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

Tables of Results
by Student Demographic Profile

The NC State University Campus Climate Survey was conducted in two years: 2004 and 2010. This page shows trends in survey responses for items included in both survey waves, broken down by student demographic profile.

To skip directly to a particular section, select the section below.

Influences on thinking about diversity: Interactions at NC State	Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff
Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences
Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Influence of NC State: Behavior related to diversity
Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/events	Influence of NC State: Working/interacting with people of diverse backgrounds

Section F: Shaping Attitudes about Diversity

Influence on thinking: Interactions with students in class ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	21.5%	58.1%	18.0%	1.9%	0.5%	1,286
2004
2010	4.0	28.9%	47.9%	20.6%	1.8%	0.8%	1,168

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	21.3%	59.3%	17.6%	1.1%	0.6%	619
Male	2004
	2010	4.0	28.6%	47.3%	21.7%	1.6%	0.7%	548
Female	2004	4.0	21.6%	57.0%	18.4%	2.5%	0.4%	667
	2010	4.0	29.2%	48.4%	19.7%	1.9%	0.8%	620

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	18.5%	58.0%	14.8%	4.9%	3.7%	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	25.0%	39.5%	31.6%	2.6%	1.3%	76
Asian	2004	4.1	17.3%	71.9%	10.2%	0.5%	.	196
	2010	4.2	37.7%	49.8%	11.4%	0.7%	0.3%	297
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.0	27.0%	48.6%	21.6%	.	2.7%	37
	2010	4.3	48.4%	32.3%	19.4%	.	.	31
White/Caucasian	2004	4.0	22.0%	56.4%	19.6%	1.9%	0.1%	874
	2010	3.9	24.8%	48.6%	23.4%	2.2%	1.0%	726

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	22.0%	56.4%	18.9%	2.1%	0.6%	1,159
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	25.5%	47.6%	23.5%	2.4%	1.0%	822
International student	2004	4.1	16.5%	73.2%	10.2%	.	.	127
	2010	4.2	37.0%	48.6%	13.9%	0.3%	0.3%	346

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	18.8%	55.1%	22.9%	2.2%	1.0%	314
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.0	27.7%	50.8%	16.4%	3.3%	1.8%	329
Middle class	2004	4.0	20.3%	61.7%	15.9%	1.7%	0.5%	665
	2010	4.1	29.2%	49.1%	20.6%	0.6%	0.6%	538
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	4.0	26.5%	53.6%	17.5%	2.0%	0.3%	302
	2010	4.0	29.4%	42.6%	26.0%	2.1%	.	289

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	22.0%	59.1%	17.2%	0.5%	1.1%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.2	37.1%	47.6%	12.9%	1.6%	0.8%	124
Not first generation	2004	4.0	21.3%	57.9%	18.2%	2.1%	0.5%	1,097
	2010	4.0	27.5%	48.3%	21.6%	1.8%	0.8%	1,024

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	21.4%	58.1%	18.2%	1.9%	0.4%	1,215
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.0	28.2%	49.2%	20.0%	1.7%	0.9%	1,049
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	4.0	25.5%	56.4%	12.7%	1.8%	3.6%	55
	2010	3.9	29.0%	35.5%	32.3%	3.2%	.	62

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	21.6%	58.6%	17.7%	1.7%	0.4%	1,229
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	28.9%	48.8%	20.0%	1.5%	0.8%	1,071
Disability	2004	3.6	16.7%	43.8%	29.2%	6.3%	4.2%	48
	2010	3.9	29.9%	37.1%	27.8%	5.2%	.	97

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	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	20.6%	59.7%	17.3%	1.9%	0.6%	1,059
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.0	28.1%	48.3%	20.9%	1.8%	0.9%	1,016
Non-Traditional	2004	4.0	25.6%	50.7%	21.6%	1.8%	0.4%	227
	2010	4.1	34.2%	44.7%	19.1%	2.0%	.	152

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	21.7%	54.2%	20.8%	2.6%	0.7%	1,283
2004
2010	4.0	29.2%	48.8%	19.3%	1.9%	0.8%	1,150

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	21.9%	57.1%	18.0%	2.3%	0.8%	617
Male	2004
	2010	4.0	28.4%	49.8%	19.6%	1.7%	0.6%	542
Female	2004	3.9	21.6%	51.5%	23.4%	2.9%	0.6%	666
	2010	4.0	29.9%	47.9%	19.1%	2.1%	1.0%	608

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	16.3%	56.3%	22.5%	3.8%	1.3%	80
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	23.0%	40.5%	33.8%	1.4%	1.4%	74
Asian	2004	4.0	20.6%	62.4%	14.4%	2.6%	.	194
	2010	4.2	32.3%	55.8%	10.9%	0.7%	0.3%	294
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.0	18.9%	59.5%	21.6%	.	.	37
	2010	4.4	58.1%	25.8%	12.9%	3.2%	.	31
White/Caucasian	2004	3.9	22.2%	53.3%	21.7%	2.2%	0.6%	874
	2010	4.0	26.8%	48.0%	22.2%	2.2%	0.8%	713

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	22.1%	52.9%	21.6%	2.5%	0.8%	1,156
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	4.0	27.5%	46.7%	22.4%	2.4%	1.0%	807
International student	2004	4.0	18.1%	65.4%	13.4%	3.1%	.	127
	2010	4.2	33.2%	53.6%	12.0%	0.9%	0.3%	343

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	20.0%	50.2%	25.1%	3.8%	1.0%	315
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.0	27.5%	52.2%	16.3%	2.5%	1.6%	320
Middle class	2004	4.0	20.4%	58.1%	18.8%	2.0%	0.8%	661
	2010	4.0	27.7%	51.8%	18.3%	1.5%	0.8%	531
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	4.0	26.2%	50.0%	20.9%	2.6%	0.3%	302
	2010	4.0	33.4%	40.1%	24.4%	2.1%	.	287

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	21.5%	51.1%	23.7%	2.7%	1.1%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.2	33.3%	51.7%	14.2%	0.8%	.	120
Not first generation	2004	3.9	21.8%	54.7%	20.4%	2.6%	0.6%	1,094
	2010	4.0	28.5%	48.8%	19.8%	2.1%	0.9%	1,011

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	21.8%	54.2%	20.8%	2.7%	0.5%	1,213
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.0	29.1%	49.1%	19.2%	1.9%	0.7%	1,031
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.9	21.8%	52.7%	20.0%	.	5.5%	55
	2010	3.9	29.0%	40.3%	24.2%	3.2%	3.2%	62

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	22.0%	54.6%	20.4%	2.4%	0.6%	1,226
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	29.1%	49.3%	18.7%	2.0%	0.9%	1,054
Disability	2004	3.5	12.5%	41.7%	35.4%	6.3%	4.2%	48
	2010	4.0	30.2%	42.7%	26.0%	1.0%	.	96

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	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	21.5%	55.5%	19.7%	2.8%	0.5%	1,057
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.0	29.1%	49.0%	19.0%	2.0%	0.9%	1,004
Non-Traditional	2004	3.9	23.0%	47.8%	26.1%	1.3%	1.8%	226
	2010	4.1	30.1%	47.3%	21.2%	1.4%	.	146

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	18.1%	51.1%	28.1%	2.4%	0.3%	1,282
2004
2010	4.0	26.6%	47.7%	24.2%	1.4%	0.2%	1,150

