North Carolina State University
Campus Climate Survey Trends (Undergraduate)

Tables of Results
College of Management

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 Management.

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	3.4	48.5%	43.5%	6.9%	1.1%	262
2004
2010	3.4	48.2%	44.2%	6.5%	1.1%	278

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*	4.0	0.8%	6.5%	19.2%	40.0%	33.5%	260
2004
2010	3.7	4.0%	10.5%	21.7%	44.0%	19.9%	277

Feel physically threatened ¹

Feel physically threatened	Mean	1: Never	2: Seldom	3: Occasionally	4: Often	5: Always	Total (N)
Year	1.4	65.5%	28.7%	4.6%	0.8%	0.4%	261
2004
2010	1.4	72.0%	22.2%	4.7%	0.7%	0.4%	279

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*	3.8	30.9%	36.6%	17.2%	11.1%	4.2%	262
2004
2010	4.1	36.5%	45.2%	9.6%	4.8%	3.8%	208

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	26.3%	45.4%	24.0%	3.8%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	4.1	31.5%	50.2%	13.6%	3.8%	0.9%	235

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*	3.7	22.9%	35.1%	34.0%	6.5%	1.5%	262
2004
2010	4.1	35.4%	49.3%	10.3%	3.6%	1.3%	223

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	24.3%	51.4%	20.5%	3.9%	.	259
2004
2010	3.7	19.4%	43.9%	25.5%	9.2%	2.0%	98

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*	4.1	35.2%	47.9%	12.6%	2.7%	1.5%	261
2004
2010	3.9	34.6%	41.0%	12.8%	6.8%	4.9%	266

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	33.6%	48.3%	14.7%	3.1%	0.4%	259
2004
2010	4.1	33.6%	51.1%	11.1%	3.0%	1.3%	235

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*	4.2	33.3%	53.3%	10.3%	2.3%	0.8%	261
2004
2010	3.8	23.2%	47.8%	20.1%	6.3%	2.7%	224

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	21.5%	40.6%	22.2%	14.9%	0.8%	261
2004
2010	3.7	22.0%	41.1%	24.1%	9.9%	2.8%	141

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*	4.3	36.0%	56.3%	6.5%	0.8%	0.4%	261
2004
2010	3.9	26.1%	51.0%	16.2%	4.0%	2.8%	253

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	4.0	24.9%	58.2%	8.4%	7.3%	1.1%	261
2004
2010	4.0	25.8%	55.0%	10.3%	8.1%	0.7%	271

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	0.4%	4.6%	17.9%	57.6%	19.5%	262
2004
2010	2.0	0.4%	4.8%	18.5%	48.9%	27.4%	270

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	18.7%	68.3%	10.7%	2.3%	.	262
2004
2010	4.1	27.3%	55.4%	12.9%	4.1%	0.4%	271

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	0.4%	4.2%	11.5%	61.1%	22.9%	262
2004
2010	2.1	2.2%	4.4%	13.3%	57.4%	22.6%	270

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	3.8	15.3%	53.8%	26.7%	3.8%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	3.8	17.4%	54.1%	25.2%	2.6%	0.7%	270

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	2.7%	8.4%	21.8%	46.6%	20.6%	262
2004
2010	2.0	1.9%	6.3%	17.2%	36.2%	38.4%	268

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	4.2	29.8%	59.5%	9.9%	0.4%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	4.1	32.2%	53.2%	10.5%	3.4%	0.7%	267

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%	62.2%	9.5%	2.3%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	4.1	26.8%	58.4%	10.0%	4.5%	0.4%	269

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	3.9	38.6%	28.2%	21.6%	9.7%	1.9%	259
2004
2010	4.2	46.0%	30.6%	17.7%	4.5%	1.1%	265

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	3.6%	8.8%	39.0%	40.2%	8.4%	251
2004
2010	2.7	8.3%	11.2%	37.3%	32.0%	11.2%	241

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	32.5%	35.4%	19.8%	11.0%	1.3%	237
2004
2010	4.1	44.4%	31.0%	18.5%	5.6%	0.4%	248

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*	2.8	7.2%	15.4%	33.9%	32.1%	11.3%	221
2004
2010	3.3	21.2%	22.5%	33.9%	14.4%	8.1%	236

