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

Tables of Results
by Student Demographic Profile

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

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

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

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*	3.9	14.0%	60.8%	22.4%	2.4%	0.3%	3,147
2004
2010	3.9	23.5%	48.2%	25.5%	2.2%	0.6%	2,618

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.8	12.2%	58.2%	26.5%	2.5%	0.6%	1,413
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	19.8%	47.2%	29.8%	2.3%	0.9%	1,169
Female	2004	3.9	15.5%	62.9%	19.0%	2.4%	0.2%	1,734
	2010	4.0	26.6%	48.9%	22.1%	2.1%	0.3%	1,449

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.9	17.1%	62.4%	17.1%	3.1%	0.4%	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	28.5%	47.2%	20.7%	2.6%	1.0%	193
Asian	2004	4.0	13.4%	74.8%	11.8%	.	.	119
	2010	4.1	32.4%	49.3%	15.4%	2.2%	0.7%	136
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.2	28.6%	61.2%	10.2%	.	.	49
	2010	4.0	28.8%	45.8%	25.4%	.	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	13.3%	60.9%	23.1%	2.2%	0.4%	2,473
	2010	3.9	22.2%	48.7%	26.6%	2.1%	0.5%	2,081

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		3.9	14.0%	60.8%	22.4%	2.4%	0.4%	3,135
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	23.5%	48.1%	25.5%	2.2%	0.5%	2,591
International student	2004	4.0	25.0%	58.3%	8.3%	8.3%	.	12
	2010	3.9	22.2%	51.9%	22.2%	.	3.7%	27

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.8	13.4%	58.2%	24.4%	3.0%	1.0%	627
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	22.4%	47.1%	26.6%	2.6%	1.2%	575
Middle class	2004	3.9	14.5%	61.4%	22.0%	2.0%	0.1%	1,533
	2010	3.9	23.6%	49.5%	24.8%	1.8%	0.3%	1,269
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	13.7%	61.8%	21.4%	2.9%	0.3%	978
	2010	3.9	24.3%	47.1%	25.7%	2.5%	0.4%	760

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.9	14.1%	62.9%	21.4%	1.6%	.	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	25.1%	49.7%	22.6%	1.5%	1.0%	195
Not first generation	2004	3.9	14.0%	60.7%	22.4%	2.5%	0.4%	2,892
	2010	3.9	23.4%	48.2%	25.7%	2.2%	0.5%	2,393

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.9	14.0%	60.9%	22.4%	2.4%	0.4%	3,033
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	23.5%	48.2%	25.7%	2.0%	0.5%	2,412
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.9	16.2%	60.6%	18.2%	5.1%	.	99
	2010	3.9	24.5%	48.3%	22.4%	3.5%	1.4%	143

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.9	14.2%	61.2%	21.9%	2.3%	0.4%	2,978
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	23.6%	48.9%	24.9%	2.1%	0.4%	2,337
Disability	2004	3.7	11.8%	54.2%	30.6%	3.5%	.	144
	2010	3.8	22.8%	42.0%	30.6%	2.8%	1.8%	281

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.9	14.3%	60.9%	21.9%	2.5%	0.4%	2,898
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	23.5%	48.4%	25.4%	2.2%	0.5%	2,478
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	10.8%	59.8%	27.3%	2.0%	.	249
	2010	3.9	23.6%	44.3%	27.9%	2.9%	1.4%	140

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	16.2%	55.8%	23.6%	3.9%	0.5%	3,145
2004
2010	3.9	24.9%	46.8%	24.5%	2.8%	1.0%	2,592

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.7	13.7%	53.5%	27.8%	4.1%	0.9%	1,412
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	22.2%	44.8%	28.0%	3.5%	1.4%	1,160
Female	2004	3.9	18.2%	57.6%	20.1%	3.8%	0.2%	1,733
	2010	4.0	27.0%	48.4%	21.6%	2.2%	0.7%	1,432

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.0	19.8%	61.9%	14.4%	2.7%	1.2%	257
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	32.3%	40.7%	20.1%	2.6%	4.2%	189
Asian	2004	4.0	19.5%	66.1%	12.7%	1.7%	.	118
	2010	4.1	33.3%	49.6%	14.8%	0.7%	1.5%	135
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.2	30.6%	59.2%	10.2%	.	.	49
	2010	4.0	27.1%	50.8%	20.3%	1.7%	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	15.2%	55.3%	25.0%	3.9%	0.6%	2,473
	2010	3.9	23.4%	47.3%	25.8%	2.9%	0.7%	2,062

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		3.8	16.2%	55.8%	23.6%	3.9%	0.5%	3,133
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	24.8%	46.8%	24.6%	2.8%	1.0%	2,566
International student	2004	3.8	25.0%	50.0%	8.3%	16.7%	.	12
	2010	4.0	30.8%	46.2%	19.2%	.	3.8%	26

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.8	15.2%	55.3%	24.3%	4.2%	1.1%	626
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	23.2%	46.3%	25.7%	3.2%	1.6%	564
Middle class	2004	3.9	16.6%	56.4%	23.3%	3.2%	0.5%	1,532
	2010	4.0	25.5%	48.5%	22.7%	2.6%	0.6%	1,258
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.8	16.1%	55.1%	23.5%	5.0%	0.3%	978
	2010	3.9	25.1%	44.7%	26.3%	2.8%	1.1%	756

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.8	14.1%	57.7%	25.4%	2.0%	0.8%	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	27.2%	46.1%	22.0%	3.1%	1.6%	191
Not first generation	2004	3.8	16.4%	55.6%	23.4%	4.1%	0.5%	2,890
	2010	3.9	24.7%	47.0%	24.7%	2.7%	0.9%	2,372

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.8	15.9%	56.0%	23.6%	4.0%	0.6%	3,032
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	24.4%	47.1%	24.9%	2.7%	0.9%	2,389
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.9	24.2%	50.5%	21.2%	4.0%	.	99
	2010	4.0	33.3%	39.7%	21.3%	2.8%	2.8%	141

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.8	16.2%	56.0%	23.3%	3.9%	0.5%	2,977
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	25.0%	47.3%	24.0%	2.9%	0.8%	2,316
Disability	2004	3.8	16.7%	50.7%	27.1%	4.2%	1.4%	144
	2010	3.8	23.9%	42.4%	29.0%	2.2%	2.5%	276

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.8	16.5%	56.2%	22.7%	4.0%	0.6%	2,896
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	24.9%	47.2%	24.2%	2.7%	0.9%	2,462
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	12.4%	51.0%	33.7%	2.8%	.	249
	2010	3.8	23.8%	38.5%	30.8%	4.6%	2.3%	130

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	12.4%	54.7%	28.6%	3.9%	0.4%	3,142
2004
2010	3.9	21.2%	45.7%	30.8%	1.9%	0.4%	2,603

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.7	11.6%	51.4%	32.6%	4.0%	0.4%	1,411
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	17.2%	43.3%	36.3%	2.6%	0.7%	1,163
Female	2004	3.8	13.1%	57.5%	25.3%	3.8%	0.4%	1,731
	2010	3.9	24.4%	47.6%	26.4%	1.4%	0.2%	1,440