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.9	18.0%	51.5%	28.5%	1.5%	0.5%	617
Male	2004
	2010	4.0	26.1%	47.1%	26.1%	0.6%	0.2%	541
Female	2004	3.8	18.2%	50.7%	27.7%	3.3%	0.2%	665
	2010	4.0	27.1%	48.1%	22.5%	2.1%	0.2%	609

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.7	14.8%	49.4%	25.9%	8.6%	1.2%	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	21.6%	47.3%	27.0%	4.1%	.	74
Asian	2004	4.0	21.0%	57.9%	21.0%	.	.	195
	2010	4.2	34.4%	53.1%	11.9%	0.3%	0.3%	294
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.8	18.9%	48.6%	29.7%	2.7%	.	37
	2010	4.1	40.0%	33.3%	26.7%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	17.0%	51.1%	29.4%	2.3%	0.2%	871
	2010	3.9	23.7%	46.2%	28.6%	1.5%	.	714

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	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	18.3%	49.8%	28.9%	2.7%	0.3%	1,155
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	23.5%	46.2%	28.3%	1.9%	0.1%	809
International student	2004	4.0	16.5%	63.0%	20.5%	.	.	127
	2010	4.2	34.0%	51.0%	14.4%	0.3%	0.3%	341

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	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	16.2%	45.2%	33.1%	4.5%	1.0%	314
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.0	26.4%	51.8%	18.4%	2.8%	0.6%	326
Middle class	2004	3.9	16.9%	55.4%	25.7%	1.8%	0.2%	661
	2010	4.0	25.8%	47.5%	25.6%	1.1%	.	528
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	22.2%	48.3%	27.8%	1.7%	.	302
	2010	4.0	28.4%	43.5%	28.1%	.	.	285

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	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	19.5%	51.9%	25.9%	1.6%	1.1%	185
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.2	36.6%	48.8%	14.6%	.	.	123
Not first generation	2004	3.8	17.8%	51.0%	28.4%	2.6%	0.2%	1,094
	2010	4.0	25.3%	47.9%	25.1%	1.5%	0.2%	1,008

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	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	18.2%	51.4%	27.7%	2.4%	0.2%	1,211
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.0	26.0%	48.5%	24.0%	1.4%	0.1%	1,033
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.7	14.5%	47.3%	32.7%	3.6%	1.8%	55
	2010	3.9	30.6%	35.5%	30.6%	1.6%	1.6%	62

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	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	18.3%	51.1%	28.0%	2.3%	0.3%	1,225
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	26.9%	48.2%	23.4%	1.3%	0.2%	1,053
Disability	2004	3.7	12.5%	47.9%	33.3%	6.3%	.	48
	2010	3.9	23.7%	41.2%	33.0%	2.1%	.	97

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	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	17.0%	52.6%	27.9%	2.1%	0.4%	1,056
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.0	26.1%	47.5%	24.8%	1.5%	0.2%	1,001
Non-Traditional	2004	3.9	23.0%	44.2%	28.8%	4.0%	.	226
	2010	4.1	30.2%	49.0%	20.1%	0.7%	.	149

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	16.6%	46.1%	34.9%	1.9%	0.6%	1,285
2004
2010	4.0	25.7%	45.5%	27.8%	0.8%	0.2%	1,111

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	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	15.2%	49.8%	33.0%	1.0%	1.0%	618
Male	2004
	2010	4.0	25.4%	46.2%	27.8%	0.4%	0.2%	528
Female	2004	3.7	17.8%	42.6%	36.6%	2.7%	0.3%	667
	2010	4.0	25.9%	44.9%	27.8%	1.2%	0.2%	583

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.4	9.9%	37.0%	42.0%	9.9%	1.2%	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	24.6%	42.0%	30.4%	2.9%	.	69
Asian	2004	4.0	18.5%	62.6%	17.9%	1.0%	.	195
	2010	4.2	32.2%	53.3%	13.8%	0.3%	0.3%	289
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.7	16.2%	43.2%	37.8%	.	2.7%	37
	2010	4.2	41.4%	37.9%	20.7%	.	.	29
White/Caucasian	2004	3.7	16.5%	43.9%	37.5%	1.5%	0.6%	874
	2010	3.9	22.4%	43.3%	33.4%	0.7%	0.1%	688

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	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	16.8%	44.4%	36.3%	1.9%	0.7%	1,158
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	22.6%	43.2%	33.1%	1.0%	0.1%	776
International student	2004	3.9	15.0%	61.4%	22.0%	1.6%	.	127
	2010	4.2	32.8%	51.0%	15.5%	0.3%	0.3%	335

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	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	14.0%	40.3%	40.3%	4.1%	1.3%	315
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.0	24.7%	49.7%	23.7%	1.3%	0.6%	312
Middle class	2004	3.8	16.0%	48.6%	33.6%	1.4%	0.5%	663
	2010	3.9	23.2%	46.1%	30.3%	0.4%	.	512
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	20.2%	47.0%	31.8%	0.7%	0.3%	302
	2010	4.0	30.3%	40.4%	28.5%	0.7%	.	277

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	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	15.6%	43.5%	38.2%	1.6%	1.1%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.1	31.9%	45.4%	22.7%	.	.	119
Not first generation	2004	3.8	16.7%	46.5%	34.3%	1.9%	0.5%	1,096
	2010	3.9	24.7%	45.8%	28.4%	0.8%	0.2%	974

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	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	16.8%	46.3%	34.6%	1.8%	0.5%	1,214
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.0	25.2%	46.1%	27.7%	0.7%	0.2%	999
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.5	10.9%	43.6%	38.2%	3.6%	3.6%	55
	2010	3.9	27.6%	34.5%	36.2%	1.7%	.	58

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	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	16.6%	46.0%	35.0%	1.7%	0.7%	1,228
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	25.8%	46.7%	26.6%	0.8%	0.1%	1,017
Disability	2004	3.7	14.6%	43.8%	35.4%	6.3%	.	48
	2010	3.8	24.5%	33.0%	40.4%	1.1%	1.1%	94

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	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	16.1%	48.3%	33.3%	1.7%	0.6%	1,059
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.0	25.4%	45.7%	27.8%	0.9%	0.2%	970
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	18.6%	35.8%	42.0%	2.7%	0.9%	226
	2010	4.0	27.7%	44.7%	27.7%	.	.	141

Back to Top

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.4	7.8%	31.5%	58.7%	1.6%	0.4%	1,285
2004
2010	3.7	18.3%	38.4%	42.4%	0.8%	0.1%	1,072

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.4	6.6%	27.3%	63.4%	2.1%	0.5%	618
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	17.1%	36.0%	45.9%	0.8%	0.2%	492
Female	2004	3.5	8.8%	35.4%	54.3%	1.2%	0.3%	667
	2010	3.8	19.3%	40.5%	39.3%	0.9%	.	580

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.4	7.4%	34.6%	51.9%	4.9%	1.2%	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	19.7%	42.1%	36.8%	1.3%	.	76
Asian	2004	3.5	6.7%	39.5%	52.3%	1.5%	.	195
	2010	4.0	24.3%	48.9%	26.1%	0.4%	0.4%	280
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.4	5.4%	32.4%	59.5%	.	2.7%	37
	2010	4.0	37.9%	31.0%	27.6%	3.4%	.	29
White/Caucasian	2004	3.4	7.8%	30.3%	60.3%	1.4%	0.2%	874
	2010	3.6	15.2%	33.7%	50.4%	0.8%	.	653

