North Carolina State University
Campus Climate Survey Trends (Undergraduate)

Tables of Results
College of Engineering

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 Engineering.

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*	3.3	38.2%	52.6%	8.6%	0.7%	920
2004
2010	3.4	45.1%	47.1%	6.9%	0.9%	845

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*	3.8	0.8%	7.5%	23.0%	47.1%	21.6%	916
2004
2010	3.6	4.6%	10.1%	19.2%	48.5%	17.7%	844

Feel physically threatened ¹

Feel physically threatened	Mean	1: Never	2: Seldom	3: Occasionally	4: Often	5: Always	Total (N)
Year*	1.4	69.7%	26.1%	3.4%	0.8%	.	918
2004
2010	1.2	78.2%	19.5%	2.0%	0.1%	0.1%	845

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*	3.9	32.0%	42.7%	13.2%	9.3%	2.8%	920
2004
2010	4.3	48.0%	38.6%	8.2%	2.7%	2.4%	704

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	24.6%	45.7%	26.7%	2.8%	0.2%	920
2004
2010	4.1	36.7%	44.2%	15.3%	3.0%	0.8%	733

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*	3.6	18.6%	37.3%	33.6%	8.9%	1.6%	918
2004
2010	4.2	38.1%	44.1%	14.4%	1.9%	1.5%	675

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	25.9%	55.0%	15.2%	3.7%	0.2%	915
2004
2010	4.0	33.4%	42.1%	18.3%	4.3%	1.9%	323

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*	4.0	28.6%	50.2%	13.9%	6.1%	1.2%	915
2004
2010	4.0	36.5%	40.2%	15.4%	4.8%	3.1%	806

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*	4.0	26.8%	52.5%	16.9%	3.4%	0.4%	913
2004
2010	4.1	36.1%	47.2%	13.1%	2.7%	0.9%	693

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*	4.0	25.1%	58.5%	13.0%	3.1%	0.4%	917
2004
2010	4.0	27.5%	49.9%	17.6%	3.5%	1.5%	659

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*	3.5	15.5%	40.9%	26.7%	15.0%	1.9%	914
2004
2010	3.7	25.3%	39.8%	23.7%	6.8%	4.4%	367

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*	4.1	25.7%	60.2%	10.8%	2.8%	0.4%	915
2004
2010	4.0	30.9%	47.1%	16.1%	4.2%	1.8%	784

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	3.9	24.8%	54.4%	10.1%	9.3%	1.4%	913
2004
2010	3.8	23.7%	50.6%	12.6%	12.0%	1.1%	786

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	0.9%	2.9%	19.1%	62.6%	14.6%	912
2004
2010	1.9	0.6%	2.3%	14.8%	54.6%	27.7%	784

Comments taken seriously by instructor ⁴

Comments taken seriously by instructor	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	17.3%	71.7%	9.2%	1.2%	0.5%	912
2004
2010	4.1	25.7%	59.2%	12.4%	1.9%	0.8%	785

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*	2.1	1.5%	3.8%	15.0%	59.8%	19.8%	914
2004
2010	1.9	1.4%	4.2%	12.7%	50.4%	31.2%	785

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*	3.7	10.4%	53.3%	31.1%	4.6%	0.5%	911
2004
2010	3.7	14.4%	48.1%	33.7%	3.1%	0.6%	783

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*	2.3	1.9%	8.9%	23.1%	45.0%	21.2%	914
2004
2010	1.9	1.4%	6.2%	14.5%	36.9%	40.9%	785

Professors communicate welcomeness in course ⁴

Professors communicate welcomeness in course	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	4.1	23.5%	63.3%	11.7%	1.1%	0.3%	913
2004
2010	4.1	29.4%	53.6%	14.9%	1.5%	0.5%	785

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	4.1	25.6%	64.4%	8.4%	1.1%	0.4%	913
2004
2010	4.1	27.2%	59.4%	10.7%	2.0%	0.6%	784

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	4.1	39.8%	35.9%	19.2%	4.9%	0.2%	906
2004
2010	4.2	45.1%	34.2%	16.1%	4.0%	0.5%	751

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*	2.6	4.0%	10.4%	36.5%	40.8%	8.3%	872
2004
2010	2.7	6.8%	15.1%	34.6%	32.3%	11.2%	703

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*	4.1	40.3%	38.6%	15.5%	5.2%	0.3%	865
2004
2010	4.3	51.1%	30.6%	13.4%	4.2%	0.7%	693

