7%	41.2%	36.8%	1.0%	0.3%	701
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.8	23.8%	37.2%	37.0%	1.5%	0.5%	584
.....Junior	3.8	19.7%	42.5%	33.8%	3.1%	0.9%	583
.....Senior	3.8	19.5%	42.3%	35.3%	2.4%	0.5%	780

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	16.1%	39.8%	40.9%	2.2%	0.9%	1,185
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	24.6%	41.8%	31.5%	1.8%	0.2%	1,463

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	30.9%	40.3%	25.1%	3.7%	.	191
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	3.9	20.9%	54.7%	23.0%	1.4%	.	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.0	32.2%	39.0%	28.8%	.	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	19.0%	40.4%	38.1%	2.0%	0.5%	2,108
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.9	30.6%	37.9%	28.2%	0.8%	2.4%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.6	18.5%	33.3%	40.7%	3.7%	3.7%	27

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	20.8%	40.8%	35.8%	2.0%	0.5%	2,622
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.0	23.1%	50.0%	26.9%	.	.	26

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	21.5%	42.0%	33.6%	2.1%	0.9%	578
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	20.6%	42.2%	35.1%	1.7%	0.4%	1,289
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	21.0%	38.3%	37.7%	2.5%	0.5%	767

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	25.0%	40.8%	31.1%	2.0%	1.0%	196
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	20.4%	41.2%	35.9%	2.0%	0.5%	2,421

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.8	20.4%	41.0%	36.1%	1.9%	0.5%	2,440
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.0	31.7%	40.7%	23.4%	3.4%	0.7%	145
.....Prefer not to answer	3.5	7.4%	38.9%	50.0%	3.7%	.	54

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.8	20.7%	41.6%	35.2%	2.0%	0.4%	2,363
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	21.4%	35.1%	40.0%	2.1%	1.4%	285

F3a: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	20.9%	40.8%	35.8%	2.0%	0.5%	2,506
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	19.0%	43.0%	34.5%	2.1%	1.4%	142

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	23.1%	40.4%	33.4%	2.3%	0.8%	2,651

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class*	3.9	23.0%	42.3%	33.5%	1.0%	0.1%	704
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	25.3%	40.4%	30.8%	2.6%	0.9%	584
.....Junior	3.8	23.1%	38.2%	34.3%	2.8%	1.7%	581
.....Senior	3.8	21.6%	40.3%	34.5%	2.8%	0.8%	782

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.6	17.6%	36.9%	39.7%	4.1%	1.7%	1,184
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	27.6%	43.2%	28.3%	0.7%	0.1%	1,467

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	27.1%	44.3%	27.6%	0.5%	0.5%	192
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	26.1%	47.1%	25.4%	1.4%	.	138
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.1	28.8%	49.2%	20.3%	1.7%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	22.3%	39.5%	34.9%	2.6%	0.8%	2,111
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.8	25.8%	39.5%	30.6%	0.8%	3.2%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	22.2%	33.3%	40.7%	.	3.7%	27

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	23.0%	40.4%	33.5%	2.3%	0.8%	2,625
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.1	34.6%	42.3%	23.1%	.	.	26

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*	3.8	22.1%	43.0%	32.0%	2.2%	0.7%	579
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	23.1%	41.4%	33.3%	1.5%	0.7%	1,290
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	24.1%	37.2%	33.9%	3.6%	1.2%	768

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	25.4%	46.2%	25.4%	2.5%	0.5%	197
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	22.9%	40.2%	33.8%	2.3%	0.9%	2,423

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.8	22.7%	40.8%	33.5%	2.2%	0.8%	2,445
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	31.5%	35.7%	28.7%	3.5%	0.7%	143
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	18.5%	37.0%	42.6%	.	1.9%	54

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.8	23.0%	41.3%	32.9%	2.1%	0.7%	2,367
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	24.3%	32.7%	37.7%	3.5%	1.8%	284

F3b: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	23.2%	40.7%	32.9%	2.4%	0.8%	2,509
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	22.5%	35.2%	41.5%	.	0.7%	142

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.7	17.4%	41.0%	38.8%	2.2%	0.7%	2,647

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.7	17.5%	39.4%	41.5%	1.3%	0.3%	701
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.8	19.7%	44.3%	33.2%	2.1%	0.7%	584
.....Junior	3.7	16.7%	40.0%	39.0%	3.1%	1.2%	582
.....Senior	3.7	16.0%	40.6%	40.3%	2.3%	0.8%	780