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.8	16.3%	54.7%	26.0%	3.1%	.	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	27.0%	42.9%	27.0%	1.6%	1.6%	189
Asian	2004	3.9	15.8%	58.3%	24.2%	1.7%	.	120
	2010	4.1	27.4%	53.3%	19.3%	.	.	135
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.9	20.4%	53.1%	22.4%	2.0%	2.0%	49
	2010	3.9	22.0%	49.2%	27.1%	1.7%	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.7	11.6%	55.5%	28.6%	4.0%	0.4%	2,467
	2010	3.8	20.3%	45.7%	31.7%	2.1%	0.3%	2,069

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		3.7	12.4%	54.7%	28.6%	3.8%	0.4%	3,130
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	21.2%	45.7%	30.8%	1.9%	0.4%	2,576
International student	2004	3.8	16.7%	58.3%	16.7%	8.3%	.	12
	2010	3.8	22.2%	40.7%	33.3%	.	3.7%	27

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.8	13.9%	52.2%	29.6%	3.8%	0.5%	625
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	19.8%	46.2%	31.0%	1.9%	1.1%	567
Middle class	2004	3.7	11.9%	55.4%	28.6%	3.7%	0.4%	1,530
	2010	3.9	21.6%	45.3%	31.5%	1.4%	0.2%	1,265
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.8	12.4%	55.6%	27.6%	4.0%	0.4%	978
	2010	3.9	21.7%	46.1%	29.3%	2.6%	0.3%	757

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student		3.8	15.9%	56.1%	24.4%	2.8%	0.8%	246
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	22.8%	48.2%	25.4%	2.6%	1.0%	193
Not first generation	2004	3.7	12.1%	54.7%	28.9%	3.9%	0.4%	2,889
	2010	3.9	21.0%	45.7%	31.2%	1.8%	0.3%	2,380

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.7	12.2%	54.9%	28.6%	3.9%	0.4%	3,028
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	21.1%	45.8%	30.9%	1.9%	0.4%	2,397
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.8	18.2%	52.5%	25.3%	3.0%	1.0%	99
	2010	3.9	25.9%	42.0%	31.5%	.	0.7%	143

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.8	12.2%	55.2%	28.4%	3.8%	0.4%	2,972
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	21.4%	46.4%	30.0%	1.8%	0.4%	2,323
Disability	2004	3.8	17.9%	45.5%	31.0%	4.8%	0.7%	145
	2010	3.8	19.6%	40.0%	37.1%	2.9%	0.4%	280

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty in class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.7	12.2%	54.8%	28.6%	4.0%	0.4%	2,893
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	21.1%	45.9%	30.7%	1.9%	0.4%	2,463
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	15.3%	54.2%	28.1%	2.0%	0.4%	249
	2010	3.8	22.9%	41.4%	32.1%	2.1%	1.4%	140

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	10.6%	42.4%	45.1%	1.5%	0.3%	3,140
2004
2010	3.8	20.7%	42.4%	35.5%	1.2%	0.3%	2,396

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.6	10.3%	41.2%	46.6%	1.4%	0.5%	1,407
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	17.3%	40.9%	39.4%	1.8%	0.6%	1,075
Female	2004	3.6	10.9%	43.4%	44.0%	1.6%	0.2%	1,733
	2010	3.9	23.4%	43.5%	32.2%	0.7%	0.2%	1,321

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*		3.7	15.2%	46.7%	35.0%	3.1%	.	257
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	29.8%	41.6%	26.4%	1.1%	1.1%	178
Asian	2004	3.8	15.3%	53.4%	31.4%	.	.	118
	2010	4.0	25.8%	52.4%	21.0%	0.8%	.	124
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.7	18.4%	36.7%	42.9%	.	2.0%	49
	2010	3.8	21.8%	38.2%	36.4%	3.6%	.	55
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	9.5%	42.0%	46.7%	1.4%	0.4%	2,469
	2010	3.8	19.4%	42.2%	37.2%	1.1%	0.2%	1,905

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		3.6	10.6%	42.5%	45.1%	1.5%	0.3%	3,128
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	20.7%	42.4%	35.4%	1.2%	0.3%	2,370
International student	2004	3.6	16.7%	33.3%	41.7%	8.3%	.	12
	2010	3.7	15.4%	42.3%	38.5%	.	3.8%	26

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.6	11.9%	41.2%	45.2%	1.3%	0.5%	624
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	19.7%	43.1%	34.9%	1.5%	0.8%	522
Middle class	2004	3.6	9.9%	43.1%	45.1%	1.6%	0.3%	1,529
	2010	3.8	21.0%	42.0%	36.1%	0.8%	0.1%	1,164
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.6	11.0%	42.4%	44.8%	1.4%	0.3%	978
	2010	3.8	20.9%	42.6%	34.7%	1.4%	0.3%	697

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.7	12.9%	45.2%	40.7%	0.4%	0.8%	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.8	22.2%	43.8%	31.3%	1.7%	1.1%	176
Not first generation	2004	3.6	10.4%	42.2%	45.5%	1.6%	0.3%	2,885
	2010	3.8	20.5%	42.5%	35.7%	1.1%	0.2%	2,194

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.6	10.4%	42.6%	45.2%	1.6%	0.3%	3,026
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	20.6%	42.1%	35.9%	1.1%	0.3%	2,212
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.7	17.2%	40.4%	41.4%	.	1.0%	99
	2010	3.9	25.0%	45.3%	27.3%	1.6%	0.8%	128

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.6	10.5%	42.7%	45.0%	1.4%	0.3%	2,972
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	20.7%	43.0%	35.0%	1.1%	0.3%	2,139
Disability	2004	3.6	14.7%	35.7%	46.9%	2.1%	0.7%	143
	2010	3.8	20.6%	37.4%	39.7%	1.9%	0.4%	257

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with faculty outside class		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.6	10.7%	42.2%	45.3%	1.6%	0.3%	2,892
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	20.5%	42.6%	35.3%	1.2%	0.3%	2,268
Non-Traditional	2004	3.6	10.5%	44.8%	43.5%	0.8%	0.4%	248
	2010	3.8	22.7%	37.5%	38.3%	.	1.6%	128

Back to Top

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*	3.5	7.3%	39.2%	51.1%	2.3%	0.2%	3,143
2004
2010	3.7	15.9%	40.5%	40.7%	2.1%	0.7%	2,540

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.4	5.1%	33.5%	58.4%	2.8%	0.2%	1,410
Male	2004
	2010	3.5	12.1%	35.5%	48.2%	2.8%	1.4%	1,127
Female	2004	3.6	9.1%	43.8%	45.1%	1.8%	0.1%	1,733
	2010	3.8	19.0%	44.4%	34.8%	1.6%	0.2%	1,413

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		3.6	9.7%	43.4%	43.4%	3.5%	.	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.8	21.0%	40.9%	34.9%	2.7%	0.5%	186
Asian	2004	3.7	10.8%	43.3%	45.8%	.	.	120
	2010	3.9	24.2%	46.1%	27.3%	2.3%	.	128
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.6	8.2%	49.0%	40.8%	2.0%	.	49
	2010	3.7	15.3%	45.8%	35.6%	1.7%	1.7%	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.5	6.6%	39.0%	52.0%	2.1%	0.1%	2,469
	2010	3.7	14.9%	40.3%	42.1%	2.1%	0.7%	2,019

