North Carolina State University
Campus Climate Survey Trends (Undergraduate)

Tables of Results
College of Natural Resources

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, for students enrolled in the College of Natural Resources.

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

Section A: Your NC State Experience	Section C: Multicultural Activities on Campus	Section E: Campus Climate
Section B: Interacting with Others	Section D: Role of Diversity in Higher Education	Section F: Shaping Attitudes about Diversity

Section A: Your NC State Experience

Overall experience at NC State

Overall experience at NC State	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.2	34.3%	54.3%	10.5%	1.0%	105
2004
2010	3.3	38.6%	53.8%	7.0%	0.6%	158

Feel like you have a good support network ¹

Feel like you have a good support network	Mean	1: Never	2: Seldom	3: Occasionally	4: Often	5: Always	Total (N)
Year	3.9	1.9%	4.8%	23.1%	43.3%	26.9%	104
2004
2010	3.6	5.0%	10.7%	19.5%	46.5%	18.2%	159

Feel physically threatened ¹

Feel physically threatened	Mean	1: Never	2: Seldom	3: Occasionally	4: Often	5: Always	Total (N)
Year	1.4	68.0%	25.2%	4.9%	1.0%	1.0%	103
2004
2010	1.2	80.4%	18.4%	1.3%	.	.	158

Comfort: Living in a campus residence hall ²

Comfort: Living in a campus residence hall	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	3.7	26.7%	41.9%	14.3%	8.6%	8.6%	105
2004
2010	4.1	37.4%	43.1%	13.0%	4.9%	1.6%	123

Comfort: Attending events/hanging out at Talley Student Center ^{2 3}

Comfort: Attending events/hanging out at Talley Student Center	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	3.9	25.7%	44.8%	26.7%	2.9%	.	105
2004
2010	4.0	26.7%	51.9%	16.8%	3.8%	0.8%	131

Comfort: Attending events/hanging out at Witherspoon Center ^{2 3}

Comfort: Attending events/hanging out at Witherspoon Center	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year*	3.5	16.3%	34.6%	36.5%	9.6%	2.9%	104
2004
2010	4.0	27.8%	52.2%	15.7%	4.3%	.	115

Comfort: Participating in a research project with faculty ²

Comfort: Participating in research project with faculty	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.0	26.0%	51.9%	17.3%	2.9%	1.9%	104
2004
2010	4.1	32.9%	44.3%	20.3%	2.5%	.	79

Comfort: Meeting with academic advisor ²

Comfort: Meeting with academic advisor	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.3	44.2%	42.3%	7.7%	5.8%	.	104
2004
2010	4.2	50.0%	36.7%	3.8%	6.3%	3.2%	158

Comfort: Participating in student organizations ²

Comfort: Participating in student organizations	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.1	29.8%	51.9%	13.5%	3.8%	1.0%	104
2004
2010	4.1	33.1%	48.5%	16.2%	2.3%	.	130

Comfort: Interacting with college/department support staff ²

Comfort: Interacting with college/department support staff	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.1	24.8%	62.9%	11.4%	1.0%	.	105
2004
2010	4.0	27.7%	48.9%	15.6%	7.1%	0.7%	141

Comfort: Interacting with top level administrators ²

Comfort: Interacting with top level administrators	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	3.7	20.0%	41.9%	26.7%	11.4%	.	105
2004
2010	3.7	13.0%	50.7%	26.1%	8.7%	1.4%	69

Comfort: Interacting with faculty during office hrs/outside classroom ²

Comfort: Interacting with faculty during office hrs/outside classroom	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.2	31.4%	59.0%	7.6%	1.9%	.	105
2004
2010	4.1	37.8%	47.3%	8.1%	5.4%	1.4%	148

Working hard leads to desired grade ⁴

Working hard leads to desired grade	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.1	34.6%	49.0%	9.6%	5.8%	1.0%	104
2004
2010	3.9	24.2%	53.0%	11.4%	9.4%	2.0%	149