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.5	8.2%	31.7%	58.1%	1.6%	0.4%	1,158
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.6	15.0%	35.8%	48.5%	0.8%	.	749
International student	2004	3.4	3.9%	29.9%	63.8%	2.4%	.	127
	2010	4.0	26.0%	44.6%	28.2%	0.9%	0.3%	323

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.4	7.0%	30.5%	59.4%	2.2%	1.0%	315
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	17.6%	43.6%	37.8%	0.7%	0.3%	307
Middle class	2004	3.4	7.2%	32.4%	58.7%	1.4%	0.3%	663
	2010	3.7	17.9%	37.3%	43.5%	1.2%	.	496
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.5	9.9%	30.8%	57.6%	1.7%	.	302
	2010	3.7	19.4%	34.9%	45.7%	.	.	258

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	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*		3.5	7.0%	38.7%	51.6%	1.6%	1.1%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	29.9%	40.2%	29.1%	0.9%	.	117
Not first generation	2004	3.4	7.9%	30.4%	59.8%	1.6%	0.3%	1,096
	2010	3.7	16.5%	38.3%	44.2%	0.9%	0.1%	937

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*		3.5	7.7%	32.0%	58.5%	1.5%	0.3%	1,214
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.7	17.3%	38.6%	43.2%	0.8%	0.1%	956
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.3	9.1%	21.8%	61.8%	5.5%	1.8%	55
	2010	3.8	21.0%	38.7%	38.7%	1.6%	.	62

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.4	7.7%	31.4%	59.0%	1.6%	0.3%	1,228
No disability	2004
	2010	3.7	17.7%	39.7%	41.6%	0.9%	0.1%	980
Disability	2004	3.5	8.3%	37.5%	50.0%	2.1%	2.1%	48
	2010	3.8	25.0%	25.0%	50.0%	.	.	92

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.4	7.4%	30.3%	60.3%	1.5%	0.5%	1,058
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.7	17.9%	38.4%	42.7%	0.9%	0.1%	926
Non-Traditional	2004	3.5	9.7%	37.0%	51.1%	2.2%	.	227
	2010	3.8	20.5%	38.4%	40.4%	0.7%	.	146

Back to Top

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year	4.2	33.4%	52.9%	13.0%	0.6%	0.1%	1,285
2004
2010	4.1	33.6%	48.9%	16.5%	0.8%	0.2%	1,155

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender		4.2	32.8%	52.4%	13.8%	0.8%	0.2%	618
Male	2004
	2010	4.1	31.4%	50.0%	17.3%	1.1%	0.2%	544
Female	2004	4.2	33.9%	53.4%	12.3%	0.4%	.	667
	2010	4.2	35.5%	48.0%	15.9%	0.5%	0.2%	611

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	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	27.2%	54.3%	17.3%	1.2%	.	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	26.7%	49.3%	20.0%	2.7%	1.3%	75
Asian	2004	4.1	27.2%	59.0%	12.8%	1.0%	.	195
	2010	4.2	32.9%	51.5%	14.6%	0.7%	0.3%	295
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.1	18.9%	70.3%	10.8%	.	.	37
	2010	4.4	64.5%	16.1%	16.1%	3.2%	.	31
White/Caucasian	2004	4.2	35.4%	51.5%	12.8%	0.3%	.	874
	2010	4.1	33.2%	49.0%	17.2%	0.6%	.	716

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		4.2	33.7%	52.6%	13.1%	0.5%	0.1%	1,158
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	4.1	33.0%	48.9%	17.2%	0.7%	0.1%	812
International student	2004	4.2	30.7%	55.9%	11.8%	1.6%	.	127
	2010	4.2	35.0%	49.0%	14.9%	0.9%	0.3%	343

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	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	28.9%	57.1%	12.7%	1.0%	0.3%	315
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.2	32.2%	52.8%	14.1%	0.6%	0.3%	326
Middle class	2004	4.2	33.3%	53.5%	12.7%	0.5%	.	663
	2010	4.1	33.1%	49.2%	17.0%	0.6%	.	528
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	4.2	37.7%	47.4%	14.2%	0.7%	.	302
	2010	4.2	36.3%	44.3%	18.3%	1.0%	.	289

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	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*		4.1	27.4%	57.5%	14.5%	.	0.5%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.2	38.5%	43.4%	18.0%	.	.	122
Not first generation	2004	4.2	34.4%	52.1%	12.8%	0.7%	.	1,096
	2010	4.1	33.0%	49.9%	16.2%	0.9%	0.1%	1,013

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		4.2	33.1%	53.0%	13.2%	0.7%	.	1,214
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.1	33.1%	49.2%	17.0%	0.6%	0.1%	1,036
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	4.2	38.2%	49.1%	10.9%	.	1.8%	55
	2010	4.2	41.9%	41.9%	12.9%	3.2%	.	62

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		4.2	33.2%	53.5%	12.5%	0.7%	0.1%	1,228
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	32.9%	49.2%	16.8%	0.9%	0.2%	1,058
Disability	2004	4.1	35.4%	39.6%	25.0%	.	.	48
	2010	4.3	41.2%	45.4%	13.4%	.	.	97

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		4.2	33.7%	53.5%	12.0%	0.7%	0.1%	1,058
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.1	33.4%	49.2%	16.4%	0.9%	0.2%	1,007
Non-Traditional	2004	4.1	31.7%	50.2%	17.6%	0.4%	.	227
	2010	4.2	35.1%	47.3%	17.6%	.	.	148

Back to Top

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.4	8.4%	28.4%	62.1%	0.9%	0.2%	1,282
2004
2010	3.8	20.1%	42.6%	35.4%	1.6%	0.3%	900

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	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	9.3%	31.5%	58.4%	0.5%	0.3%	615
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	19.2%	42.5%	34.9%	2.7%	0.7%	438
Female	2004	3.4	7.6%	25.5%	65.5%	1.2%	0.1%	667
	2010	3.8	21.0%	42.6%	35.9%	0.4%	.	462

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.5	8.6%	34.6%	54.3%	2.5%	.	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	19.0%	41.4%	39.7%	.	.	58
Asian	2004	3.7	14.4%	43.1%	42.1%	0.5%	.	195
	2010	4.1	28.3%	53.9%	15.6%	1.9%	0.4%	269
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.2	2.7%	18.9%	75.7%	.	2.7%	37
	2010	4.1	44.0%	24.0%	32.0%	.	.	25
White/Caucasian	2004	3.4	6.7%	25.1%	67.4%	0.7%	0.1%	871
	2010	3.7	14.8%	37.7%	45.6%	1.5%	0.4%	520

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.4	8.4%	26.8%	63.7%	0.9%	0.3%	1,155
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.7	15.1%	38.2%	45.0%	1.4%	0.3%	589
International student	2004	3.6	8.7%	43.3%	47.2%	0.8%	.	127
	2010	4.1	29.6%	50.8%	17.4%	1.9%	0.3%	311

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.4	7.0%	27.3%	64.1%	0.6%	1.0%	315
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	20.3%	47.3%	31.3%	0.4%	0.8%	256
Middle class	2004	3.4	8.6%	27.4%	62.9%	1.1%	.	660
	2010	3.8	20.5%	41.3%	36.5%	1.7%	.	414
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.5	9.3%	32.1%	57.9%	0.7%	.	302
	2010	3.8	19.4%	39.6%	38.3%	2.3%	0.5%	222