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	45.6%	34.4%	16.8%	2.8%	0.4%	250
2004
2010	4.3	43.5%	40.8%	14.1%	1.2%	0.4%	255

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*	3.9	39.6%	28.1%	20.8%	10.0%	1.5%	260
2004
2010	4.0	42.6%	26.8%	24.5%	3.4%	2.6%	265

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	32.3%	37.3%	23.8%	4.2%	2.3%	260
2004
2010	4.0	36.5%	33.8%	21.5%	5.4%	2.7%	260

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	3.5	25.5%	26.3%	28.6%	11.6%	8.1%	259
2004
2010	3.5	28.4%	26.8%	23.4%	7.3%	14.2%	261

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*	4.6%	34.1%	38.7%	14.6%	8.0%	261
2004
2010	13.3%	43.2%	28.4%	8.3%	6.8%	264

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	14.9%	54.0%	20.7%	5.4%	5.0%	261
2004
2010	12.7%	51.5%	25.4%	4.5%	6.0%	268

Back to Top

Section C: Multicultural Activities on Campus

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year	14.3%	85.7%	258
2004
2010	18.1%	81.9%	259

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	4.2	40.5%	43.2%	16.2%	37
2004
2010	4.3	41.9%	41.9%	16.3%	43

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year	4.7%	95.3%	256
2004
2010	7.7%	92.3%	259

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	4.2	30.8%	61.5%	7.7%	.	.	13
2004
2010	3.4	27.8%	27.8%	22.2%	5.6%	16.7%	18

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	27.3%	47.3%	18.8%	5.4%	1.2%	260
2004
2010	24.9%	45.5%	21.0%	6.2%	2.3%	257

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	10.6%	55.0%	31.7%	2.6%	.	189
2004
2010	3.7	17.6%	43.5%	36.3%	1.0%	1.6%	193

Participation in diversity/multicultural events

Participation in diversity/multicultural events	Never	Once	Two or three times	Four or more times	Total (N)
Year*	66.3%	5.8%	17.8%	10.1%	258
2004
2010	37.0%	23.7%	25.3%	14.0%	257

Reasons for not participating: Not aware ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not aware	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	60.1%	39.9%	263
2004
2010	50.5%	49.5%	95

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	39.9%	60.1%	263
2004
2010	43.2%	56.8%	95

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	62.4%	37.6%	263
2004
2010	60.0%	40.0%	95

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	63.1%	36.9%	263
2004
2010	60.0%	40.0%	95

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	20.5%	79.5%	263
2004
2010	15.8%	84.2%	95

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	34.6%	65.4%	263
2004
2010	45.3%	54.7%	95

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	41.1%	58.9%	263
2004
2010	46.3%	53.7%	95

Reasons for not participating: Location ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Location	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	10.6%	89.4%	263
2004
2010	10.5%	89.5%	95

Reasons for not participating: Cost ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Cost	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	16.7%	83.3%	263
2004
2010	11.6%	88.4%	95

Reasons for not participating: Other ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Other	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	2.7%	97.3%	263
2004
2010	4.2%	95.8%	95

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*	4.0	20.9%	62.4%	10.6%	5.7%	0.4%	263
2004
2010	4.0	30.4%	52.2%	10.1%	5.3%	2.0%	247

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*	3.7	11.5%	57.3%	24.4%	6.1%	0.8%	262
2004
2010	3.9	23.9%	49.0%	21.4%	4.5%	1.2%	243

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*	3.0	8.4%	19.5%	44.4%	23.0%	4.6%	261
2004
2010	3.0	13.8%	22.8%	25.2%	26.4%	11.8%	246

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	4.2	37.0%	49.6%	11.1%	1.9%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	4.1	34.1%	49.6%	11.8%	3.7%	0.8%	246

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	3.2	13.0%	27.6%	33.3%	21.1%	5.0%	261
2004
2010	3.2	16.2%	27.9%	29.1%	17.8%	8.9%	247

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	3.0	9.5%	19.8%	37.3%	27.4%	6.1%	263
2004
2010	3.1	14.3%	20.8%	35.1%	21.2%	8.6%	245

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*	3.9	26.7%	48.1%	16.4%	8.0%	0.8%	262
2004
2010	3.7	18.0%	46.7%	26.6%	6.6%	2.0%	244