Ignored in class when attempting to participate ⁴

Ignored in class when attempting to participate	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	2.1	.	7.7%	12.5%	58.7%	21.2%	104
2004
2010	2.1	2.0%	2.0%	20.8%	49.7%	25.5%	149

Comments taken seriously by instructor ⁴

Comments taken seriously by instructor	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.1	20.2%	69.2%	9.6%	1.0%	104
2004
2010	4.1	23.3%	63.0%	11.0%	2.7%	146

Ignored by classmates/given trivial jobs during group work ⁴

Ignored by classmates/given trivial jobs during group work	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	2.0	1.9%	2.9%	13.5%	61.5%	20.2%	104
2004
2010	2.0	1.4%	4.7%	10.1%	60.1%	23.6%	148

Instructors recognize importance of ideas ⁴

Instructors recognize importance of ideas	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.9	16.5%	63.1%	14.6%	5.8%	.	103
2004
2010	3.8	18.5%	52.7%	24.0%	4.1%	0.7%	146

Singled out to speak on behalf of specific group ⁴

Singled out to speak on behalf of specific group	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	2.4	1.9%	7.8%	30.1%	46.6%	13.6%	103
2004
2010	1.9	2.7%	4.7%	16.1%	34.2%	42.3%	149

Professors communicate welcomeness in course ⁴

Professors communicate welcomeness in course	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.1	27.9%	57.7%	13.5%	1.0%	104
2004
2010	4.1	26.8%	59.1%	12.1%	2.0%	149

Comfortable among students in courses ^{4 5}

Comfortable among students in courses	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.0	26.0%	58.7%	9.6%	5.8%	.	104
2004
2010	4.0	25.7%	58.8%	12.2%	1.4%	2.0%	148

Back to Top

Section B: Interacting with Others

Interact with students from different race/ethnicity ⁶

Interact with students from different race/ethnicity	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	28.2%	35.0%	22.3%	12.6%	1.9%	103
2004
2010	4.2	44.4%	32.6%	19.4%	3.5%	.	144

Interact with students who have a disability ⁶

Interact with students who have a disability	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	2.7	2.1%	16.5%	40.2%	35.1%	6.2%	97
2004
2010	2.8	6.2%	14.7%	40.3%	31.0%	7.8%	129

Interact with students with different religious belief ⁶

Interact with students with different religious belief	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	3.9	34.0%	37.1%	20.6%	6.2%	2.1%	97
2004
2010	4.1	42.1%	30.1%	22.6%	5.3%	.	133

Interact with students with different sexual orientation ⁶

Interact with students with different sexual orientation	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year*	2.7	7.9%	12.4%	37.1%	28.1%	14.6%	89
2004
2010	3.2	19.0%	18.2%	30.6%	25.6%	6.6%	121

Interact with students from different social/economic background ⁶

Interact with students from different social/economic background	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	Total (N)
Year	4.2	41.2%	36.1%	21.6%	1.0%	97
2004
2010	4.2	43.0%	34.8%	20.7%	1.5%	135

Socialized with student of different race/ethnicity than own within past year ⁶

Socialized with student of different race/ethnicity than own within past year	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	3.8	28.2%	35.0%	26.2%	7.8%	2.9%	103
2004
2010	4.0	43.2%	25.2%	21.6%	7.9%	2.2%	139

Worked in class with student of different race/ethnicity within past year ⁶

Worked in class with student of different race/ethnicity within past year	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	3.7	25.2%	32.0%	30.1%	9.7%	2.9%	103
2004
2010	3.8	30.7%	28.6%	30.7%	7.1%	2.9%	140

Worked outside class with student of different race/ethnicity within past year ⁶

Worked outside class with student of different race/ethnicity within past year	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	3.3	20.4%	27.2%	24.3%	20.4%	7.8%	103
2004
2010	3.3	25.2%	20.1%	29.5%	14.4%	10.8%	139

Number of classes taught by instructor of different race/ethnicity

Number of classes taught by instructor of different race/ethnicity	None	A few	Some	Most	All	Total (N)
Year	5.8%	35.9%	45.6%	10.7%	1.9%	103
2004
2010	11.7%	42.1%	33.1%	8.3%	4.8%	145