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	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*		3.4	7.6%	28.1%	62.7%	0.5%	1.1%	185
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	27.8%	41.2%	29.9%	1.0%	.	97
Not first generation	2004	3.4	8.5%	28.5%	62.0%	0.9%	0.1%	1,094
	2010	3.8	19.0%	42.8%	36.2%	1.5%	0.4%	789

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.4	8.0%	28.8%	62.3%	0.8%	0.1%	1,211
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	20.2%	43.2%	34.5%	1.6%	0.4%	805
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.4	12.7%	20.0%	61.8%	1.8%	3.6%	55
	2010	3.6	14.9%	29.8%	55.3%	.	.	47

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.4	8.4%	28.4%	62.4%	0.7%	0.1%	1,225
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	20.0%	43.7%	34.6%	1.3%	0.4%	824
Disability	2004	3.3	8.3%	27.1%	56.3%	4.2%	4.2%	48
	2010	3.7	21.1%	30.3%	44.7%	3.9%	.	76

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.5	8.5%	31.4%	59.1%	0.8%	0.2%	1,057
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	20.4%	44.3%	33.3%	1.6%	0.4%	796
Non-Traditional	2004	3.3	8.0%	14.2%	76.0%	1.3%	0.4%	225
	2010	3.6	18.3%	28.8%	51.9%	1.0%	.	104

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.4	6.0%	30.6%	62.1%	0.9%	0.2%	1,276
2004
2010	3.8	18.6%	41.4%	38.1%	1.4%	0.6%	888

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.4	6.0%	33.1%	59.4%	1.1%	0.3%	613
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	19.0%	41.0%	37.1%	2.3%	0.7%	437
Female	2004	3.4	6.0%	28.4%	64.7%	0.8%	0.2%	663
	2010	3.8	18.2%	41.9%	39.0%	0.4%	0.4%	451

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.4	6.2%	33.3%	59.3%	1.2%	.	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.7	16.9%	37.3%	44.1%	.	1.7%	59
Asian	2004	3.7	11.9%	49.0%	38.7%	0.5%	.	194
	2010	4.1	26.6%	57.2%	14.8%	1.1%	0.4%	271
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.3	2.7%	32.4%	62.2%	.	2.7%	37
	2010	4.1	42.3%	26.9%	30.8%	.	.	26
White/Caucasian	2004	3.3	4.5%	26.3%	68.4%	0.7%	0.1%	867
	2010	3.6	12.9%	34.4%	50.3%	1.8%	0.6%	503

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.4	5.9%	28.8%	64.1%	1.0%	0.3%	1,149
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.6	13.0%	34.9%	49.8%	1.6%	0.7%	576
International student	2004	3.6	7.1%	47.2%	44.9%	0.8%	.	127
	2010	4.1	28.8%	53.5%	16.3%	1.0%	0.3%	312

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.4	5.1%	30.2%	63.0%	1.0%	0.6%	311
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	21.1%	43.4%	33.5%	0.4%	1.6%	251
Middle class	2004	3.4	5.8%	31.3%	62.1%	0.8%	0.2%	659
	2010	3.7	17.0%	42.0%	39.1%	1.9%	.	412
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.4	7.3%	30.2%	61.1%	1.3%	.	301
	2010	3.7	18.8%	38.5%	41.3%	0.9%	0.5%	218

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	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*		3.4	3.8%	34.8%	60.3%	.	1.1%	184
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	26.0%	43.8%	29.2%	1.0%	.	96
Not first generation	2004	3.4	6.3%	30.0%	62.4%	1.1%	0.1%	1,089
	2010	3.7	17.6%	41.3%	39.2%	1.3%	0.6%	778

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.4	5.8%	31.0%	62.1%	0.9%	0.2%	1,205
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	18.3%	42.2%	37.4%	1.4%	0.6%	796
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.3	7.3%	25.5%	63.6%	1.8%	1.8%	55
	2010	3.7	15.6%	35.6%	48.9%	.	.	45

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.4	6.0%	30.8%	62.4%	0.7%	0.2%	1,220
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	18.6%	42.7%	36.7%	1.4%	0.6%	812
Disability	2004	3.3	6.4%	25.5%	57.4%	8.5%	2.1%	47
	2010	3.6	18.4%	27.6%	52.6%	1.3%	.	76

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.4	6.0%	32.3%	60.6%	0.9%	0.3%	1,053
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	18.9%	43.6%	35.5%	1.4%	0.6%	778
Non-Traditional	2004	3.3	6.3%	22.9%	69.5%	1.3%	.	223
	2010	3.6	16.4%	26.4%	56.4%	0.9%	.	110

Back to Top

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	11.5%	50.2%	35.7%	2.3%	0.3%	1,278
2004
2010	3.9	20.5%	46.7%	31.4%	1.1%	0.3%	1,126

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	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	10.6%	51.9%	34.7%	2.1%	0.6%	616
Male	2004
	2010	3.9	19.9%	47.2%	31.3%	1.1%	0.4%	527
Female	2004	3.7	12.4%	48.6%	36.6%	2.4%	.	662
	2010	3.9	21.0%	46.2%	31.6%	1.0%	0.2%	599

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.6	7.4%	51.9%	35.8%	4.9%	.	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	16.7%	47.2%	34.7%	.	1.4%	72
Asian	2004	3.8	11.3%	61.0%	25.6%	2.1%	.	195
	2010	4.1	25.8%	56.4%	16.7%	0.7%	0.3%	287
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.8	8.3%	61.1%	27.8%	2.8%	.	36
	2010	4.1	41.4%	31.0%	27.6%	.	.	29
White/Caucasian	2004	3.7	11.5%	47.6%	38.4%	2.2%	0.3%	868
	2010	3.8	17.8%	43.6%	37.2%	1.3%	0.1%	702

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	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	11.6%	48.9%	37.0%	2.1%	0.3%	1,151
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	18.0%	44.3%	36.3%	1.1%	0.3%	793
International student	2004	3.8	10.2%	62.2%	23.6%	3.9%	.	127
	2010	4.0	26.4%	52.6%	19.8%	0.9%	0.3%	333

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	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	8.6%	50.2%	36.8%	3.5%	1.0%	315
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	19.9%	53.6%	24.9%	1.3%	0.3%	317
Middle class	2004	3.7	10.9%	51.5%	35.6%	2.0%	.	658
	2010	3.8	19.1%	45.9%	34.1%	1.0%	.	519
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.8	15.3%	48.3%	34.3%	1.7%	0.3%	300
	2010	3.9	23.4%	41.4%	34.2%	0.7%	0.4%	278

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	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*		3.6	9.2%	49.7%	36.2%	4.3%	0.5%	185
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.1	31.4%	47.9%	19.8%	0.8%	.	121
Not first generation	2004	3.7	11.8%	50.5%	35.5%	1.9%	0.3%	1,090
	2010	3.8	18.8%	47.0%	32.8%	1.1%	0.2%	987

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	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	11.4%	50.7%	35.4%	2.3%	0.2%	1,208
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	20.2%	47.0%	31.3%	1.2%	0.2%	1,008
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.6	11.1%	44.4%	38.9%	1.9%	3.7%	54
	2010	3.9	18.0%	49.2%	32.8%	.	.	61