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.6	13.1%	35.2%	47.2%	3.0%	1.5%	1,184
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	20.8%	45.7%	31.9%	1.5%	0.1%	1,463

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.9	25.3%	40.0%	33.2%	1.6%	.	190
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	3.8	16.5%	49.6%	33.1%	0.7%	.	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.9	23.7%	44.1%	30.5%	.	1.7%	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.7	16.3%	40.5%	40.1%	2.4%	0.7%	2,108
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.8	22.6%	40.3%	33.9%	1.6%	1.6%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.6	11.1%	40.7%	44.4%	.	3.7%	27

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.7	17.3%	41.1%	38.7%	2.2%	0.7%	2,621
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.8	23.1%	30.8%	46.2%	.	.	26

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*	3.8	17.7%	42.9%	36.8%	1.9%	0.7%	576
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.7	16.8%	42.4%	38.8%	1.4%	0.5%	1,291
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.7	18.1%	37.6%	39.6%	3.7%	1.0%	766

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.8	20.3%	46.7%	30.5%	1.5%	1.0%	197
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.7	17.1%	40.9%	39.2%	2.2%	0.7%	2,421

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.7	16.8%	41.2%	39.2%	2.2%	0.7%	2,441
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	29.4%	37.8%	28.7%	2.8%	1.4%	143
.....Prefer not to answer	3.6	11.1%	42.6%	46.3%	.	.	54

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.7	17.3%	41.3%	38.7%	2.1%	0.6%	2,362
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	18.2%	38.2%	39.3%	2.8%	1.4%	285

F3c: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.7	17.5%	41.1%	38.4%	2.3%	0.7%	2,508
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.7	14.4%	39.6%	45.3%	.	0.7%	139

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	20.9%	43.0%	34.2%	1.5%	0.4%	2,650

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.8	21.2%	43.2%	34.3%	1.0%	0.3%	703
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.8	22.1%	41.0%	35.3%	1.2%	0.3%	583
.....Junior	3.8	19.2%	43.2%	34.1%	2.7%	0.7%	583
.....Senior	3.8	20.9%	44.2%	33.4%	1.3%	0.3%	781

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	16.9%	40.1%	40.2%	2.1%	0.8%	1,186
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	24.1%	45.4%	29.4%	1.0%	0.1%	1,464

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	28.3%	44.0%	25.7%	2.1%	.	191
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	3.9	21.6%	47.5%	30.2%	.	0.7%	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.0	32.2%	40.7%	25.4%	1.7%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	19.3%	43.3%	35.4%	1.6%	0.4%	2,110
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.9	30.6%	33.1%	34.7%	0.8%	0.8%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	14.8%	40.7%	40.7%	3.7%	.	27

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	20.8%	43.1%	34.2%	1.5%	0.4%	2,624
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	3.9	26.9%	38.5%	34.6%	.	.	26

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	20.6%	42.9%	33.2%	2.6%	0.7%	578
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	21.1%	43.5%	34.3%	0.9%	0.2%	1,289
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	20.8%	42.7%	34.3%	1.7%	0.5%	769

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	24.4%	46.7%	26.4%	2.0%	0.5%	197
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	20.6%	43.0%	34.5%	1.5%	0.4%	2,423

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.8	20.5%	43.7%	34.1%	1.4%	0.3%	2,443
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	29.9%	35.4%	31.3%	2.1%	1.4%	144
.....Prefer not to answer	3.6	13.0%	35.2%	48.1%	3.7%	.	54

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.8	21.1%	43.2%	34.0%	1.4%	0.2%	2,365
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	18.6%	41.4%	36.1%	2.1%	1.8%	285

F3d: Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of initiating conversation with student of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	21.1%	43.0%	34.0%	1.6%	0.4%	2,509
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	17.0%	44.0%	38.3%	.	0.7%	141

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	24.0%	45.4%	29.3%	0.9%	0.5%	2,648

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.9	23.6%	44.0%	31.6%	0.3%	0.4%	702
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	4.0	26.4%	44.8%	27.6%	0.9%	0.3%	583
.....Junior	3.9	23.1%	44.8%	29.6%	1.7%	0.9%	581
.....Senior	3.9	23.1%	47.4%	28.3%	0.8%	0.4%	782

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	19.4%	43.5%	34.7%	1.4%	0.9%	1,183
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	27.7%	46.8%	24.9%	0.4%	0.1%	1,465