Number of roommates of different race/ethnicity

Number of roommates of different race/ethnicity	Never had a roommate	Never	Once	Twice	Three or more times	Total (N)
Year	14.6%	47.6%	28.2%	2.9%	6.8%	103
2004
2010	10.4%	50.0%	19.4%	10.4%	9.7%	144

Back to Top

Section C: Multicultural Activities on Campus

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year	15.5%	84.5%	103
2004
2010	16.7%	83.3%	138

Impact on thinking/understanding diversity: Ethnic Studies Course

Impact on thinking/understanding diversity: Ethnic Studies Course	Mean	5: Very positive	4: Positive	3: Neither positive nor negative	Total (N)
Year	4.4	50.0%	37.5%	12.5%	16
2004
2010	4.1	27.3%	59.1%	13.6%	22

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year	6.0%	94.0%	100
2004
2010	2.9%	97.1%	138

Impact on thinking/understanding diversity: Women's/Gender Studies course

Impact on thinking/understanding diversity: Women's/Gender Studies course	Mean	5: Very positive	4: Positive	2: Negative	Total (N)
Year	4.0	33.3%	50.0%	16.7%	6
2004
2010	3.5	.	75.0%	25.0%	4

Number of classes with diversity issues clearly integrated

Number of classes with diversity issues clearly integrated	None	A few	Some	Most	All	Total (N)
Year	23.8%	52.5%	17.8%	5.0%	1.0%	101
2004
2010	31.4%	46.0%	16.8%	5.1%	0.7%	137

Impact of courses on thinking about/understanding of diversity

Impact of courses on thinking about/understanding of diversity	Mean	5: Very positive impact	4: Positive impact	3: Neither positive nor negative impact	2: Negative impact	1: Very negative impact	Total (N)
Year	3.7	10.3%	51.3%	33.3%	5.1%	.	78
2004
2010	3.8	20.4%	43.0%	34.4%	1.1%	1.1%	93

Participation in diversity/multicultural events

Participation in diversity/multicultural events	Never	Once	Two or three times	Four or more times	Total (N)
Year*	68.9%	9.7%	8.7%	12.6%	103
2004
2010	52.9%	12.3%	21.7%	13.0%	138

Reasons for not participating: Not aware ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not aware	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year*	64.8%	35.2%	105
2004
2010	46.6%	53.4%	73

Reasons for not participating: Event has nothing to do with me ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Event has nothing to do with me	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year*	33.3%	66.7%	105
2004
2010	56.2%	43.8%	73

Reasons for not participating: Not enough time ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not enough time	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	57.1%	42.9%	105
2004
2010	56.2%	43.8%	73

Reasons for not participating: Not convenient for schedule ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not convenient for schedule	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	47.6%	52.4%	105
2004
2010	58.9%	41.1%	73

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	16.2%	83.8%	105
2004
2010	12.3%	87.7%	73

Reasons for not participating: Friends do not participate ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Friends do not participate	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	29.5%	70.5%	105
2004
2010	35.6%	64.4%	73

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	40.0%	60.0%	105
2004
2010	50.7%	49.3%	73

Reasons for not participating: Location ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Location	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	11.4%	88.6%	105
2004
2010	8.2%	91.8%	73

Reasons for not participating: Cost ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Cost	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	17.1%	82.9%	105
2004
2010	15.1%	84.9%	73

Reasons for not participating: Other ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Other	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year*	9.5%	90.5%	105
2004
2010	1.4%	98.6%	73

Back to Top

Section D: The Role of Diversity in Higher Education

NCSU provides environment for free expression of ideas/opinions/beliefs ⁸

NCSU provides environment for free expression of ideas/opinions/beliefs	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.8	19.4%	54.4%	16.5%	7.8%	1.9%	103
2004
2010	3.9	20.5%	59.8%	9.4%	6.3%	3.9%	127