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.5	7.3%	39.2%	51.1%	2.3%	0.2%	3,131
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.7	16.0%	40.5%	40.6%	2.1%	0.8%	2,514
International student	2004	3.5	8.3%	41.7%	41.7%	8.3%	.	12
	2010	3.6	11.5%	34.6%	53.8%	.	.	26

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.5	7.5%	39.1%	50.4%	2.9%	0.2%	627
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.7	15.5%	42.2%	38.4%	2.9%	0.9%	554
Middle class	2004	3.5	7.4%	38.4%	51.7%	2.2%	0.3%	1,532
	2010	3.7	16.7%	40.8%	40.6%	1.3%	0.6%	1,235
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.5	7.1%	40.6%	50.3%	2.1%	.	975
	2010	3.6	14.9%	38.5%	43.0%	2.8%	0.7%	737

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.7	10.5%	44.9%	43.7%	0.8%	.	247
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.7	16.5%	42.0%	36.7%	3.2%	1.6%	188
Not first generation	2004	3.5	7.0%	38.7%	51.7%	2.4%	0.2%	2,889
	2010	3.7	15.8%	40.4%	41.1%	2.0%	0.6%	2,323

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.5	7.1%	39.2%	51.3%	2.2%	0.2%	3,029
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.7	16.0%	40.4%	40.9%	2.1%	0.7%	2,339
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.6	12.1%	42.4%	42.4%	3.0%	.	99
	2010	3.7	18.7%	38.1%	38.8%	2.9%	1.4%	139

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.5	7.3%	39.4%	51.1%	2.1%	0.1%	2,973
No disability	2004
	2010	3.7	16.2%	40.5%	40.7%	1.9%	0.7%	2,263
Disability	2004	3.5	8.3%	36.6%	51.0%	3.4%	0.7%	145
	2010	3.6	13.7%	40.1%	40.8%	4.3%	1.1%	277

Influence on thinking about diversity: Course materials		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.5	7.5%	39.0%	51.0%	2.3%	0.1%	2,894
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.7	15.6%	40.7%	40.9%	2.0%	0.7%	2,404
Non-Traditional	2004	3.5	5.6%	41.0%	51.4%	1.6%	0.4%	249
	2010	3.7	20.6%	36.8%	38.2%	3.7%	0.7%	136

Back to Top

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*	4.1	26.0%	58.1%	14.7%	1.1%	0.1%	3,145
2004
2010	4.1	33.7%	46.9%	18.2%	0.9%	0.3%	2,611

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		4.0	23.9%	55.7%	19.0%	1.3%	0.1%	1,412
Male	2004
	2010	4.0	29.9%	45.9%	22.2%	1.5%	0.5%	1,167
Female	2004	4.1	27.8%	60.0%	11.3%	0.9%	0.1%	1,733
	2010	4.2	36.8%	47.6%	15.0%	0.4%	0.1%	1,444

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.2	26.0%	66.7%	5.4%	1.9%	.	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.2	38.7%	45.0%	14.7%	1.0%	0.5%	191
Asian	2004	4.2	29.4%	57.1%	13.4%	.	.	119
	2010	4.3	40.1%	50.4%	8.8%	.	0.7%	137
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.3	44.9%	46.9%	4.1%	4.1%	.	49
	2010	4.3	48.3%	34.5%	17.2%	.	.	58
White/Caucasian	2004	4.1	25.1%	58.3%	15.7%	0.9%	0.1%	2,471
	2010	4.1	32.2%	47.5%	19.2%	0.9%	0.2%	2,076

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		4.1	26.0%	58.1%	14.8%	1.1%	0.1%	3,133
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	4.1	33.7%	46.9%	18.2%	0.9%	0.3%	2,584
International student	2004	3.9	33.3%	50.0%	.	8.3%	8.3%	12
	2010	4.2	37.0%	44.4%	18.5%	.	.	27

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		4.1	28.2%	54.7%	14.7%	2.4%	.	627
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	4.1	33.0%	48.9%	16.8%	0.7%	0.5%	570
Middle class	2004	4.1	25.3%	60.7%	13.1%	0.8%	.	1,533
	2010	4.1	33.2%	47.9%	18.2%	0.6%	0.1%	1,268
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	4.1	25.7%	56.3%	17.1%	0.6%	0.3%	976
	2010	4.1	35.4%	44.0%	18.8%	1.3%	0.4%	759

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student		4.1	29.0%	54.8%	14.5%	1.6%	.	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	30.1%	48.2%	19.2%	1.6%	1.0%	193
Not first generation	2004	4.1	25.8%	58.4%	14.7%	1.0%	0.1%	2,890
	2010	4.1	34.1%	47.0%	17.9%	0.8%	0.2%	2,388

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		4.1	25.7%	58.2%	14.9%	1.1%	0.1%	3,031
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.1	33.2%	47.2%	18.5%	0.8%	0.2%	2,407
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	4.3	38.4%	51.5%	9.1%	1.0%	.	99
	2010	4.2	43.4%	39.2%	14.7%	1.4%	1.4%	143

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		4.1	26.2%	58.2%	14.5%	1.1%	0.1%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	34.2%	47.2%	17.5%	0.9%	0.2%	2,333
Disability	2004	4.0	23.6%	56.3%	18.8%	1.4%	.	144
	2010	4.0	30.2%	44.2%	24.1%	0.4%	1.1%	278

Influence on thinking about diversity: Friendships/acquaintances		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		4.1	26.4%	58.0%	14.5%	1.0%	0.1%	2,897
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.1	34.0%	46.9%	17.8%	0.9%	0.3%	2,473
Non-Traditional	2004	4.0	21.0%	59.7%	17.7%	1.6%	.	248
	2010	4.0	28.3%	45.7%	25.4%	.	0.7%	138

Back to Top

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	13.6%	40.1%	41.1%	4.2%	1.0%	3,137
2004
2010	3.9	25.7%	42.1%	26.8%	4.0%	1.4%	2,202

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)
Gender*		3.6	11.8%	39.6%	43.8%	3.8%	1.0%	1,411
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	22.0%	41.7%	30.9%	4.1%	1.3%	985
Female	2004	3.6	15.1%	40.4%	38.9%	4.6%	0.9%	1,726
	2010	3.9	28.6%	42.4%	23.6%	4.0%	1.4%	1,217

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)
Race/Ethnicity*		3.7	18.0%	42.0%	33.3%	5.5%	1.2%	255
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	28.4%	43.8%	17.0%	8.5%	2.3%	176
Asian	2004	3.7	15.1%	47.1%	34.5%	2.5%	0.8%	119
	2010	4.0	25.0%	54.5%	18.8%	1.8%	.	112
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.8	24.5%	30.6%	44.9%	.	.	49
	2010	4.0	36.2%	38.3%	21.3%	.	4.3%	47
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	12.9%	40.1%	42.0%	4.1%	0.9%	2,467
	2010	3.9	25.3%	41.1%	28.5%	3.9%	1.2%	1,739

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)
Residency*		3.6	13.6%	40.1%	41.1%	4.2%	1.0%	3,125
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	25.6%	42.2%	26.8%	4.1%	1.4%	2,180
International student	2004	3.7	16.7%	41.7%	33.3%	8.3%	.	12
	2010	4.0	31.8%	36.4%	31.8%	.	.	22