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	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	11.5%	50.5%	35.5%	2.3%	0.2%	1,221
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	20.5%	47.1%	31.0%	1.1%	0.3%	1,031
Disability	2004	3.7	12.5%	45.8%	39.6%	.	2.1%	48
	2010	3.8	21.1%	42.1%	35.8%	1.1%	.	95

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	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	11.0%	51.5%	34.8%	2.5%	0.3%	1,055
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	20.6%	46.9%	31.1%	1.0%	0.3%	980
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	13.9%	44.4%	39.9%	1.3%	0.4%	223
	2010	3.8	19.9%	45.2%	33.6%	1.4%	.	146

Back to Top

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences ¹²

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year	3.8	24.7%	43.8%	22.2%	8.1%	1.2%	1,285
2004
2010	3.9	29.0%	43.3%	19.1%	7.0%	1.6%	1,134

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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	24.0%	43.8%	24.0%	6.6%	1.6%	617
Male	2004
	2010	3.9	26.4%	44.8%	21.8%	5.6%	1.3%	522
Female	2004	3.8	25.4%	43.9%	20.5%	9.4%	0.7%	668
	2010	3.9	31.2%	42.0%	16.8%	8.2%	1.8%	612

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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	37.0%	42.0%	13.6%	7.4%	.	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.1	39.0%	36.4%	18.2%	5.2%	1.3%	77
Asian	2004	3.9	19.1%	53.1%	24.7%	2.6%	0.5%	194
	2010	4.1	30.2%	53.4%	14.9%	1.1%	0.4%	281
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.3	40.5%	48.6%	10.8%	.	.	37
	2010	4.5	65.5%	20.7%	10.3%	3.4%	.	29
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	23.2%	41.8%	24.0%	9.9%	1.0%	875
	2010	3.8	24.6%	41.5%	21.8%	9.8%	2.3%	711

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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	25.5%	43.1%	21.4%	8.8%	1.2%	1,159
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	27.7%	40.9%	20.1%	9.2%	2.1%	806
International student	2004	3.8	17.5%	50.8%	29.4%	1.6%	0.8%	126
	2010	4.1	32.3%	49.1%	16.8%	1.5%	0.3%	328

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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	25.7%	39.4%	20.6%	12.4%	1.9%	315
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	26.0%	45.8%	16.0%	9.1%	3.1%	319
Middle class	2004	3.8	20.9%	46.8%	23.6%	7.7%	1.1%	665
	2010	3.9	27.8%	44.0%	19.6%	7.7%	1.0%	521
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	4.0	31.3%	42.7%	21.0%	4.3%	0.7%	300
	2010	4.0	34.6%	39.9%	21.6%	3.2%	0.7%	283

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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	23.7%	38.7%	23.1%	12.9%	1.6%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	28.7%	43.4%	20.5%	5.7%	1.6%	122
Not first generation	2004	3.9	24.8%	44.8%	22.1%	7.2%	1.1%	1,096
	2010	3.9	29.0%	43.3%	19.0%	7.2%	1.5%	993

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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	24.7%	44.1%	22.6%	7.7%	0.9%	1,214
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	29.4%	44.1%	19.4%	5.7%	1.4%	1,018
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.5	20.0%	40.0%	16.4%	16.4%	7.3%	55
	2010	3.5	25.0%	35.0%	11.7%	23.3%	5.0%	60

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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	24.8%	44.1%	22.1%	7.9%	1.1%	1,228
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	28.6%	43.8%	19.0%	7.0%	1.5%	1,038
Disability	2004	3.6	18.8%	41.7%	25.0%	10.4%	4.2%	48
	2010	3.9	33.3%	37.5%	20.8%	6.3%	2.1%	96

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	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%	44.5%	23.0%	8.3%	1.0%	1,058
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	29.1%	43.7%	18.7%	6.8%	1.7%	987
Non-Traditional	2004	3.9	32.2%	40.5%	18.5%	7.0%	1.8%	227
	2010	3.9	28.6%	40.8%	21.8%	8.2%	0.7%	147

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	16.3%	47.7%	34.5%	1.4%	0.2%	1,286
2004
2010	3.8	22.2%	40.2%	35.6%	1.8%	0.3%	1,178

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	14.3%	48.5%	35.7%	1.3%	0.3%	617
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	20.8%	40.1%	36.8%	2.0%	0.4%	554
Female	2004	3.8	18.1%	46.9%	33.5%	1.5%	.	669
	2010	3.9	23.4%	40.4%	34.5%	1.6%	0.2%	624

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	18.3%	45.1%	32.9%	3.7%	.	82
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	28.6%	33.8%	33.8%	3.9%	.	77
Asian	2004	3.9	13.9%	60.3%	24.7%	1.0%	.	194
	2010	4.0	26.4%	51.8%	20.7%	0.7%	0.3%	299
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.7	16.2%	45.9%	32.4%	5.4%	.	37
	2010	4.3	53.3%	26.7%	20.0%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	15.9%	45.0%	38.1%	1.0%	.	876
	2010	3.7	18.7%	37.2%	41.6%	2.2%	0.3%	733

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	16.3%	46.4%	35.7%	1.4%	0.2%	1,159
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.7	19.6%	36.3%	41.7%	2.2%	0.2%	832
International student	2004	3.9	15.7%	59.1%	23.6%	1.6%	.	127
	2010	4.0	28.3%	49.7%	20.8%	0.9%	0.3%	346

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	14.6%	46.2%	37.3%	1.6%	0.3%	316
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	24.7%	39.2%	33.4%	2.1%	0.6%	332
Middle class	2004	3.8	14.8%	50.5%	33.1%	1.5%	0.2%	662
	2010	3.8	20.1%	42.0%	35.9%	1.8%	0.2%	543
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.8	20.5%	43.7%	34.8%	1.0%	.	302
	2010	3.8	23.1%	38.3%	37.2%	1.4%	.	290

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	16.7%	45.7%	36.6%	0.5%	0.5%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	29.9%	42.5%	24.4%	3.1%	.	127
Not first generation	2004	3.8	16.1%	48.0%	34.2%	1.5%	0.1%	1,097
	2010	3.8	21.2%	40.0%	37.0%	1.6%	0.3%	1,030

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	16.3%	47.4%	34.8%	1.5%	0.1%	1,216
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	21.8%	40.2%	35.9%	1.9%	0.3%	1,057
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.9	18.5%	51.9%	27.8%	.	1.9%	54
	2010	4.0	34.4%	28.1%	35.9%	1.6%	.	64

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	16.4%	47.3%	34.7%	1.4%	0.2%	1,229
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	22.3%	40.5%	35.2%	1.7%	0.3%	1,081
Disability	2004	3.8	10.6%	57.4%	29.8%	2.1%	.	47
	2010	3.8	20.6%	37.1%	39.2%	3.1%	.	97

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	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	16.6%	48.7%	33.0%	1.6%	0.1%	1,060
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	21.6%	40.0%	36.3%	1.9%	0.3%	1,026
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	14.6%	42.9%	41.6%	0.4%	0.4%	226
	2010	3.9	25.7%	42.1%	30.9%	1.3%	.	152

Back to Top

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	14.9%	43.0%	40.9%	1.0%	0.2%	1,282
2004
2010	3.8	23.2%	40.4%	34.4%	1.7%	0.3%	1,171