NCSU is good place to learn about multicultural issues/perspectives ⁸

NCSU is good place to learn about multicultural issues/perspectives	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.5	8.6%	45.7%	36.2%	8.6%	1.0%	105
2004
2010	3.6	11.9%	49.2%	28.6%	8.7%	1.6%	126

NCSU places too much emphasis on diversity ⁸

NCSU places too much emphasis on diversity	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.1	10.6%	21.2%	39.4%	27.9%	1.0%	104
2004
2010	3.2	17.2%	19.5%	33.6%	22.7%	7.0%	128

Diversity is good for NCSU ⁸

Diversity is good for NCSU	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.0	30.1%	48.5%	17.5%	2.9%	1.0%	103
2004
2010	4.0	32.0%	44.5%	16.4%	4.7%	2.3%	128

Efforts to increase diversity lead to admission of less qualified students ⁸

Efforts to increase diversity lead to admission of less qualified students	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.4	16.2%	30.5%	29.5%	21.0%	2.9%	105
2004
2010	3.3	15.6%	25.0%	38.3%	12.5%	8.6%	128

Efforts to increase diversity lead to less qualified faculty/staff/admin ⁸

Efforts to increase diversity lead to less qualified faculty/staff/admin	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.1	7.6%	25.7%	41.9%	18.1%	6.7%	105
2004
2010	3.2	17.6%	18.4%	36.8%	18.4%	8.8%	125

Enhancing ability to partic in multicultural society should be part of university mission ⁸

Enhancing ability to partic in multicultural society should be part of university mission	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.8	20.0%	46.7%	23.8%	7.6%	1.9%	105
2004
2010	3.4	11.7%	43.8%	26.6%	12.5%	5.5%	128

Fostering intellectual diversity should be goal of NCSU ⁸

Fostering intellectual diversity should be goal of NCSU	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.0	29.8%	48.1%	17.3%	4.8%	.	104
2004
2010	3.8	21.9%	44.5%	25.8%	5.5%	2.3%	128

Building diverse/inclusive community should be key goal of NCSU ⁸

Building diverse/inclusive community should be key goal of NCSU	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.7	19.0%	47.6%	23.8%	7.6%	1.9%	105
2004
2010	3.6	17.2%	43.8%	25.8%	9.4%	3.9%	128

Easy to find diversity info on NCSU website ⁸

Easy to find diversity info on NCSU website	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.3	7.6%	25.7%	58.1%	7.6%	1.0%	105
2004
2010	3.3	6.3%	29.7%	57.0%	4.7%	2.3%	128

Learning about different cultures is important part of college education ⁸

Learning about different cultures is important part of college education	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.0	29.5%	45.7%	19.0%	5.7%	.	105
2004
2010	3.8	23.4%	46.1%	18.8%	6.3%	5.5%	128

Including diversity in curriculum detracts from more important knowledge ⁸

Including diversity in curriculum detracts from more important knowledge	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	2.9	7.6%	21.9%	32.4%	29.5%	8.6%	105
2004
2010	3.1	10.2%	29.7%	28.1%	22.7%	9.4%	128

Developing respect for diversity will better enable me to work in chosen field ⁸

Developing respect for diversity will better enable me to work in chosen field	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.1	31.4%	49.5%	13.3%	5.7%	.	105
2004
2010	3.8	22.7%	50.0%	15.6%	7.0%	4.7%	128

Developing respect for diversity will better enable me live in my community ⁸

Developing respect for diversity will better enable me live in my community	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.9	22.9%	50.5%	22.9%	1.9%	1.9%	105
2004
2010	3.8	23.4%	47.7%	18.8%	5.5%	4.7%	128

Interaction with different people is essential part of college education ⁸

Interaction with different people is essential part of college education	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.8	28.6%	41.9%	16.2%	8.6%	4.8%	105
2004
2010	3.5	22.7%	33.6%	25.8%	7.0%	10.9%	128

Back to Top

Section E: Campus Climate

Faculty respect for students in general

Faculty respect for students in general	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	Total (N)
Year	3.2	26.2%	63.1%	10.7%	103
2004
2010	3.3	36.1%	55.7%	8.2%	122