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)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.5	14.2%	33.9%	45.0%	5.8%	1.1%	625
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	23.8%	43.0%	26.5%	5.4%	1.3%	446
Middle class	2004	3.6	13.3%	42.2%	40.1%	3.5%	0.9%	1,526
	2010	3.9	25.6%	42.3%	27.4%	3.6%	1.1%	1,071
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.6	13.8%	40.5%	40.2%	4.4%	1.0%	977
	2010	3.9	27.4%	41.4%	25.8%	3.7%	1.6%	674

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)
First Generation College Student*		3.6	16.7%	29.8%	48.6%	3.7%	1.2%	245
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	29.5%	39.6%	27.5%	2.0%	1.3%	149
Not first generation	2004	3.6	13.4%	40.9%	40.5%	4.3%	0.9%	2,885
	2010	3.9	25.5%	42.3%	26.7%	4.1%	1.3%	2,030

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)
Sexual Orientation*		3.6	13.6%	40.5%	40.8%	4.2%	0.9%	3,023
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	25.9%	42.4%	27.0%	3.5%	1.3%	2,041
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.5	14.1%	28.3%	49.5%	7.1%	1.0%	99
	2010	3.7	28.4%	29.4%	26.6%	11.9%	3.7%	109

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)
Disability Status*		3.6	13.8%	40.7%	40.4%	4.1%	0.9%	2,970
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	25.9%	42.7%	26.3%	3.8%	1.3%	1,990
Disability	2004	3.4	10.6%	26.8%	55.6%	6.3%	0.7%	142
	2010	3.7	23.6%	36.3%	31.6%	6.6%	1.9%	212

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)
Age*		3.7	14.5%	42.5%	37.4%	4.6%	0.9%	2,891
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	25.8%	42.3%	26.5%	4.1%	1.3%	2,167
Non-Traditional	2004	3.1	3.3%	11.0%	84.1%	0.4%	1.2%	246
	2010	3.6	17.1%	31.4%	48.6%	.	2.9%	35

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	12.7%	40.1%	45.3%	1.6%	0.3%	3,138
2004
2010	3.9	26.6%	42.2%	28.3%	2.3%	0.6%	2,320

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.6	10.7%	36.9%	50.4%	1.6%	0.4%	1,408
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	21.4%	38.3%	36.1%	3.1%	1.1%	1,027
Female	2004	3.7	14.3%	42.7%	41.3%	1.6%	0.2%	1,730
	2010	4.0	30.7%	45.2%	22.1%	1.6%	0.3%	1,293

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*		3.8	15.6%	50.8%	31.6%	2.0%	.	256
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	32.8%	43.5%	19.2%	3.4%	1.1%	177
Asian	2004	3.8	12.6%	55.5%	28.6%	2.5%	0.8%	119
	2010	4.1	33.9%	48.8%	14.2%	3.1%	.	127
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.9	26.5%	32.7%	40.8%	.	.	49
	2010	4.1	38.0%	40.0%	20.0%	2.0%	.	50
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	11.8%	38.6%	47.9%	1.5%	0.2%	2,466
	2010	3.9	24.9%	41.7%	30.6%	2.2%	0.6%	1,839

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		3.6	12.7%	40.1%	45.3%	1.6%	0.3%	3,126
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	26.6%	42.3%	28.3%	2.3%	0.6%	2,298
International student	2004	3.5	8.3%	33.3%	58.3%	.	.	12
	2010	3.7	27.3%	31.8%	31.8%	4.5%	4.5%	22

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.6	14.0%	35.7%	48.4%	1.6%	0.3%	628
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	24.8%	42.0%	29.6%	2.3%	1.2%	483
Middle class	2004	3.6	12.2%	40.2%	45.8%	1.6%	0.2%	1,527
	2010	3.9	27.1%	43.5%	26.8%	2.3%	0.3%	1,117
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.7	12.6%	42.8%	42.5%	1.6%	0.4%	974
	2010	3.9	27.0%	40.5%	29.7%	2.1%	0.7%	708

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.6	14.6%	32.9%	51.6%	0.8%	.	246
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	28.5%	43.7%	25.9%	0.6%	1.3%	158
Not first generation	2004	3.6	12.5%	40.7%	44.8%	1.7%	0.3%	2,885
	2010	3.9	26.3%	42.3%	28.5%	2.4%	0.6%	2,137

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*		3.6	12.6%	40.2%	45.4%	1.6%	0.3%	3,024
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	26.3%	42.3%	28.5%	2.3%	0.7%	2,140
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.7	16.2%	37.4%	44.4%	2.0%	.	99
	2010	4.0	32.8%	40.0%	25.6%	0.8%	0.8%	125

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.6	12.8%	40.4%	45.0%	1.5%	0.2%	2,971
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	27.3%	42.8%	27.2%	2.1%	0.6%	2,079
Disability	2004	3.5	12.6%	32.9%	51.7%	1.4%	1.4%	143
	2010	3.7	20.7%	36.9%	37.8%	3.7%	0.8%	241

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus orgs/clubs		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.7	13.3%	41.9%	42.9%	1.6%	0.3%	2,891
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	26.7%	42.5%	27.9%	2.3%	0.6%	2,247
Non-Traditional	2004	3.3	5.3%	18.6%	73.7%	2.0%	0.4%	247
	2010	3.7	23.3%	32.9%	39.7%	1.4%	2.7%	73

Back to Top

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*	3.6	9.0%	40.3%	48.1%	2.3%	0.4%	3,139
2004
2010	3.9	23.0%	42.9%	31.5%	2.0%	0.6%	2,387

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.5	6.6%	35.9%	54.6%	2.3%	0.6%	1,408
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	17.2%	39.7%	39.0%	3.0%	1.0%	1,061
Female	2004	3.6	10.9%	43.8%	42.7%	2.3%	0.2%	1,731
	2010	4.0	27.7%	45.4%	25.6%	1.1%	0.2%	1,326

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*		3.8	15.2%	52.3%	30.1%	2.0%	0.4%	256
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	31.5%	43.8%	21.9%	1.7%	1.1%	178
Asian	2004	3.7	8.4%	52.9%	37.8%	.	0.8%	119
	2010	4.1	30.7%	47.2%	20.5%	1.6%	.	127
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.8	16.3%	51.0%	30.6%	.	2.0%	49
	2010	4.1	30.2%	49.1%	20.8%	.	.	53
White/Caucasian	2004	3.5	8.1%	38.5%	50.8%	2.3%	0.3%	2,469
	2010	3.8	21.2%	41.9%	34.2%	2.1%	0.5%	1,896

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		3.6	9.0%	40.3%	48.1%	2.3%	0.3%	3,127
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	23.0%	43.0%	31.6%	1.9%	0.6%	2,363
International student	2004	3.3	8.3%	33.3%	50.0%	.	8.3%	12
	2010	3.8	29.2%	33.3%	29.2%	4.2%	4.2%	24