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	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	12.4%	43.6%	42.3%	1.3%	0.5%	615
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	20.9%	42.5%	33.5%	2.5%	0.5%	550
Female	2004	3.8	17.2%	42.4%	39.6%	0.7%	.	667
	2010	3.9	25.3%	38.5%	35.3%	1.0%	.	621

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.7	17.3%	33.3%	48.1%	1.2%	.	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	28.9%	27.6%	43.4%	.	.	76
Asian	2004	3.8	11.4%	64.2%	21.8%	2.1%	0.5%	193
	2010	4.1	28.8%	52.5%	17.3%	1.0%	0.3%	295
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.5	8.1%	35.1%	56.8%	.	.	37
	2010	4.2	46.7%	30.0%	23.3%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.7	15.6%	39.7%	43.9%	0.8%	.	874
	2010	3.7	19.2%	37.9%	40.4%	2.3%	0.3%	731

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	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	15.2%	41.2%	42.5%	0.8%	0.3%	1,155
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.7	20.5%	35.5%	41.6%	2.2%	0.2%	829
International student	2004	3.8	11.8%	59.1%	26.0%	3.1%	.	127
	2010	4.1	29.8%	52.3%	17.0%	0.6%	0.3%	342

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	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	13.1%	38.9%	46.5%	1.0%	0.6%	314
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	24.5%	39.1%	34.2%	1.5%	0.6%	330
Middle class	2004	3.7	13.6%	46.8%	38.2%	1.2%	0.2%	660
	2010	3.8	22.1%	41.6%	34.0%	2.2%	0.2%	539
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.8	18.9%	39.7%	40.7%	0.7%	.	302
	2010	3.9	23.9%	39.4%	35.6%	1.0%	.	289

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	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	14.0%	44.6%	38.2%	2.2%	1.1%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	33.1%	37.8%	27.6%	1.6%	.	127
Not first generation	2004	3.7	15.0%	42.8%	41.3%	0.8%	0.1%	1,093
	2010	3.8	21.8%	41.0%	35.3%	1.7%	0.3%	1,023

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	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	14.8%	43.9%	40.1%	1.0%	0.2%	1,213
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	23.0%	40.6%	34.2%	1.9%	0.3%	1,050
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.6	16.7%	27.8%	51.9%	1.9%	1.9%	54
	2010	3.9	28.1%	32.8%	39.1%	.	.	64

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	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	14.9%	43.3%	40.5%	1.1%	0.2%	1,225
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	23.1%	41.0%	34.0%	1.7%	0.3%	1,075
Disability	2004	3.6	10.6%	42.6%	46.8%	.	.	47
	2010	3.8	25.0%	33.3%	39.6%	2.1%	.	96

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	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	15.0%	44.9%	38.8%	1.0%	0.2%	1,057
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	22.5%	41.0%	34.5%	1.7%	0.3%	1,020
Non-Traditional	2004	3.6	14.2%	33.8%	50.7%	0.9%	0.4%	225
	2010	3.9	27.8%	36.4%	33.8%	2.0%	.	151

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.6	11.9%	40.7%	45.9%	1.3%	0.3%	1,280
2004
2010	3.7	18.2%	40.2%	39.4%	2.0%	0.3%	1,176

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	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	10.2%	36.9%	51.7%	0.8%	0.3%	615
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	18.1%	38.4%	40.4%	2.7%	0.4%	554
Female	2004	3.7	13.4%	44.2%	40.5%	1.7%	0.3%	665
	2010	3.8	18.3%	41.8%	38.4%	1.3%	0.2%	622

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.6	17.1%	34.1%	45.1%	2.4%	1.2%	82
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	27.3%	36.4%	35.1%	1.3%	.	77
Asian	2004	3.7	10.3%	51.5%	35.6%	2.1%	0.5%	194
	2010	3.9	22.1%	46.6%	28.9%	2.0%	0.3%	298
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.5	8.6%	28.6%	62.9%	.	.	35
	2010	4.0	36.7%	26.7%	36.7%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	11.6%	40.0%	47.4%	0.9%	0.1%	872
	2010	3.7	15.0%	38.7%	44.0%	2.0%	0.3%	732

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.6	12.0%	39.8%	46.8%	1.0%	0.3%	1,153
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.7	16.2%	37.3%	44.2%	2.0%	0.2%	832
International student	2004	3.7	11.0%	48.8%	37.0%	3.1%	.	127
	2010	3.9	23.0%	47.4%	27.6%	1.7%	0.3%	344

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	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	10.8%	37.0%	50.6%	0.9%	0.6%	316
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	20.2%	40.8%	37.5%	0.9%	0.6%	331
Middle class	2004	3.6	10.5%	43.6%	44.2%	1.4%	0.3%	658
	2010	3.7	17.2%	40.4%	39.9%	2.6%	.	542
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.7	15.9%	38.5%	44.2%	1.3%	.	301
	2010	3.7	17.6%	39.3%	40.7%	2.1%	0.3%	290

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	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*		3.6	10.8%	40.9%	45.7%	1.1%	1.6%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	26.0%	40.2%	32.3%	1.6%	.	127
Not first generation	2004	3.6	12.1%	40.7%	45.8%	1.3%	0.1%	1,091
	2010	3.7	17.0%	40.5%	40.2%	1.9%	0.3%	1,029

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.6	12.0%	40.9%	45.7%	1.2%	0.2%	1,210
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.7	18.1%	40.1%	39.6%	1.9%	0.3%	1,055
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.6	13.0%	37.0%	46.3%	.	3.7%	54
	2010	3.8	21.9%	37.5%	37.5%	3.1%	.	64

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.6	11.8%	40.6%	46.0%	1.2%	0.3%	1,223
No disability	2004
	2010	3.7	18.1%	40.9%	38.8%	1.9%	0.3%	1,080
Disability	2004	3.7	14.9%	42.6%	40.4%	2.1%	.	47
	2010	3.7	18.8%	32.3%	45.8%	3.1%	.	96

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	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	11.8%	41.6%	45.1%	1.3%	0.2%	1,056
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.7	18.0%	40.2%	39.4%	2.1%	0.3%	1,024
Non-Traditional	2004	3.6	12.1%	36.6%	49.6%	0.9%	0.9%	224
	2010	3.8	19.7%	40.1%	39.5%	0.7%	.	152

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	17.6%	52.0%	29.5%	0.9%	0.2%	1,282
2004
2010	3.9	24.8%	45.7%	28.7%	0.6%	0.2%	1,177

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.9	16.6%	53.9%	28.4%	0.8%	0.3%	616
Male	2004
	2010	3.9	24.4%	46.6%	28.5%	0.4%	0.2%	554
Female	2004	3.9	18.5%	50.2%	30.5%	0.9%	.	666
	2010	3.9	25.2%	44.9%	28.9%	0.8%	0.2%	623

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	15.9%	48.8%	31.7%	3.7%	.	82
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	27.3%	28.6%	41.6%	1.3%	1.3%	77
Asian	2004	4.0	17.4%	65.1%	16.4%	1.0%	.	195
	2010	4.1	30.5%	53.4%	14.8%	1.0%	0.3%	298
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.9	10.8%	70.3%	18.9%	.	.	37
	2010	4.4	56.7%	23.3%	20.0%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	17.8%	49.1%	32.8%	0.2%	0.1%	872
	2010	3.9	21.1%	45.7%	32.7%	0.4%	.	733