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	24.0%	56.5%	13.7%	5.3%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	4.0	23.9%	53.4%	18.2%	3.2%	1.2%	247

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	3.8	21.3%	49.4%	19.8%	8.4%	1.1%	263
2004
2010	3.8	21.1%	49.6%	22.4%	5.7%	1.2%	246

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*	3.4	7.6%	30.9%	53.8%	6.9%	0.8%	262
2004
2010	3.7	17.0%	36.8%	42.1%	4.0%	.	247

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	26.7%	50.8%	16.4%	5.7%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	4.1	38.1%	44.9%	11.7%	4.5%	0.8%	247

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	3.0	8.4%	26.4%	24.9%	32.2%	8.0%	261
2004
2010	3.2	15.4%	28.5%	23.6%	25.6%	6.9%	246

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	4.2	33.3%	52.9%	11.5%	0.8%	1.5%	261
2004
2010	4.1	30.8%	49.0%	15.8%	3.6%	0.8%	247

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	4.0	27.9%	55.3%	12.2%	3.1%	1.5%	262
2004
2010	4.0	29.3%	48.8%	16.7%	4.5%	0.8%	246

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	25.6%	42.4%	19.1%	11.5%	1.5%	262
2004
2010	4.0	32.4%	42.9%	15.8%	6.9%	2.0%	247

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	3.3	37.4%	55.7%	6.1%	0.8%	262
2004
2010	3.4	44.9%	49.0%	6.2%	.	243

Faculty respect for minority students

Faculty respect for minority students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.3	36.3%	56.9%	6.1%	0.8%	262
2004
2010	3.4	45.8%	47.9%	6.3%	.	240

Student respect for faculty

Student respect for faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.1	21.4%	67.9%	9.9%	0.8%	262
2004
2010	3.1	30.3%	54.8%	14.1%	0.8%	241

Student respect for minority faculty

Student respect for minority faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.0	21.1%	61.7%	14.6%	2.7%	261
2004
2010	3.1	28.0%	52.7%	17.6%	1.7%	239

Faculty respect for female students

Faculty respect for female students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.3	37.0%	56.9%	5.7%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	3.4	47.9%	45.4%	6.3%	0.4%	240

Student respect for female faculty

Student respect for female faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	Total (N)
Year	3.3	31.0%	63.2%	5.7%	261
2004
2010	3.2	33.2%	55.9%	10.9%	238

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	25.8%	52.3%	20.0%	1.9%	260
2004
2010	3.1	25.9%	55.2%	17.6%	1.3%	239

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	2.7	17.6%	43.3%	30.7%	8.4%	261
2004
2010	2.7	18.8%	43.9%	29.3%	7.9%	239

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	35.7%	53.6%	8.7%	1.1%	0.8%	263
2004
2010	4.3	48.1%	39.4%	9.5%	2.9%	.	241

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	19.2%	51.7%	27.2%	1.9%	261
2004
2010	3.9	26.6%	40.7%	25.7%	7.1%	241

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.1	26.2%	58.6%	13.3%	1.9%	263
2004
2010	4.2	38.0%	43.8%	15.7%	2.5%	242

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	19.4%	58.9%	20.2%	1.5%	263
2004
2010	4.0	29.0%	44.0%	22.4%	4.6%	241

NCSU Supportiveness: White students

NCSU Supportiveness: White students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.3	42.6%	44.9%	8.7%	2.7%	1.1%	263
2004
2010	4.1	43.4%	34.3%	16.1%	3.3%	2.9%	242

NCSU Supportiveness: International students

NCSU Supportiveness: International students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.2	31.7%	55.3%	12.2%	0.4%	0.4%	262
2004
2010	4.3	44.2%	43.8%	10.3%	1.7%	.	242

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.2	32.3%	55.9%	11.8%	.	263
2004
2010	4.2	38.0%	46.3%	15.3%	0.4%	242

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.2	33.8%	52.1%	12.2%	1.1%	0.8%	263
2004
2010	4.1	37.3%	41.1%	16.2%	4.1%	1.2%	241

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	12.6%	38.7%	39.5%	6.1%	3.1%	261
2004
2010	3.8	26.1%	39.0%	25.7%	8.3%	0.8%	241