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	7.6%	13.6%	30.5%	36.7%	11.7%	780
2004
2010	3.2	18.8%	22.2%	29.3%	22.6%	7.0%	627

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	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	4.2	40.8%	41.8%	15.3%	2.1%	.	870
2004
2010	4.2	42.6%	38.3%	17.0%	1.6%	0.6%	690

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*	4.0	37.7%	35.2%	21.0%	5.3%	0.8%	909
2004
2010	4.0	41.9%	30.0%	19.7%	6.2%	2.3%	743

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*	3.9	31.1%	35.6%	25.9%	5.5%	2.0%	908
2004
2010	3.8	30.7%	33.2%	24.5%	7.6%	4.0%	747

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*	3.7	27.1%	31.4%	26.0%	11.5%	3.8%	910
2004
2010	3.5	27.7%	26.0%	26.9%	10.9%	8.5%	743

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*	1.5%	21.0%	40.3%	33.0%	4.2%	910
2004
2010	9.1%	27.8%	37.2%	20.7%	5.2%	755

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*	11.8%	49.9%	23.3%	8.9%	6.1%	909
2004
2010	6.8%	54.4%	23.6%	9.7%	5.4%	753

Back to Top

Section C: Multicultural Activities on Campus

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year	10.9%	89.1%	899
2004
2010	13.0%	87.0%	731

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	2: Negative	1: Very negative	Total (N)
Year	3.8	18.8%	49.0%	28.1%	2.1%	2.1%	96
2004
2010	3.9	26.3%	43.2%	27.4%	3.2%	.	95

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year*	2.5%	97.5%	891
2004
2010	4.2%	95.8%	731

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	3: Neither positive nor negative	2: Negative	1: Very negative	Total (N)
Year	3.8	25.0%	45.8%	16.7%	4.2%	8.3%	24
2004
2010	3.9	38.7%	19.4%	35.5%	3.2%	3.2%	31

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	50.7%	41.0%	7.3%	0.9%	0.1%	905
2004
2010	47.8%	41.8%	8.8%	1.1%	0.5%	730

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*	3.5	5.9%	46.7%	42.2%	4.5%	0.7%	443
2004
2010	3.7	10.8%	52.1%	30.4%	5.6%	1.1%	378

Participation in diversity/multicultural events

Participation in diversity/multicultural events	Never	Once	Two or three times	Four or more times	Total (N)
Year*	70.0%	9.0%	12.7%	8.3%	902
2004
2010	57.5%	12.0%	19.3%	11.2%	722

Reasons for not participating: Not aware ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not aware	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	62.7%	37.3%	924
2004
2010	63.6%	36.4%	415

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*	42.1%	57.9%	924
2004
2010	48.9%	51.1%	415

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	65.0%	35.0%	924
2004
2010	63.4%	36.6%	415

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	60.1%	39.9%	924
2004
2010	57.6%	42.4%	415

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year*	19.0%	81.0%	924
2004
2010	12.5%	87.5%	415

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	33.9%	66.1%	924
2004
2010	38.1%	61.9%	415

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	50.9%	49.1%	924
2004
2010	48.9%	51.1%	415

Reasons for not participating: Location ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Location	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	11.1%	88.9%	924
2004
2010	11.3%	88.7%	415

Reasons for not participating: Cost ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Cost	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year*	18.2%	81.8%	924
2004
2010	11.3%	88.7%	415

Reasons for not participating: Other ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Other	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	6.0%	94.0%	924
2004
2010	4.3%	95.7%	415

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*	3.9	15.9%	64.9%	13.5%	5.5%	0.2%	921
2004
2010	4.1	31.6%	51.4%	10.4%	4.3%	2.4%	675

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*	3.6	7.8%	54.1%	30.3%	7.5%	0.3%	919
2004
2010	3.7	18.7%	45.0%	29.7%	5.5%	1.0%	673

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*	3.3	14.6%	24.1%	39.7%	18.7%	2.8%	924
2004
2010	3.2	19.8%	20.1%	31.1%	21.1%	8.0%	673

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	4.1	28.6%	52.0%	16.4%	2.4%	0.7%	921
2004
2010	4.0	30.9%	47.8%	16.9%	2.8%	1.6%	676

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	17.7%	33.8%	28.8%	14.8%	5.0%	921
2004
2010	3.3	15.4%	30.4%	32.0%	15.0%	7.3%	675

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*	3.3	14.3%	28.6%	34.7%	17.4%	5.0%	922
2004
2010	3.1	13.6%	21.2%	35.2%	21.5%	8.5%	674