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.0	31.9%	41.9%	25.1%	0.5%	0.5%	191
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	26.8%	50.7%	21.7%	0.7%	.	138
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.1	35.6%	40.7%	23.7%	.	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	22.3%	45.8%	30.5%	0.9%	0.5%	2,109
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.0	30.6%	43.5%	24.2%	0.8%	0.8%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	25.9%	29.6%	40.7%	.	3.7%	27

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	24.0%	45.3%	29.3%	0.9%	0.5%	2,622
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.0	26.9%	46.2%	26.9%	.	.	26

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	23.2%	46.1%	28.2%	1.2%	1.2%	577
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	24.4%	45.7%	29.2%	0.5%	0.2%	1,289
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	24.1%	44.5%	29.7%	1.2%	0.5%	768

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	27.9%	46.2%	23.4%	1.0%	1.5%	197
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	23.6%	45.6%	29.5%	0.9%	0.4%	2,421

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.9	23.9%	45.7%	29.1%	0.8%	0.5%	2,441
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	29.2%	39.6%	28.5%	1.4%	1.4%	144
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	14.8%	44.4%	40.7%	.	.	54

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.9	24.2%	46.1%	28.6%	0.8%	0.3%	2,364
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	22.2%	39.4%	34.9%	1.8%	1.8%	284

F3e: Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.9	24.1%	45.4%	29.1%	0.9%	0.5%	2,507
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.9	21.3%	44.7%	32.6%	0.7%	0.7%	141

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	25.0%	45.2%	27.9%	1.4%	0.4%	2,648

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	4.0	25.7%	45.1%	28.2%	0.9%	0.1%	703
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	4.0	28.3%	44.0%	26.0%	1.4%	0.3%	580
.....Junior	3.9	22.9%	45.5%	29.9%	1.0%	0.7%	582
.....Senior	3.9	23.6%	46.1%	27.6%	2.3%	0.4%	783

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	20.2%	42.0%	34.5%	2.5%	0.8%	1,183
.....Male
.....Female	4.1	28.9%	47.8%	22.6%	0.5%	0.1%	1,465

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity	4.0	31.4%	43.5%	23.6%	1.0%	0.5%	191
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	26.6%	51.8%	19.4%	2.2%	.	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.0	29.3%	44.8%	25.9%	.	.	58
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	23.8%	45.2%	29.3%	1.4%	0.4%	2,109
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.0	31.5%	45.2%	20.2%	2.4%	0.8%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.9	33.3%	29.6%	33.3%	3.7%	.	27

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	24.9%	45.2%	28.0%	1.4%	0.4%	2,622
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.2	34.6%	46.2%	19.2%	.	.	26

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	25.7%	43.5%	28.8%	1.6%	0.3%	579
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	4.0	25.2%	46.3%	27.1%	1.1%	0.3%	1,288
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	24.3%	45.2%	28.0%	2.0%	0.5%	767

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	26.8%	46.5%	25.8%	0.5%	0.5%	198
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	24.9%	45.5%	27.7%	1.5%	0.4%	2,419

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.9	24.6%	45.6%	28.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,440
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.1	36.6%	37.9%	21.4%	3.4%	0.7%	145
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	13.0%	50.0%	35.2%	1.9%	.	54

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.9	25.2%	45.9%	27.3%	1.3%	0.3%	2,365
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	23.7%	39.9%	32.9%	2.8%	0.7%	283

F3f: Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.9	25.2%	45.2%	27.8%	1.5%	0.3%	2,506
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.9	21.8%	46.5%	29.6%	0.7%	1.4%	142

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	4.0	26.1%	45.3%	27.9%	0.5%	0.2%	2,647

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	4.0	26.3%	44.1%	29.2%	0.3%	0.1%	703
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	4.0	27.5%	46.1%	26.0%	0.2%	0.2%	581
.....Junior	3.9	24.2%	45.7%	29.0%	0.7%	0.3%	582
.....Senior	4.0	26.2%	45.6%	27.3%	0.6%	0.3%	781

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	21.1%	43.3%	34.3%	0.8%	0.5%	1,183
.....Male
.....Female	4.1	30.1%	47.0%	22.7%	0.2%	.	1,464

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.1	34.0%	45.5%	19.9%	0.5%	.	191
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.1	26.6%	53.2%	19.4%	0.7%	.	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.2	39.0%	44.1%	16.9%	.	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	24.7%	45.0%	29.6%	0.5%	0.2%	2,108
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.1	30.9%	46.3%	22.0%	.	0.8%	123
.....Other/Unknown	3.9	29.6%	29.6%	40.7%	.	.	27