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.5	10.1%	37.5%	50.0%	2.1%	0.3%	624
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	20.4%	45.3%	30.6%	2.5%	1.2%	510
Middle class	2004	3.6	9.3%	41.2%	46.9%	2.2%	0.4%	1,530
	2010	3.9	23.7%	43.3%	30.8%	1.9%	0.3%	1,148
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.5	7.9%	40.6%	48.7%	2.6%	0.3%	976
	2010	3.9	23.9%	40.8%	33.2%	1.5%	0.6%	716

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.6	11.4%	39.0%	47.6%	2.0%	.	246
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	24.6%	43.3%	29.2%	1.8%	1.2%	171
Not first generation	2004	3.5	8.8%	40.4%	48.1%	2.3%	0.4%	2,886
	2010	3.9	22.9%	43.0%	31.7%	1.9%	0.5%	2,190

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*		3.6	8.9%	40.5%	47.9%	2.3%	0.3%	3,025
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	23.1%	43.2%	31.6%	1.6%	0.5%	2,195
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.6	12.1%	34.3%	52.5%	1.0%	.	99
	2010	3.8	25.0%	37.9%	28.8%	6.8%	1.5%	132

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.6	9.3%	40.5%	47.7%	2.2%	0.3%	2,972
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	23.7%	43.0%	30.8%	1.9%	0.6%	2,144
Disability	2004	3.4	4.9%	35.9%	52.8%	5.6%	0.7%	142
	2010	3.7	17.3%	41.6%	37.9%	2.9%	0.4%	243

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.6	9.4%	41.7%	46.4%	2.2%	0.3%	2,891
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	23.2%	43.2%	31.2%	1.9%	0.5%	2,301
Non-Traditional	2004	3.3	4.0%	24.2%	67.7%	3.6%	0.4%	248
	2010	3.6	18.6%	34.9%	39.5%	4.7%	2.3%	86

Back to Top

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	9.5%	48.7%	39.1%	2.6%	0.2%	3,135
2004
2010	3.8	19.0%	42.2%	37.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,506

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.6	7.9%	46.6%	43.1%	2.1%	0.3%	1,407
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	16.0%	39.6%	42.0%	1.7%	0.7%	1,120
Female	2004	3.7	10.8%	50.4%	35.8%	2.9%	0.1%	1,728
	2010	3.9	21.4%	44.2%	33.1%	1.0%	0.2%	1,386

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*		3.7	10.5%	55.0%	31.0%	3.5%	.	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	22.4%	48.1%	27.3%	1.6%	0.5%	183
Asian	2004	3.8	14.4%	51.7%	33.9%	.	.	118
	2010	4.0	27.7%	46.2%	24.6%	0.8%	0.8%	130
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.7	12.5%	47.9%	37.5%	.	2.1%	48
	2010	3.8	19.6%	44.6%	33.9%	1.8%	.	56
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	9.2%	48.2%	39.8%	2.6%	0.2%	2,463
	2010	3.8	17.9%	41.5%	38.9%	1.4%	0.4%	1,991

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency		3.6	9.4%	48.8%	39.1%	2.5%	0.2%	3,123
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	19.0%	42.2%	37.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,481
International student	2004	3.5	25.0%	25.0%	33.3%	8.3%	8.3%	12
	2010	3.8	20.0%	44.0%	32.0%	4.0%	.	25

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.7	11.0%	47.4%	38.9%	2.6%	0.2%	625
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	18.4%	42.2%	37.6%	0.9%	0.9%	543
Middle class	2004	3.6	9.2%	49.3%	38.8%	2.4%	0.3%	1,530
	2010	3.8	18.4%	42.7%	37.4%	1.3%	0.1%	1,210
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.6	9.0%	48.7%	39.5%	2.7%	0.1%	971
	2010	3.8	20.4%	41.4%	36.2%	1.5%	0.5%	741

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student		3.8	12.5%	53.2%	32.3%	1.6%	0.4%	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.8	16.6%	46.4%	34.3%	1.7%	1.1%	181
Not first generation	2004	3.6	9.2%	48.3%	39.7%	2.6%	0.2%	2,880
	2010	3.8	19.1%	42.0%	37.3%	1.3%	0.3%	2,298

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.6	9.4%	48.8%	39.1%	2.5%	0.2%	3,021
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	19.0%	42.0%	37.3%	1.3%	0.4%	2,311
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.7	10.1%	48.5%	39.4%	2.0%	.	99
	2010	3.8	22.6%	40.9%	33.6%	1.5%	1.5%	137

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.6	9.4%	48.8%	39.0%	2.6%	0.2%	2,968
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	19.0%	42.8%	36.6%	1.3%	0.4%	2,228
Disability	2004	3.7	11.3%	46.5%	40.1%	2.1%	.	142
	2010	3.7	18.7%	37.4%	41.0%	1.8%	1.1%	278

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interactions with staff		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.6	9.6%	48.3%	39.3%	2.6%	0.2%	2,888
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	19.0%	42.3%	37.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,372
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	8.5%	53.4%	36.4%	1.6%	.	247
	2010	3.7	19.4%	40.3%	36.6%	2.2%	1.5%	134

Back to Top

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	24.7%	46.5%	19.1%	8.6%	1.2%	3,141
2004
2010	3.8	28.3%	37.9%	24.4%	7.3%	2.2%	2,623

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.8	22.5%	43.5%	23.2%	9.0%	1.8%	1,411
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	26.7%	35.4%	28.4%	6.9%	2.6%	1,172
Female	2004	3.9	26.5%	48.8%	15.7%	8.3%	0.7%	1,730
	2010	3.9	29.6%	39.8%	21.1%	7.6%	1.9%	1,451

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.1	35.2%	44.5%	13.7%	5.9%	0.8%	256
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.1	37.9%	40.5%	18.4%	2.1%	1.1%	190
Asian	2004	4.2	37.0%	47.9%	13.4%	0.8%	0.8%	119
	2010	4.3	41.9%	42.6%	14.7%	0.7%	.	136
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.3	43.8%	47.9%	4.2%	2.1%	2.1%	48
	2010	4.3	47.5%	35.6%	13.6%	3.4%	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	21.9%	47.1%	20.2%	9.7%	1.1%	2,470
	2010	3.8	25.5%	37.5%	26.1%	8.5%	2.4%	2,088

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.8	24.5%	46.5%	19.1%	8.6%	1.2%	3,129
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	28.1%	37.9%	24.4%	7.4%	2.2%	2,598
International student	2004	4.3	58.3%	25.0%	8.3%	.	8.3%	12
	2010	4.3	48.0%	32.0%	20.0%	.	.	25

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.8	23.0%	42.9%	22.7%	10.1%	1.3%	625
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	29.4%	33.9%	25.0%	9.4%	2.3%	572
Middle class	2004	3.9	24.6%	48.2%	17.7%	8.4%	1.2%	1,530
	2010	3.8	27.7%	39.3%	24.8%	6.5%	1.7%	1,276
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	26.0%	46.2%	18.5%	8.1%	1.2%	978
	2010	3.8	28.6%	38.5%	23.1%	7.0%	2.8%	761

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student		3.9	26.3%	43.7%	21.5%	7.7%	0.8%	247
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	28.4%	38.7%	25.3%	5.7%	2.1%	194
Not first generation	2004	3.8	24.5%	46.7%	18.8%	8.7%	1.2%	2,888
	2010	3.8	28.1%	38.0%	24.3%	7.5%	2.2%	2,398