Faculty respect for minority students

Faculty respect for minority students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.2	23.5%	68.6%	7.8%	.	102
2004
2010	3.3	36.1%	59.8%	3.3%	0.8%	122

Student respect for faculty

Student respect for faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.1	18.6%	69.6%	11.8%	.	102
2004
2010	3.0	24.2%	56.7%	17.5%	1.7%	120

Student respect for minority faculty

Student respect for minority faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	2.9	17.6%	59.8%	20.6%	2.0%	102
2004
2010	2.9	19.7%	57.4%	18.9%	4.1%	122

Faculty respect for female students

Faculty respect for female students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.2	26.5%	66.7%	5.9%	1.0%	102
2004
2010	3.3	38.5%	53.3%	8.2%	.	122

Student respect for female faculty

Student respect for female faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.1	23.5%	64.7%	11.8%	.	102
2004
2010	3.1	27.0%	59.0%	13.1%	0.8%	122

Friendships between students of different racial/ethnic groups

Friendships between students of different racial/ethnic groups	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	2.9	20.6%	54.9%	19.6%	4.9%	102
2004
2010	3.0	22.1%	63.1%	9.8%	4.9%	122

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	2.5	9.7%	43.7%	33.0%	13.6%	103
2004
2010	2.6	16.4%	41.0%	32.8%	9.8%	122

NCSU Supportiveness: African American students

NCSU Supportiveness: African American students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.2	36.2%	50.5%	12.4%	1.0%	.	105
2004
2010	4.2	33.3%	53.7%	10.6%	1.6%	0.8%	123

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	3.7	19.4%	38.8%	35.9%	4.9%	1.0%	103
2004
2010	3.8	18.0%	52.5%	27.0%	0.8%	1.6%	122

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.0	25.7%	52.4%	18.1%	3.8%	.	105
2004
2010	4.1	31.7%	49.6%	17.9%	.	0.8%	123

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	3.9	21.0%	48.6%	27.6%	2.9%	.	105
2004
2010	3.9	18.0%	58.2%	19.7%	2.5%	1.6%	122

NCSU Supportiveness: White students

NCSU Supportiveness: White students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.1	39.0%	40.0%	17.1%	1.9%	1.9%	105
2004
2010	3.9	34.1%	35.8%	22.8%	4.9%	2.4%	123

NCSU Supportiveness: International students

NCSU Supportiveness: International students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.0	28.6%	49.5%	20.0%	.	1.9%	105
2004
2010	4.2	32.0%	54.1%	13.1%	0.8%	.	122

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.1	27.6%	58.1%	13.3%	1.0%	105
2004
2010	4.2	30.1%	58.5%	11.4%	.	123

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.1	35.6%	45.2%	17.3%	1.0%	1.0%	104
2004
2010	3.9	27.6%	44.7%	22.0%	3.3%	2.4%	123

NCSU Supportiveness: Gay, lesbian and bisexual students

NCSU Supportiveness: Gay, lesbian and bisexual students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	3.4	14.3%	31.4%	36.2%	12.4%	5.7%	105
2004
2010	3.6	17.1%	40.7%	31.7%	8.1%	2.4%	123

Note: Transgendered students were included in 2004 question wording, but not 2010 wording.

NCSU Supportiveness: Christian students

NCSU Supportiveness: Christian students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.0	27.6%	47.6%	20.0%	3.8%	1.0%	105
2004
2010	4.1	29.3%	51.2%	17.9%	0.8%	0.8%	123

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	3.8	18.1%	49.5%	26.7%	4.8%	1.0%	105
2004
2010	3.8	14.0%	57.0%	24.8%	3.3%	0.8%	121

NCSU Supportiveness: Poor/working class students

NCSU Supportiveness: Poor/working class students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	3.7	15.2%	49.5%	23.8%	9.5%	1.9%	105
2004
2010	3.8	16.4%	57.4%	18.9%	6.6%	0.8%	122

NCSU Supportiveness: Middle class students

NCSU Supportiveness: Middle class students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	3.9	20.2%	51.9%	22.1%	5.8%	.	104
2004
2010	3.8	15.6%	58.2%	18.0%	6.6%	1.6%	122