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*	4.1	31.9%	49.8%	15.6%	1.5%	1.1%	263
2004
2010	4.3	45.6%	38.6%	12.9%	2.1%	0.8%	241

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	15.7%	56.7%	22.2%	5.0%	0.4%	261
2004
2010	3.9	27.9%	41.3%	24.2%	6.3%	0.4%	240

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*	3.9	21.1%	49.0%	23.8%	6.1%	.	261
2004
2010	4.1	32.6%	44.4%	19.2%	3.3%	0.4%	239

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	19.3%	55.6%	20.1%	4.2%	0.8%	259
2004
2010	4.1	33.1%	44.4%	19.2%	3.3%	.	239

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	4.0	28.0%	51.7%	16.1%	3.4%	0.8%	261
2004
2010	4.1	38.1%	40.2%	16.3%	3.3%	2.1%	239

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*	3.7	13.0%	46.4%	35.6%	4.6%	0.4%	261
2004
2010	3.8	25.8%	37.1%	28.8%	6.7%	1.7%	240

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*	4.0	17.0%	65.3%	15.8%	1.9%	.	259
2004
2010	4.0	26.4%	49.3%	22.5%	0.4%	1.3%	227

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	3.9	20.5%	57.0%	19.0%	3.5%	.	258
2004
2010	4.0	29.1%	48.5%	19.8%	1.8%	0.9%	227

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	3.8	13.9%	59.1%	25.5%	1.2%	0.4%	259
2004
2010	3.9	22.8%	48.2%	26.8%	1.3%	0.9%	224

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*	3.7	11.6%	46.9%	40.3%	1.2%	.	258
2004
2010	3.8	22.7%	42.2%	31.8%	2.4%	0.9%	211

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*	3.6	8.2%	43.4%	48.0%	.	0.4%	256
2004
2010	3.7	18.5%	43.2%	34.2%	2.7%	1.4%	222

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*	4.2	30.9%	57.1%	10.4%	1.5%	.	259
2004
2010	4.1	34.7%	45.3%	19.1%	.	0.9%	225

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*	3.7	17.8%	41.1%	36.8%	3.9%	0.4%	258
2004
2010	3.9	24.2%	46.2%	23.1%	3.8%	2.7%	186

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*	3.7	15.1%	42.1%	41.7%	1.2%	.	259
2004
2010	4.0	31.6%	41.3%	24.3%	1.9%	1.0%	206

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*	3.7	12.7%	44.8%	41.7%	0.8%	.	259
2004
2010	3.9	24.3%	45.8%	27.1%	1.9%	0.9%	214

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	10.8%	52.1%	35.9%	1.2%	.	259
2004
2010	3.8	22.9%	41.6%	32.7%	1.4%	1.4%	214

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*	4.0	27.8%	48.6%	15.8%	6.6%	1.2%	259
2004
2010	3.9	33.3%	37.3%	22.2%	4.4%	2.7%	225

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	16.6%	49.0%	31.7%	2.7%	.	259
2004
2010	3.9	23.7%	41.7%	32.0%	1.8%	0.9%	228

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	3.8	17.4%	44.8%	35.1%	2.3%	0.4%	259
2004
2010	3.9	25.6%	40.5%	30.8%	1.8%	1.3%	227

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	3.7	15.1%	43.0%	39.1%	1.9%	0.8%	258
2004
2010	3.7	20.2%	37.7%	39.5%	0.9%	1.8%	228

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	18.9%	54.4%	24.7%	1.5%	0.4%	259
2004
2010	4.0	25.7%	46.9%	25.2%	1.3%	0.9%	226

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*	3.9	17.4%	59.5%	22.0%	0.8%	0.4%	259
2004
2010	4.0	26.0%	46.7%	25.1%	0.9%	1.3%	227

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*	4.0	20.2%	56.2%	23.6%	.	.	258
2004
2010	4.0	29.8%	44.7%	23.7%	0.9%	0.9%	228

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*	4.0	19.8%	57.0%	22.5%	0.8%	.	258
2004
2010	3.9	26.8%	44.3%	27.2%	0.4%	1.3%	228

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*	3.7	15.1%	43.4%	39.5%	0.8%	1.2%	258
2004
2010	3.8	25.9%	35.5%	34.6%	2.2%	1.8%	228

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