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*		3.8	24.2%	46.9%	19.3%	8.4%	1.2%	3,028
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	28.6%	38.2%	24.4%	7.0%	1.8%	2,420
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.9	37.4%	32.3%	13.1%	16.2%	1.0%	99
	2010	3.6	26.1%	31.0%	23.9%	10.6%	8.5%	142

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.9	24.6%	47.0%	18.8%	8.5%	1.1%	2,973
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	28.9%	37.9%	23.9%	7.2%	2.0%	2,342
Disability	2004	3.8	26.4%	38.9%	22.2%	10.4%	2.1%	144
	2010	3.7	23.1%	37.4%	28.1%	8.2%	3.2%	281

Influence on thinking about diversity: Family/home town experiences		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.8	24.4%	46.4%	19.5%	8.5%	1.2%	2,894
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	28.2%	37.6%	24.8%	7.3%	2.1%	2,484
Non-Traditional	2004	3.9	27.5%	47.4%	14.6%	9.7%	0.8%	247
	2010	3.9	30.2%	42.4%	17.3%	7.2%	2.9%	139

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	14.0%	50.5%	33.2%	2.2%	0.1%	3,147
2004
2010	3.8	20.8%	40.9%	35.7%	2.0%	0.5%	2,648

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.7	11.3%	46.8%	39.1%	2.5%	0.3%	1,416
Male	2004
	2010	3.7	16.1%	39.8%	40.9%	2.2%	0.9%	1,185
Female	2004	3.8	16.2%	53.5%	28.3%	2.0%	.	1,731
	2010	3.9	24.6%	41.8%	31.5%	1.8%	0.2%	1,463

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.0	25.2%	54.7%	18.2%	1.9%	.	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	30.9%	40.3%	25.1%	3.7%	.	191
Asian	2004	3.9	20.2%	54.6%	23.5%	1.7%	.	119
	2010	3.9	20.9%	54.7%	23.0%	1.4%	.	139
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.1	31.9%	48.9%	19.1%	.	.	47
	2010	4.0	32.2%	39.0%	28.8%	.	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.7	11.7%	50.6%	35.4%	2.1%	0.1%	2,475
	2010	3.8	19.0%	40.4%	38.1%	2.0%	0.5%	2,108

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.8	14.0%	50.5%	33.2%	2.2%	0.1%	3,135
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	20.8%	40.8%	35.8%	2.0%	0.5%	2,622
International student	2004	3.9	25.0%	41.7%	33.3%	.	.	12
	2010	4.0	23.1%	50.0%	26.9%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.7	14.1%	50.2%	32.4%	3.2%	0.2%	626
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	21.5%	42.0%	33.6%	2.1%	0.9%	578
Middle class	2004	3.8	14.7%	50.8%	32.7%	1.7%	0.2%	1,533
	2010	3.8	20.6%	42.2%	35.1%	1.7%	0.4%	1,289
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.7	12.8%	50.5%	34.4%	2.3%	.	981
	2010	3.8	21.0%	38.3%	37.7%	2.5%	0.5%	767

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.8	14.1%	54.0%	31.5%	0.4%	.	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	25.0%	40.8%	31.1%	2.0%	1.0%	196
Not first generation	2004	3.8	14.0%	50.2%	33.3%	2.3%	0.1%	2,894
	2010	3.8	20.4%	41.2%	35.9%	2.0%	0.5%	2,421

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.8	13.7%	50.5%	33.4%	2.2%	0.1%	3,035
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	20.4%	41.0%	36.1%	1.9%	0.5%	2,440
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	4.0	23.2%	52.5%	23.2%	1.0%	.	99
	2010	4.0	31.7%	40.7%	23.4%	3.4%	0.7%	145

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.8	14.2%	50.7%	32.9%	2.1%	0.1%	2,980
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	20.7%	41.6%	35.2%	2.0%	0.4%	2,363
Disability	2004	3.7	11.8%	47.2%	36.1%	4.2%	0.7%	144
	2010	3.7	21.4%	35.1%	40.0%	2.1%	1.4%	285

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of discussing diversity topics with friends		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.8	14.2%	50.3%	33.1%	2.2%	0.1%	2,899
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	20.9%	40.8%	35.8%	2.0%	0.5%	2,506
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	11.3%	52.4%	33.9%	1.6%	0.8%	248
	2010	3.8	19.0%	43.0%	34.5%	2.1%	1.4%	142

Back to Top

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	17.1%	43.6%	37.2%	1.6%	0.5%	3,144
2004
2010	3.8	23.1%	40.4%	33.4%	2.3%	0.8%	2,651

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.6	12.9%	40.7%	43.1%	2.3%	0.9%	1,415
Male	2004
	2010	3.6	17.6%	36.9%	39.7%	4.1%	1.7%	1,184
Female	2004	3.9	20.5%	46.0%	32.4%	1.0%	0.1%	1,729
	2010	4.0	27.6%	43.2%	28.3%	0.7%	0.1%	1,467

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*		4.0	27.3%	46.1%	25.0%	1.2%	0.4%	256
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	27.1%	44.3%	27.6%	0.5%	0.5%	192
Asian	2004	3.8	17.6%	49.6%	31.1%	1.7%	.	119
	2010	4.0	26.1%	47.1%	25.4%	1.4%	.	138
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.1	38.3%	29.8%	31.9%	.	.	47
	2010	4.1	28.8%	49.2%	20.3%	1.7%	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.7	15.6%	44.3%	38.0%	1.7%	0.5%	2,475
	2010	3.8	22.3%	39.5%	34.9%	2.6%	0.8%	2,111

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.8	17.0%	43.6%	37.2%	1.6%	0.5%	3,132
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	23.0%	40.4%	33.5%	2.3%	0.8%	2,625
International student	2004	3.9	25.0%	41.7%	33.3%	.	.	12
	2010	4.1	34.6%	42.3%	23.1%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.7	16.0%	42.2%	39.4%	2.1%	0.3%	625
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	22.1%	43.0%	32.0%	2.2%	0.7%	579
Middle class	2004	3.8	17.6%	45.8%	34.8%	1.5%	0.4%	1,530
	2010	3.8	23.1%	41.4%	33.3%	1.5%	0.7%	1,290
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.7	16.9%	41.3%	39.7%	1.4%	0.7%	981
	2010	3.8	24.1%	37.2%	33.9%	3.6%	1.2%	768

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.8	16.7%	45.1%	37.0%	0.8%	0.4%	246
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	25.4%	46.2%	25.4%	2.5%	0.5%	197
Not first generation	2004	3.8	17.2%	43.5%	37.2%	1.7%	0.5%	2,892
	2010	3.8	22.9%	40.2%	33.8%	2.3%	0.9%	2,423

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.8	16.9%	43.8%	37.2%	1.6%	0.5%	3,032
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	22.7%	40.8%	33.5%	2.2%	0.8%	2,445
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.8	23.5%	36.7%	38.8%	1.0%	.	98
	2010	3.9	31.5%	35.7%	28.7%	3.5%	0.7%	143

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.8	17.2%	44.0%	36.8%	1.6%	0.4%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	23.0%	41.3%	32.9%	2.1%	0.7%	2,367
Disability	2004	3.7	16.7%	38.9%	41.0%	2.1%	1.4%	144
	2010	3.7	24.3%	32.7%	37.7%	3.5%	1.8%	284