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.2%	50.4%	31.4%	0.8%	0.2%	1,154
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	22.7%	42.7%	33.8%	0.7%	0.1%	832
International student	2004	4.0	20.3%	65.6%	12.5%	1.6%	.	128
	2010	4.1	29.9%	53.0%	16.5%	0.3%	0.3%	345

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	13.7%	49.7%	35.7%	0.6%	0.3%	314
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	25.7%	42.6%	30.5%	0.6%	0.6%	331
Middle class	2004	3.9	17.1%	55.4%	26.3%	1.1%	0.2%	661
	2010	3.9	23.8%	46.8%	28.9%	0.6%	.	543
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	22.2%	47.7%	29.5%	0.7%	.	302
	2010	4.0	25.5%	47.9%	25.9%	0.7%	.	290

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	14.6%	53.5%	30.3%	1.1%	0.5%	185
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.1	30.7%	44.9%	24.4%	.	.	127
Not first generation	2004	3.9	18.0%	51.8%	29.3%	0.8%	0.1%	1,094
	2010	3.9	24.0%	45.9%	29.3%	0.7%	0.2%	1,029

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.7%	51.8%	29.5%	0.9%	0.1%	1,212
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	24.1%	46.9%	28.3%	0.6%	0.2%	1,056
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.8	16.7%	51.9%	29.6%	.	1.9%	54
	2010	4.0	32.8%	31.3%	34.4%	1.6%	.	64

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.5%	52.5%	29.1%	0.8%	0.2%	1,225
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	25.2%	45.8%	28.3%	0.6%	0.2%	1,081
Disability	2004	3.7	17.0%	42.6%	38.3%	2.1%	.	47
	2010	3.9	20.8%	44.8%	33.3%	1.0%	.	96

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.6%	54.0%	27.5%	0.9%	0.1%	1,058
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	23.9%	45.7%	29.8%	0.5%	0.2%	1,025
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	17.4%	42.4%	38.8%	0.9%	0.4%	224
	2010	4.1	30.9%	46.1%	21.7%	1.3%	.	152

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	15.8%	50.8%	32.0%	1.1%	0.3%	1,282
2004
2010	3.9	24.3%	44.4%	30.3%	0.8%	0.2%	1,175

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	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	13.7%	51.8%	32.2%	1.6%	0.7%	614
Male	2004
	2010	3.9	23.7%	42.9%	31.6%	1.4%	0.4%	553
Female	2004	3.8	17.8%	49.9%	31.7%	0.6%	.	668
	2010	4.0	24.9%	45.8%	29.1%	0.2%	.	622

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.7	17.1%	35.4%	45.1%	2.4%	.	82
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	27.6%	38.2%	34.2%	.	.	76
Asian	2004	4.0	14.9%	68.2%	16.9%	.	.	195
	2010	4.2	33.6%	52.7%	12.8%	0.7%	0.3%	298
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.8	10.8%	56.8%	32.4%	.	.	37
	2010	4.4	53.3%	30.0%	16.7%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	15.9%	49.2%	33.9%	0.6%	0.3%	872
	2010	3.8	18.9%	42.9%	37.2%	1.0%	0.1%	732

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	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	15.8%	49.0%	33.7%	1.2%	0.3%	1,154
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	20.6%	41.0%	37.3%	1.0%	0.1%	830
International student	2004	4.0	16.4%	67.2%	16.4%	.	.	128
	2010	4.2	33.3%	52.8%	13.3%	0.3%	0.3%	345

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	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	15.0%	46.5%	36.9%	1.3%	0.3%	314
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.0	26.6%	44.4%	27.8%	0.6%	0.6%	331
Middle class	2004	3.8	14.8%	52.3%	31.6%	1.1%	0.2%	661
	2010	3.9	22.6%	44.2%	32.2%	1.1%	.	541
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	18.3%	52.2%	27.9%	1.0%	0.7%	301
	2010	3.9	24.8%	44.8%	30.0%	0.3%	.	290

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	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	15.2%	51.6%	32.6%	.	0.5%	184
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	31.0%	44.4%	23.0%	1.6%	.	126
Not first generation	2004	3.8	15.9%	50.6%	32.0%	1.3%	0.3%	1,095
	2010	3.9	23.3%	44.5%	31.4%	0.6%	0.2%	1,028

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	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	15.9%	50.7%	32.1%	1.1%	0.2%	1,212
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	23.7%	44.8%	30.5%	0.9%	0.2%	1,054
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.7	16.7%	46.3%	31.5%	1.9%	3.7%	54
	2010	4.0	31.3%	37.5%	31.3%	.	.	64

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	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	15.8%	50.9%	31.8%	1.1%	0.3%	1,225
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	24.3%	45.4%	29.4%	0.7%	0.2%	1,079
Disability	2004	3.8	17.0%	42.6%	40.4%	.	.	47
	2010	3.8	25.0%	33.3%	40.6%	1.0%	.	96

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	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	15.5%	51.7%	31.5%	0.9%	0.4%	1,060
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	24.0%	43.9%	31.2%	0.7%	0.2%	1,024
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	17.6%	46.4%	34.2%	1.8%	.	222
	2010	4.0	26.5%	47.7%	24.5%	1.3%	.	151

Back to Top

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

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	17.3%	53.4%	28.7%	0.3%	0.2%	1,280
2004
2010	4.0	26.0%	46.3%	27.0%	0.5%	0.3%	1,175

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	16.3%	53.5%	29.6%	0.2%	0.5%	615
Male	2004
	2010	3.9	23.9%	48.6%	26.3%	0.7%	0.5%	552
Female	2004	3.9	18.3%	53.4%	27.8%	0.5%	.	665
	2010	4.0	27.8%	44.3%	27.6%	0.3%	.	623

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.1%	46.3%	34.1%	2.4%	.	82
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	29.9%	28.6%	40.3%	1.3%	.	77
Asian	2004	4.0	14.0%	68.4%	17.1%	.	0.5%	193
	2010	4.2	32.7%	53.9%	12.1%	0.7%	0.7%	297
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.9	10.8%	67.6%	21.6%	.	.	37
	2010	4.5	60.0%	26.7%	13.3%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.9	18.2%	51.4%	30.3%	.	0.1%	872
	2010	3.9	21.7%	45.9%	31.8%	0.4%	0.1%	732

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.4%	52.1%	29.9%	0.3%	0.2%	1,153
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	23.4%	43.3%	32.7%	0.5%	0.1%	832
International student	2004	4.0	16.5%	65.4%	17.3%	.	0.8%	127
	2010	4.2	32.1%	53.6%	13.1%	0.6%	0.6%	343

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	14.4%	53.0%	31.9%	0.3%	0.3%	313
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.0	28.9%	43.2%	26.7%	0.6%	0.6%	329
Middle class	2004	3.9	16.1%	56.8%	26.4%	0.5%	0.3%	660
	2010	4.0	25.4%	47.0%	27.3%	0.4%	.	543
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	22.6%	47.2%	30.2%	.	.	301
	2010	3.9	23.1%	49.0%	26.9%	0.7%	0.3%	290

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	13.6%	55.4%	30.4%	.	0.5%	184
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.1	36.5%	41.3%	21.4%	0.8%	.	126
Not first generation	2004	3.9	17.9%	53.2%	28.4%	0.4%	0.2%	1,093
	2010	3.9	24.4%	47.2%	27.6%	0.5%	0.3%	1,028