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*	3.6	16.2%	48.3%	22.0%	10.1%	3.4%	921
2004
2010	3.6	15.6%	42.3%	29.4%	9.7%	3.0%	671

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	25.2%	52.9%	15.8%	4.9%	1.2%	920
2004
2010	3.9	28.9%	44.3%	20.7%	4.9%	1.2%	672

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*	3.5	13.7%	41.3%	26.9%	14.2%	3.9%	921
2004
2010	3.7	19.0%	45.7%	24.8%	8.0%	2.5%	674

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	6.2%	30.5%	53.7%	8.5%	1.1%	915
2004
2010	3.5	13.1%	32.9%	48.4%	4.7%	0.9%	674

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*	3.7	19.3%	47.0%	20.8%	10.3%	2.6%	919
2004
2010	3.8	26.9%	43.5%	17.7%	8.3%	3.7%	674

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	3.2	11.5%	30.3%	30.4%	22.7%	5.1%	918
2004
2010	3.2	13.8%	29.1%	28.4%	22.7%	5.9%	673

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*	3.8	21.8%	48.9%	19.1%	8.4%	1.7%	916
2004
2010	3.8	24.7%	45.4%	21.4%	5.5%	3.0%	672

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	3.8	21.0%	49.5%	19.9%	8.0%	1.6%	918
2004
2010	3.8	22.7%	46.8%	21.8%	5.9%	2.7%	673

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*	3.6	20.7%	42.5%	18.7%	14.0%	4.1%	922
2004
2010	3.7	24.2%	38.2%	23.3%	8.3%	5.9%	673

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	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.2	27.1%	63.8%	9.0%	0.1%	912
2004
2010	3.4	43.4%	50.4%	5.6%	0.6%	655

Faculty respect for minority students

Faculty respect for minority students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.2	27.9%	63.9%	8.0%	0.2%	911
2004
2010	3.4	42.7%	51.8%	5.2%	0.3%	655

Student respect for faculty

Student respect for faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.0	15.4%	65.4%	18.3%	0.9%	911
2004
2010	3.1	27.4%	55.0%	16.4%	1.2%	653

Student respect for minority faculty

Student respect for minority faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	2.9	16.0%	56.9%	23.4%	3.6%	910
2004
2010	3.0	25.6%	50.2%	21.6%	2.6%	652

Faculty respect for female students

Faculty respect for female students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.2	24.5%	68.2%	7.2%	0.1%	911
2004
2010	3.4	43.0%	50.0%	6.7%	0.3%	654

Student respect for female faculty

Student respect for female faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.1	21.5%	67.6%	10.3%	0.7%	907
2004
2010	3.2	30.4%	56.7%	11.7%	1.2%	652

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*	3.0	24.9%	55.6%	15.8%	3.7%	907
2004
2010	3.1	30.0%	55.1%	12.7%	2.1%	653

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	2.6	12.8%	46.8%	31.9%	8.5%	899
2004
2010	2.8	18.2%	46.1%	28.9%	6.8%	648

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	33.9%	53.0%	11.4%	1.4%	0.3%	914
2004
2010	4.3	40.9%	47.8%	10.7%	0.5%	0.2%	655

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*	3.8	17.3%	47.6%	31.1%	3.4%	0.5%	913
2004
2010	3.9	24.7%	43.9%	29.0%	2.0%	0.5%	652

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%	55.4%	17.7%	0.9%	0.4%	912
2004
2010	4.1	32.4%	50.4%	15.7%	1.5%	.	655

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*	3.8	18.3%	51.3%	25.8%	4.3%	0.3%	914
2004
2010	4.0	27.4%	50.0%	20.5%	1.8%	0.3%	654

NCSU Supportiveness: White students

NCSU Supportiveness: White students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	30.4%	44.1%	17.5%	5.5%	2.5%	914
2004
2010	4.0	36.9%	33.8%	21.4%	5.4%	2.6%	654

NCSU Supportiveness: International students

NCSU Supportiveness: International students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.1	25.6%	56.9%	15.1%	2.0%	0.4%	911
2004
2010	4.2	36.2%	49.5%	13.2%	1.1%	.	652

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.1	26.9%	57.8%	13.6%	1.5%	0.2%	914
2004
2010	4.2	37.4%	50.2%	11.9%	0.3%	0.2%	653

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	25.0%	49.8%	18.9%	5.4%	0.9%	915
2004
2010	3.9	31.1%	39.2%	24.0%	3.8%	1.8%	653