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	4.0	25.9%	45.4%	28.0%	0.5%	0.2%	2,621
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.3	46.2%	38.5%	15.4%	.	.	26

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	24.9%	46.4%	27.7%	0.7%	0.3%	578
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	4.0	27.2%	45.5%	27.0%	0.2%	0.1%	1,286
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	25.4%	44.7%	28.9%	0.7%	0.4%	769

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	29.8%	46.5%	22.7%	0.5%	0.5%	198
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	4.0	25.8%	45.5%	28.0%	0.5%	0.2%	2,418

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	4.0	25.9%	45.7%	27.8%	0.4%	0.2%	2,439
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.0	33.1%	37.9%	26.9%	1.4%	0.7%	145
.....Prefer not to answer	3.8	16.7%	48.1%	35.2%	.	.	54

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	4.0	26.5%	46.1%	26.9%	0.4%	0.2%	2,363
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	22.9%	39.1%	36.3%	1.1%	0.7%	284

F3g: Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	4.0	26.3%	45.3%	27.7%	0.5%	0.2%	2,505
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.9	22.5%	45.8%	31.0%	.	0.7%	142

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	25.3%	45.4%	28.1%	0.8%	0.3%	2,648

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	4.0	25.5%	44.7%	29.2%	0.4%	0.1%	702
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	4.0	26.6%	45.5%	26.5%	1.2%	0.2%	582
.....Junior	3.9	23.9%	44.5%	29.7%	1.0%	0.9%	582
.....Senior	4.0	25.2%	46.7%	27.2%	0.6%	0.3%	782

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	20.2%	43.8%	33.8%	1.5%	0.8%	1,184
.....Male
.....Female	4.1	29.4%	46.8%	23.6%	0.2%	.	1,464

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity	4.1	31.9%	47.1%	19.4%	1.6%	.	191
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	28.8%	46.8%	24.5%	.	.	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.2	33.9%	47.5%	18.6%	.	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	23.9%	45.5%	29.4%	0.9%	0.4%	2,109
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.0	30.9%	41.5%	26.8%	.	0.8%	123
.....Other/Unknown	4.0	29.6%	37.0%	33.3%	.	.	27

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	25.2%	45.5%	28.2%	0.8%	0.3%	2,622
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.2	38.5%	42.3%	19.2%	.	.	26

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	25.0%	44.6%	28.7%	1.4%	0.3%	579
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	4.0	26.1%	45.9%	27.1%	0.7%	0.2%	1,289
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	24.3%	45.7%	28.9%	0.5%	0.7%	766

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	29.3%	43.9%	25.8%	0.5%	0.5%	198
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	25.1%	45.8%	28.0%	0.8%	0.3%	2,419

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	3.9	25.1%	45.8%	27.9%	0.8%	0.3%	2,441
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.0	32.6%	37.5%	29.2%	.	0.7%	144
.....Prefer not to answer	3.8	14.8%	50.0%	33.3%	1.9%	.	54

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	4.0	25.6%	45.9%	27.5%	0.8%	0.3%	2,363
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	22.5%	41.8%	33.7%	1.1%	1.1%	285

F3h: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.9	25.4%	45.5%	27.9%	0.8%	0.3%	2,506
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.9	23.2%	43.7%	32.4%	.	0.7%	142

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	23.4%	37.4%	35.9%	2.0%	1.2%	2,649

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.8	22.5%	36.4%	38.0%	2.1%	1.0%	703
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	26.0%	38.2%	33.0%	1.5%	1.2%	584
.....Junior	3.8	22.4%	36.9%	37.4%	2.1%	1.2%	580
.....Senior	3.8	23.0%	38.0%	35.2%	2.3%	1.5%	782

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.6	18.2%	32.3%	43.7%	3.3%	2.5%	1,182
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	27.6%	41.4%	29.7%	1.0%	0.2%	1,467

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity	4.0	29.7%	39.1%	28.6%	2.6%	.	192
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	3.9	23.0%	45.3%	29.5%	0.7%	1.4%	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.9	27.1%	39.0%	32.2%	1.7%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	22.5%	37.0%	37.1%	2.2%	1.2%	2,108
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.8	28.2%	32.3%	35.5%	0.8%	3.2%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	22.2%	37.0%	37.0%	.	3.7%	27

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	23.3%	37.5%	35.9%	2.1%	1.3%	2,623
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.0	38.5%	23.1%	38.5%	.	.	26