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of abstaining from using offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.8	17.4%	43.5%	36.9%	1.7%	0.5%	2,897
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	23.2%	40.7%	32.9%	2.4%	0.8%	2,509
Non-Traditional	2004	3.7	13.8%	44.5%	40.9%	0.8%	.	247
	2010	3.8	22.5%	35.2%	41.5%	.	0.7%	142

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	13.1%	42.2%	41.9%	2.2%	0.6%	3,141
2004
2010	3.7	17.4%	41.0%	38.8%	2.2%	0.7%	2,647

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.5	9.4%	37.0%	49.7%	2.8%	1.1%	1,415
Male	2004
	2010	3.6	13.1%	35.2%	47.2%	3.0%	1.5%	1,184
Female	2004	3.8	16.2%	46.3%	35.6%	1.7%	0.2%	1,726
	2010	3.9	20.8%	45.7%	31.9%	1.5%	0.1%	1,463

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.0	24.9%	49.8%	23.3%	1.6%	0.4%	257
African American/Black	2004
	2010	3.9	25.3%	40.0%	33.2%	1.6%	.	190
Asian	2004	3.7	15.1%	43.7%	39.5%	1.7%	.	119
	2010	3.8	16.5%	49.6%	33.1%	0.7%	.	139
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.0	25.5%	48.9%	25.5%	.	.	47
	2010	3.9	23.7%	44.1%	30.5%	.	1.7%	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	11.4%	41.8%	43.9%	2.2%	0.6%	2,472
	2010	3.7	16.3%	40.5%	40.1%	2.4%	0.7%	2,108

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.6	13.1%	42.1%	42.0%	2.2%	0.6%	3,129
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.7	17.3%	41.1%	38.7%	2.2%	0.7%	2,621
International student	2004	3.9	16.7%	58.3%	25.0%	.	.	12
	2010	3.8	23.1%	30.8%	46.2%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.6	13.1%	40.8%	43.0%	2.6%	0.5%	625
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	17.7%	42.9%	36.8%	1.9%	0.7%	576
Middle class	2004	3.7	12.8%	42.8%	41.7%	2.2%	0.4%	1,529
	2010	3.7	16.8%	42.4%	38.8%	1.4%	0.5%	1,291
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.7	13.6%	42.1%	41.6%	1.7%	1.0%	979
	2010	3.7	18.1%	37.6%	39.6%	3.7%	1.0%	766

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.7	12.7%	42.6%	43.4%	0.8%	0.4%	244
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.8	20.3%	46.7%	30.5%	1.5%	1.0%	197
Not first generation	2004	3.7	13.2%	42.1%	41.8%	2.2%	0.6%	2,891
	2010	3.7	17.1%	40.9%	39.2%	2.2%	0.7%	2,421

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.6	12.7%	42.4%	42.1%	2.2%	0.6%	3,028
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.7	16.8%	41.2%	39.2%	2.2%	0.7%	2,441
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.9	28.3%	33.3%	37.4%	1.0%	.	99
	2010	3.9	29.4%	37.8%	28.7%	2.8%	1.4%	143

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.7	13.0%	42.5%	41.7%	2.2%	0.6%	2,974
No disability	2004
	2010	3.7	17.3%	41.3%	38.7%	2.1%	0.6%	2,362
Disability	2004	3.6	14.0%	37.8%	45.5%	1.4%	1.4%	143
	2010	3.7	18.2%	38.2%	39.3%	2.8%	1.4%	285

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.7	13.5%	42.3%	41.4%	2.2%	0.6%	2,896
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.7	17.5%	41.1%	38.4%	2.3%	0.7%	2,508
Non-Traditional	2004	3.6	9.0%	40.4%	48.2%	1.6%	0.8%	245
	2010	3.7	14.4%	39.6%	45.3%	.	0.7%	139

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	16.3%	54.2%	28.1%	1.1%	0.2%	3,144
2004
2010	3.9	24.0%	45.4%	29.3%	0.9%	0.5%	2,648

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.8	13.2%	52.5%	32.7%	1.3%	0.4%	1,414
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	19.4%	43.5%	34.7%	1.4%	0.9%	1,183
Female	2004	3.9	18.9%	55.6%	24.4%	1.0%	0.1%	1,730
	2010	4.0	27.7%	46.8%	24.9%	0.4%	0.1%	1,465

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.0	25.3%	54.5%	17.9%	2.3%	.	257
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	31.9%	41.9%	25.1%	0.5%	0.5%	191
Asian	2004	4.0	17.8%	60.2%	22.0%	.	.	118
	2010	4.0	26.8%	50.7%	21.7%	0.7%	.	138
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.1	27.7%	53.2%	19.1%	.	.	47
	2010	4.1	35.6%	40.7%	23.7%	.	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	15.0%	54.5%	29.3%	1.0%	0.2%	2,474
	2010	3.9	22.3%	45.8%	30.5%	0.9%	0.5%	2,109

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.9	16.3%	54.2%	28.1%	1.1%	0.2%	3,132
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	24.0%	45.3%	29.3%	0.9%	0.5%	2,622
International student	2004	3.8	16.7%	41.7%	41.7%	.	.	12
	2010	4.0	26.9%	46.2%	26.9%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.8	14.2%	55.2%	29.2%	1.0%	0.5%	627
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	23.2%	46.1%	28.2%	1.2%	1.2%	577
Middle class	2004	3.9	16.7%	54.5%	27.5%	1.1%	0.2%	1,529
	2010	3.9	24.4%	45.7%	29.2%	0.5%	0.2%	1,289
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	17.1%	53.2%	28.2%	1.3%	0.1%	981
	2010	3.9	24.1%	44.5%	29.7%	1.2%	0.5%	768

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.9	17.3%	53.6%	27.8%	1.2%	.	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	27.9%	46.2%	23.4%	1.0%	1.5%	197
Not first generation	2004	3.9	16.2%	54.3%	28.1%	1.1%	0.2%	2,891
	2010	3.9	23.6%	45.6%	29.5%	0.9%	0.4%	2,421

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.9	16.1%	54.4%	28.0%	1.2%	0.2%	3,032
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	23.9%	45.7%	29.1%	0.8%	0.5%	2,441
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.9	23.2%	47.5%	29.3%	.	.	99
	2010	3.9	29.2%	39.6%	28.5%	1.4%	1.4%	144

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.9	16.4%	54.5%	27.8%	1.1%	0.2%	2,977
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	24.2%	46.1%	28.6%	0.8%	0.3%	2,364
Disability	2004	3.8	16.7%	49.3%	31.3%	1.4%	1.4%	144
	2010	3.8	22.2%	39.4%	34.9%	1.8%	1.8%	284

Influence of NCSU: Comfort working with students from diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.9	16.4%	54.3%	27.9%	1.1%	0.2%	2,896
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	24.1%	45.4%	29.1%	0.9%	0.5%	2,507
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	14.9%	53.2%	30.2%	1.6%	.	248
	2010	3.9	21.3%	44.7%	32.6%	0.7%	0.7%	141

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	15.5%	54.6%	28.1%	1.5%	0.3%	3,142
2004
2010	3.9	25.0%	45.2%	27.9%	1.4%	0.4%	2,648