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.3%	53.7%	28.5%	0.3%	0.2%	1,211
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.0	25.5%	47.4%	26.3%	0.5%	0.3%	1,054
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.8	20.4%	44.4%	33.3%	.	1.9%	54
	2010	4.0	32.8%	31.3%	35.9%	.	.	64

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.3%	54.1%	28.0%	0.3%	0.2%	1,223
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	26.3%	46.8%	26.1%	0.5%	0.3%	1,079
Disability	2004	3.7	17.0%	38.3%	44.7%	.	.	47
	2010	3.8	21.9%	40.6%	36.5%	1.0%	.	96

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	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	17.4%	55.8%	26.2%	0.4%	0.2%	1,057
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.0	25.3%	46.3%	27.5%	0.6%	0.3%	1,023
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	17.0%	42.2%	40.4%	.	0.4%	223
	2010	4.1	30.3%	46.1%	23.7%	.	.	152

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

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	17.0%	50.9%	31.1%	0.8%	0.2%	1,280
2004
2010	4.0	24.8%	46.5%	28.1%	0.3%	0.3%	1,174

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	16.6%	51.5%	31.0%	0.6%	0.3%	616
Male	2004
	2010	3.9	22.5%	49.8%	27.2%	0.2%	0.4%	552
Female	2004	3.8	17.5%	50.5%	31.2%	0.9%	.	664
	2010	4.0	26.8%	43.6%	28.9%	0.5%	0.2%	622

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	16.0%	51.9%	28.4%	3.7%	.	81
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	28.6%	32.5%	36.4%	1.3%	1.3%	77
Asian	2004	4.0	14.4%	67.5%	17.0%	1.0%	.	194
	2010	4.2	31.0%	56.6%	12.1%	.	0.3%	297
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.9	13.5%	62.2%	21.6%	2.7%	.	37
	2010	4.4	63.3%	16.7%	20.0%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	17.8%	47.8%	34.3%	0.1%	.	872
	2010	3.9	20.5%	45.4%	33.5%	0.4%	0.1%	731

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	17.2%	49.4%	32.5%	0.7%	0.2%	1,153
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	22.3%	42.6%	34.4%	0.5%	0.2%	831
International student	2004	3.9	15.7%	64.6%	18.1%	1.6%	.	127
	2010	4.2	30.9%	56.0%	12.8%	.	0.3%	343

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	14.6%	49.4%	34.8%	0.9%	0.3%	316
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.0	26.7%	44.7%	27.1%	0.6%	0.9%	329
Middle class	2004	3.9	16.1%	54.2%	28.8%	0.8%	0.2%	659
	2010	3.9	23.6%	46.1%	29.9%	0.4%	.	542
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	21.1%	46.2%	32.1%	0.7%	.	299
	2010	4.0	24.5%	49.3%	26.2%	.	.	290

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	12.4%	54.3%	31.7%	1.1%	0.5%	186
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.1	33.3%	43.7%	23.0%	.	.	126
Not first generation	2004	3.9	17.8%	50.4%	31.0%	0.7%	0.1%	1,091
	2010	3.9	23.7%	46.9%	28.7%	0.4%	0.3%	1,027

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	17.1%	51.1%	30.9%	0.8%	0.1%	1,210
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	24.1%	47.5%	27.8%	0.3%	0.3%	1,053
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.8	18.5%	44.4%	35.2%	.	1.9%	54
	2010	4.0	32.8%	31.3%	34.4%	1.6%	.	64

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	17.2%	51.3%	30.7%	0.7%	0.2%	1,223
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	25.0%	46.9%	27.4%	0.4%	0.3%	1,078
Disability	2004	3.6	10.6%	42.6%	42.6%	4.3%	.	47
	2010	3.9	21.9%	41.7%	36.5%	.	.	96

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	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	17.0%	53.1%	29.0%	0.9%	0.1%	1,056
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	24.0%	46.8%	28.6%	0.4%	0.3%	1,022
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	17.4%	40.6%	41.1%	0.4%	0.4%	224
	2010	4.1	30.3%	44.7%	25.0%	.	.	152

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

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.6	12.9%	35.8%	50.0%	0.9%	0.3%	1,282
2004
2010	3.8	22.1%	38.0%	38.6%	0.7%	0.7%	1,174

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	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	10.2%	35.0%	53.2%	1.1%	0.5%	615
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	19.2%	37.9%	40.6%	1.1%	1.3%	552
Female	2004	3.7	15.4%	36.6%	47.1%	0.7%	0.1%	667
	2010	3.9	24.6%	38.1%	36.8%	0.3%	0.2%	622

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.6	13.4%	36.6%	48.8%	1.2%	.	82
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	24.7%	31.2%	44.2%	.	.	77
Asian	2004	3.7	9.7%	49.2%	39.0%	1.5%	0.5%	195
	2010	4.0	26.9%	49.2%	22.6%	0.7%	0.7%	297
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.5	2.7%	40.5%	56.8%	.	.	37
	2010	4.3	56.7%	13.3%	30.0%	.	.	30
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	14.1%	33.3%	51.9%	0.5%	0.2%	872
	2010	3.7	18.7%	35.4%	44.3%	0.8%	0.8%	732

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.6	13.9%	35.1%	50.0%	0.8%	0.3%	1,154
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.7	20.3%	34.2%	44.0%	0.7%	0.7%	831
International student	2004	3.5	4.7%	42.2%	50.0%	2.3%	0.8%	128
	2010	4.0	26.2%	47.2%	25.4%	0.6%	0.6%	343

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background		3.5	10.4%	34.5%	53.8%	0.6%	0.6%	316
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	24.6%	36.8%	37.4%	.	1.2%	329
Middle class	2004	3.6	12.1%	37.5%	49.2%	0.9%	0.3%	659
	2010	3.8	21.2%	39.0%	38.3%	0.9%	0.6%	543
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.7	16.9%	33.9%	47.8%	1.3%	.	301
	2010	3.8	20.8%	37.7%	40.1%	1.0%	0.3%	289

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	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*		3.5	9.2%	37.8%	50.8%	1.6%	0.5%	185
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	28.0%	41.6%	29.6%	.	0.8%	125
Not first generation	2004	3.6	13.6%	35.5%	49.8%	0.8%	0.3%	1,094
	2010	3.8	21.4%	37.6%	39.7%	0.8%	0.6%	1,029

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.6	12.8%	36.1%	50.0%	0.9%	0.2%	1,213
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	21.4%	38.8%	38.3%	0.8%	0.7%	1,054
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.6	20.4%	27.8%	48.1%	1.9%	1.9%	54
	2010	3.8	29.7%	23.4%	45.3%	.	1.6%	64

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.6	13.1%	35.9%	49.8%	0.9%	0.2%	1,225
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	22.2%	38.6%	37.9%	0.7%	0.6%	1,078
Disability	2004	3.4	8.5%	34.0%	53.2%	2.1%	2.1%	47
	2010	3.7	20.8%	31.3%	45.8%	.	2.1%	96

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	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	12.8%	37.3%	48.3%	1.1%	0.4%	1,059
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	21.8%	37.8%	39.0%	0.7%	0.7%	1,022
Non-Traditional	2004	3.6	13.5%	28.7%	57.8%	.	.	223
	2010	3.8	23.7%	39.5%	35.5%	0.7%	0.7%	152

Back to Top

 

For more information on the Campus Climate Survey trends 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: July, 2011

Return to OIRP Survey Page

Return to OIRP Home Page