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.8	22.8%	38.3%	35.4%	2.1%	1.4%	579
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.8	23.4%	38.7%	34.9%	1.9%	1.1%	1,288
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	24.1%	34.9%	37.5%	2.2%	1.3%	768

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	27.4%	40.6%	29.4%	0.5%	2.0%	197
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	23.1%	37.4%	36.1%	2.2%	1.1%	2,421

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.8	22.6%	37.8%	36.2%	2.2%	1.2%	2,442
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.0	38.2%	29.2%	30.6%	.	2.1%	144
.....Prefer not to answer	3.8	18.5%	42.6%	37.0%	1.9%	.	54

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.8	23.4%	37.9%	35.7%	1.8%	1.2%	2,364
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.7	23.9%	32.6%	38.2%	3.9%	1.4%	285

F3i: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	23.5%	37.4%	35.8%	2.1%	1.2%	2,508
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	22.0%	36.9%	39.0%	0.7%	1.4%	141

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.8	21.9%	40.7%	36.7%	0.5%	0.2%	2,652

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.9	23.3%	41.2%	35.4%	0.1%	.	704
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.8	22.8%	40.4%	36.0%	0.7%	0.2%	584
.....Junior	3.8	19.4%	42.1%	38.1%	0.3%	.	582
.....Senior	3.8	21.9%	39.5%	37.5%	0.8%	0.4%	782

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.7	17.7%	38.3%	43.1%	0.6%	0.3%	1,186
.....Male
.....Female	3.9	25.3%	42.7%	31.6%	0.4%	.	1,466

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	3.9	26.6%	38.5%	33.9%	1.0%	.	192
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	3.9	20.1%	48.9%	30.2%	.	0.7%	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	3.9	30.5%	35.6%	30.5%	3.4%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.8	21.3%	40.9%	37.4%	0.4%	0.1%	2,111
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.8	23.4%	35.5%	39.5%	0.8%	0.8%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.8	22.2%	37.0%	40.7%	.	.	27

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.8	21.9%	40.7%	36.8%	0.5%	0.2%	2,626
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.0	26.9%	46.2%	26.9%	.	.	26

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	21.9%	42.1%	35.3%	0.5%	0.2%	580
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	22.5%	40.9%	36.3%	0.3%	.	1,289
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.8	21.1%	39.8%	38.0%	0.8%	0.4%	769

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	24.7%	45.5%	28.8%	0.5%	0.5%	198
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.8	21.7%	40.6%	37.1%	0.5%	0.1%	2,423

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.8	21.6%	41.1%	36.7%	0.5%	0.1%	2,444
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	29.7%	33.1%	35.2%	0.7%	1.4%	145
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	13.0%	44.4%	42.6%	.	.	54

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	3.8	21.8%	41.6%	36.0%	0.5%	0.1%	2,367
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	22.8%	33.3%	42.8%	0.4%	0.7%	285

F3j: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people with disabilities	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.8	22.0%	40.8%	36.6%	0.5%	0.1%	2,510
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	21.1%	39.4%	38.7%	.	0.7%	142

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	3.9	24.6%	41.4%	32.3%	1.2%	0.5%	2,650

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	3.9	24.9%	41.0%	32.9%	0.9%	0.3%	702
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	3.9	26.2%	42.7%	29.5%	1.0%	0.5%	583
.....Junior	3.9	23.3%	41.3%	33.6%	1.2%	0.5%	583
.....Senior	3.9	23.9%	40.9%	32.7%	1.8%	0.6%	782

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	20.4%	37.7%	39.3%	1.7%	0.8%	1,185
.....Male
.....Female	4.0	27.9%	44.4%	26.6%	0.9%	0.2%	1,465

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity	4.0	29.2%	40.6%	29.2%	1.0%	.	192
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.0	24.5%	49.6%	24.5%	1.4%	.	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.1	33.9%	40.7%	23.7%	.	1.7%	59
.....White/Caucasian	3.9	23.6%	41.3%	33.3%	1.4%	0.5%	2,109
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	3.9	29.0%	38.7%	30.6%	.	1.6%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.9	25.9%	33.3%	40.7%	.	.	27

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	3.9	24.5%	41.5%	32.3%	1.3%	0.5%	2,624
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.0	30.8%	38.5%	30.8%	.	.	26

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	23.3%	43.1%	31.6%	1.6%	0.5%	580
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	3.9	25.3%	42.1%	31.1%	1.2%	0.3%	1,288
.....Upper middle/Upper class	3.9	24.5%	39.6%	34.0%	1.2%	0.8%	768