NCSU Supportiveness: Upper class/wealthy students

NCSU Supportiveness: Upper class/wealthy students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.1	32.4%	49.5%	18.1%	.	.	105
2004
2010	4.0	27.0%	50.8%	17.2%	3.3%	1.6%	122

NCSU Supportiveness: Students with children

NCSU Supportiveness: Students with children	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	3.6	15.2%	38.1%	42.9%	3.8%	105
2004
2010	3.6	13.1%	43.4%	34.4%	9.0%	122

Back to Top

Section F: Shaping Attitudes about Diversity

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class ⁹

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	Total (N)
Year	3.8	14.9%	55.4%	28.7%	1.0%	101
2004
2010	3.8	12.0%	56.4%	26.5%	5.1%	117

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class ⁹

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	3.7	13.9%	48.5%	32.7%	4.0%	1.0%	101
2004
2010	3.7	14.4%	50.0%	25.4%	7.6%	2.5%	118

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class ⁹

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	Total (N)
Year	3.8	14.9%	51.5%	30.7%	3.0%	101
2004
2010	3.8	13.0%	53.9%	31.3%	1.7%	115

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class ⁹

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	3.6	13.9%	39.6%	44.6%	1.0%	1.0%	101
2004
2010	3.8	14.8%	50.0%	32.4%	2.8%	.	108

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials ⁹

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	Total (N)
Year	3.5	9.9%	31.7%	55.4%	3.0%	101
2004
2010	3.6	11.2%	42.2%	44.0%	2.6%	116

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances ⁹

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	Total (N)
Year	4.0	21.8%	53.5%	23.8%	1.0%	101
2004
2010	4.0	27.1%	50.8%	21.2%	0.8%	118

Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls ⁹

Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	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	16.0%	36.0%	44.0%	2.0%	2.0%	100
2004
2010	3.8	24.7%	38.1%	28.9%	7.2%	1.0%	97

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs ⁹

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*	3.6	12.9%	32.7%	53.5%	.	1.0%	101
2004
2010	3.8	21.6%	42.2%	31.4%	4.9%	.	102

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events ⁹

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	3.5	9.9%	32.7%	54.5%	2.0%	1.0%	101
2004
2010	3.7	15.6%	44.0%	35.8%	3.7%	0.9%	109

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff ⁹

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	11.0%	45.0%	42.0%	2.0%	.	100
2004
2010	3.7	13.2%	47.4%	36.0%	1.8%	1.8%	114

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences ⁹

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	25.7%	41.6%	21.8%	8.9%	2.0%	101
2004
2010	3.7	24.6%	38.1%	20.3%	15.3%	1.7%	118

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	12.0%	54.0%	31.0%	3.0%	.	100
2004
2010	3.5	10.9%	37.8%	42.9%	7.6%	0.8%	119

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	10.0%	49.0%	39.0%	1.0%	1.0%	100
2004
2010	3.6	15.1%	38.7%	36.1%	8.4%	1.7%	119

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	9.0%	44.0%	44.0%	2.0%	1.0%	100
2004
2010	3.6	14.3%	34.5%	44.5%	5.9%	0.8%	119

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	3.8	13.0%	53.0%	34.0%	.	.	100
2004
2010	3.7	15.1%	44.5%	37.8%	0.8%	1.7%	119

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	Total (N)
Year	3.8	15.0%	52.0%	32.0%	1.0%	100
2004
2010	3.7	14.3%	47.1%	34.5%	4.2%	119

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	3.8	15.0%	52.0%	32.0%	1.0%	.	100
2004
2010	3.8	16.9%	44.1%	37.3%	0.8%	0.8%	118

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	3.9	17.3%	53.1%	29.6%	.	.	98
2004
2010	3.7	14.3%	48.7%	34.5%	1.7%	0.8%	119

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	10.0%	44.0%	43.0%	.	3.0%	100
2004
2010	3.5	14.3%	35.3%	41.2%	5.9%	3.4%	119

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