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*	3.5	13.6%	37.5%	38.4%	8.1%	2.4%	913
2004
2010	3.8	25.0%	40.9%	26.5%	6.7%	0.9%	653

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	26.0%	50.2%	18.6%	4.4%	0.8%	914
2004
2010	4.2	40.3%	39.3%	17.2%	2.1%	1.1%	652

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	13.4%	52.9%	27.6%	5.5%	0.7%	913
2004
2010	3.8	21.9%	44.9%	29.8%	2.9%	0.5%	648

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	15.6%	49.6%	27.8%	6.0%	1.0%	911
2004
2010	4.0	30.5%	46.8%	19.6%	2.0%	1.1%	649

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*	3.8	15.8%	54.5%	23.0%	5.2%	1.5%	912
2004
2010	4.0	28.1%	43.8%	24.6%	3.2%	0.3%	651

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*	3.9	23.3%	50.2%	22.5%	3.0%	1.1%	911
2004
2010	4.0	33.4%	38.8%	22.3%	4.5%	1.1%	650

NCSU Supportiveness: Students with children

NCSU Supportiveness: Students with children	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.5	9.8%	41.6%	42.1%	5.4%	1.1%	910
2004
2010	3.7	18.9%	40.9%	35.2%	4.5%	0.6%	651

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	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	12.5%	59.4%	25.8%	1.8%	0.4%	902
2004
2010	3.8	20.2%	47.9%	28.8%	2.2%	0.9%	635

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*	3.8	14.3%	55.8%	26.0%	3.1%	0.8%	903
2004
2010	3.9	22.8%	46.4%	27.1%	2.9%	0.8%	631

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	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	11.0%	50.9%	31.7%	5.7%	0.7%	899
2004
2010	3.7	17.4%	41.8%	37.7%	2.4%	0.8%	632

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	9.9%	41.9%	46.0%	1.6%	0.7%	898
2004
2010	3.7	16.9%	41.5%	40.2%	0.8%	0.5%	597

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	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.3	4.3%	26.9%	66.5%	2.0%	0.2%	902
2004
2010	3.5	10.5%	32.4%	54.4%	1.5%	1.2%	599

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	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	23.9%	57.8%	17.1%	1.2%	.	903
2004
2010	4.1	31.1%	47.3%	20.5%	0.8%	0.3%	634

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	12.6%	40.3%	42.7%	3.7%	0.7%	903
2004
2010	3.9	22.0%	46.5%	27.3%	3.3%	0.9%	546

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	11.5%	37.8%	48.3%	2.1%	0.3%	898
2004
2010	3.8	22.2%	40.4%	33.9%	2.5%	1.1%	567

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	7.1%	36.3%	54.0%	2.3%	0.2%	900
2004
2010	3.7	19.1%	39.8%	37.9%	2.4%	0.7%	580

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*	3.6	7.9%	47.0%	42.7%	2.3%	0.1%	903
2004
2010	3.7	15.8%	39.1%	43.2%	1.2%	0.7%	606

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	23.5%	42.7%	24.1%	8.6%	1.0%	903
2004
2010	3.8	26.8%	35.9%	28.9%	6.3%	2.0%	637

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*	3.7	10.3%	47.7%	39.1%	2.8%	0.1%	905
2004
2010	3.7	16.3%	40.9%	40.6%	1.5%	0.8%	646

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*	3.6	12.7%	42.5%	42.1%	2.0%	0.7%	904
2004
2010	3.7	17.6%	39.5%	38.4%	3.3%	1.2%	646

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	3.5	9.4%	36.9%	50.2%	2.9%	0.7%	905
2004
2010	3.6	11.3%	40.3%	45.0%	2.5%	0.9%	645

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	13.1%	53.4%	31.5%	1.4%	0.6%	905
2004
2010	3.8	19.9%	46.5%	32.3%	0.6%	0.6%	647

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*	3.7	12.2%	50.9%	35.0%	1.7%	0.2%	902
2004
2010	3.8	21.2%	43.1%	32.9%	2.2%	0.6%	645

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	14.1%	53.2%	32.1%	0.6%	0.1%	903
2004
2010	3.9	21.3%	45.8%	32.6%	0.2%	0.2%	644

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	14.0%	54.3%	30.5%	1.0%	0.2%	902
2004
2010	3.9	20.1%	46.7%	32.2%	0.8%	0.2%	646

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*	3.5	9.0%	33.3%	53.4%	2.9%	1.4%	904
2004
2010	3.7	17.8%	35.0%	43.9%	2.0%	1.2%	645

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