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	3.9	27.3%	43.4%	26.8%	1.5%	1.0%	198
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	3.9	24.4%	41.6%	32.4%	1.2%	0.5%	2,421

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*	3.9	24.3%	41.8%	32.4%	1.1%	0.4%	2,442
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	3.9	31.7%	35.2%	28.3%	3.4%	1.4%	145
.....Prefer not to answer	3.7	16.7%	46.3%	33.3%	1.9%	1.9%	54

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status	3.9	24.5%	42.2%	31.7%	1.1%	0.5%	2,366
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.8	25.0%	35.2%	37.0%	2.1%	0.7%	284

F3k: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different religion	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	3.9	24.7%	41.7%	31.9%	1.3%	0.5%	2,508
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.8	21.8%	37.3%	39.4%	0.7%	0.7%	142

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin

	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Total (N)	4.0	27.3%	43.9%	27.8%	0.7%	0.4%	2,649

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Academic Class	4.0	26.6%	43.5%	29.4%	0.6%	.	704
.....Freshman
.....Sophomore	4.0	29.8%	43.1%	26.2%	0.2%	0.7%	583
.....Junior	3.9	25.8%	43.7%	29.3%	0.9%	0.3%	581
.....Senior	4.0	27.0%	44.9%	26.4%	1.2%	0.5%	781

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*	3.8	21.8%	42.9%	33.3%	1.1%	0.8%	1,186
.....Male
.....Female	4.1	31.6%	44.6%	23.3%	0.4%	.	1,463

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*	4.1	31.3%	46.4%	21.4%	1.0%	.	192
.....African American/Black
.....Asian	4.1	28.8%	47.5%	23.7%	.	.	139
.....Hispanic/Latino	4.1	35.6%	40.7%	22.0%	1.7%	.	59
.....White/Caucasian	4.0	26.3%	44.0%	28.7%	0.7%	0.3%	2,108
.....Multiple races/ethnicities	4.0	32.3%	37.9%	28.2%	.	1.6%	124
.....Other/Unknown	3.7	25.9%	33.3%	33.3%	3.7%	3.7%	27

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency	4.0	27.1%	43.9%	27.8%	0.7%	0.4%	2,623
.....U.S. resident
.....International student	4.2	38.5%	38.5%	23.1%	.	.	26

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background	3.9	25.1%	44.3%	29.2%	0.9%	0.5%	578
.....Poor/Working class
.....Middle class	4.0	28.2%	44.6%	26.5%	0.5%	0.2%	1,289
.....Upper middle/Upper class	4.0	27.5%	42.8%	28.3%	1.0%	0.4%	768

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student	4.0	27.3%	45.5%	25.3%	1.5%	0.5%	198
.....First generation student
.....Not first generation	4.0	27.3%	44.0%	27.7%	0.6%	0.3%	2,420

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation	4.0	27.0%	44.1%	27.8%	0.7%	0.4%	2,444
.....Heterosexual or straight
.....Gay, lesbian, or bisexual	4.0	34.5%	37.3%	25.4%	2.1%	0.7%	142
.....Prefer not to answer	3.9	18.5%	50.0%	31.5%	.	.	54

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*	4.0	27.4%	44.5%	27.2%	0.6%	0.3%	2,366
.....No disability
.....Disability	3.9	25.8%	38.9%	32.9%	1.4%	1.1%	283

F3l: Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different country-of-origin	Mean Rating	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age	4.0	27.5%	43.9%	27.6%	0.7%	0.4%	2,509
.....Traditional (18-27)
.....Non-Traditional (>27)	3.9	23.6%	43.6%	30.7%	1.4%	0.7%	140

Back to Top

View These Results by Academic College

To download an MS Word document with results by demographic profile, click here.

Endnote:
Academic class, gender, residency, and age are based on information obtained from official university records. Race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, college generation, sexual orientation, and disability status are based on self-reported survey data. Race/ethnicity was obtained from official university records for those who chose not to self-identify. (back)

For more information on the 2010 Campus Climate Survey contact:
Dr. Nancy Whelchel, Associate Director for Survey Research
Office of Institutional Planning and Research
Box 7002
NCSU
Phone: (919) 515-4184
Email: Nancy_Whelchel@ncsu.edu

Posted: January, 2011

Return to Student Demographic Profile Table of Contents

Return to 2010 Campus Climate Survey Table of Contents

Return to OIRP Survey Page

Return to OIRP Home Page