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.7	12.4%	50.8%	34.6%	1.8%	0.4%	1,412
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	20.2%	42.0%	34.5%	2.5%	0.8%	1,183
Female	2004	3.9	18.1%	57.6%	22.8%	1.3%	0.2%	1,730
	2010	4.1	28.9%	47.8%	22.6%	0.5%	0.1%	1,465

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.1	27.1%	54.7%	16.3%	1.2%	0.8%	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	31.4%	43.5%	23.6%	1.0%	0.5%	191
Asian	2004	4.0	18.5%	61.3%	19.3%	0.8%	.	119
	2010	4.0	26.6%	51.8%	19.4%	2.2%	.	139
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.1	34.0%	40.4%	25.5%	.	.	47
	2010	4.0	29.3%	44.8%	25.9%	.	.	58
White/Caucasian	2004	3.8	13.2%	55.6%	29.5%	1.5%	0.2%	2,471
	2010	3.9	23.8%	45.2%	29.3%	1.4%	0.4%	2,109

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.8	15.5%	54.7%	28.1%	1.5%	0.3%	3,130
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	24.9%	45.2%	28.0%	1.4%	0.4%	2,622
International student	2004	3.8	25.0%	25.0%	50.0%	.	.	12
	2010	4.2	34.6%	46.2%	19.2%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.8	14.8%	54.2%	28.9%	1.9%	0.2%	627
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	25.7%	43.5%	28.8%	1.6%	0.3%	579
Middle class	2004	3.8	16.0%	54.3%	28.0%	1.4%	0.3%	1,531
	2010	4.0	25.2%	46.3%	27.1%	1.1%	0.3%	1,288
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.8	15.3%	55.3%	27.7%	1.5%	0.2%	977
	2010	3.9	24.3%	45.2%	28.0%	2.0%	0.5%	767

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student		3.9	19.4%	56.9%	22.2%	1.2%	0.4%	248
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	26.8%	46.5%	25.8%	0.5%	0.5%	198
Not first generation	2004	3.8	15.2%	54.4%	28.6%	1.6%	0.2%	2,889
	2010	3.9	24.9%	45.5%	27.7%	1.5%	0.4%	2,419

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*		3.8	15.3%	54.7%	28.1%	1.6%	0.3%	3,030
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	24.6%	45.6%	28.1%	1.3%	0.4%	2,440
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	4.0	23.2%	49.5%	27.3%	.	.	99
	2010	4.1	36.6%	37.9%	21.4%	3.4%	0.7%	145

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.8	15.6%	54.8%	28.0%	1.4%	0.2%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	25.2%	45.9%	27.3%	1.3%	0.3%	2,365
Disability	2004	3.8	16.0%	52.8%	27.8%	2.8%	0.7%	144
	2010	3.8	23.7%	39.9%	32.9%	2.8%	0.7%	283

Influence of NCSU: Understanding of diversity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.8	15.5%	54.8%	28.0%	1.4%	0.3%	2,894
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	25.2%	45.2%	27.8%	1.5%	0.3%	2,506
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	15.3%	51.6%	29.8%	3.2%	.	248
	2010	3.9	21.8%	46.5%	29.6%	0.7%	1.4%	142

Back to Top

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

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	17.7%	54.8%	26.9%	0.5%	0.1%	3,133
2004
2010	4.0	26.1%	45.3%	27.9%	0.5%	0.2%	2,647

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.8	14.0%	52.9%	32.2%	0.8%	0.1%	1,409
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	21.1%	43.3%	34.3%	0.8%	0.5%	1,183
Female	2004	4.0	20.8%	56.3%	22.6%	0.3%	.	1,724
	2010	4.1	30.1%	47.0%	22.7%	0.2%	.	1,464

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.1	28.4%	54.1%	16.7%	0.8%	.	257
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.1	34.0%	45.5%	19.9%	0.5%	.	191
Asian	2004	4.0	21.8%	58.8%	19.3%	.	.	119
	2010	4.1	26.6%	53.2%	19.4%	0.7%	.	139
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.2	36.2%	44.7%	19.1%	.	.	47
	2010	4.2	39.0%	44.1%	16.9%	.	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.9	15.7%	55.6%	28.3%	0.4%	0.0%	2,462
	2010	3.9	24.7%	45.0%	29.6%	0.5%	0.2%	2,108

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.9	17.7%	54.8%	26.9%	0.5%	0.1%	3,121
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	4.0	25.9%	45.4%	28.0%	0.5%	0.2%	2,621
International student	2004	3.9	25.0%	41.7%	33.3%	.	.	12
	2010	4.3	46.2%	38.5%	15.4%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.9	16.5%	53.8%	28.8%	0.8%	.	624
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	24.9%	46.4%	27.7%	0.7%	0.3%	578
Middle class	2004	3.9	18.6%	55.0%	25.8%	0.5%	0.1%	1,526
	2010	4.0	27.2%	45.5%	27.0%	0.2%	0.1%	1,286
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	17.2%	55.0%	27.4%	0.4%	.	976
	2010	3.9	25.4%	44.7%	28.9%	0.7%	0.4%	769

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student		4.0	20.2%	55.9%	22.7%	1.2%	.	247
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	29.8%	46.5%	22.7%	0.5%	0.5%	198
Not first generation	2004	3.9	17.5%	54.7%	27.2%	0.5%	0.1%	2,881
	2010	4.0	25.8%	45.5%	28.0%	0.5%	0.2%	2,418

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.9	17.5%	55.0%	26.8%	0.5%	0.1%	3,021
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	4.0	25.9%	45.7%	27.8%	0.4%	0.2%	2,439
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	4.0	26.3%	46.5%	27.3%	.	.	99
	2010	4.0	33.1%	37.9%	26.9%	1.4%	0.7%	145

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.9	18.0%	54.8%	26.7%	0.4%	0.0%	2,966
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	26.5%	46.1%	26.9%	0.4%	0.2%	2,363
Disability	2004	3.8	14.6%	54.9%	28.5%	1.4%	0.7%	144
	2010	3.8	22.9%	39.1%	36.3%	1.1%	0.7%	284

Influence of NCSU: Ability to work in job with people of diverse backgrounds		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.9	17.8%	54.8%	26.8%	0.5%	0.1%	2,886
Traditional	2004
	2010	4.0	26.3%	45.3%	27.7%	0.5%	0.2%	2,505
Non-Traditional	2004	3.9	16.6%	54.3%	28.3%	0.8%	.	247
	2010	3.9	22.5%	45.8%	31.0%	.	0.7%	142

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	17.5%	54.9%	26.6%	0.9%	0.1%	3,132
2004
2010	3.9	25.3%	45.4%	28.1%	0.8%	0.3%	2,648

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.8	14.2%	54.0%	31.0%	0.6%	0.2%	1,408
Male	2004
	2010	3.8	20.2%	43.8%	33.8%	1.5%	0.8%	1,184
Female	2004	3.9	20.1%	55.7%	23.0%	1.2%	.	1,724
	2010	4.1	29.4%	46.8%	23.6%	0.2%	.	1,464

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity		4.0	24.8%	54.7%	19.0%	1.6%	.	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.1	31.9%	47.1%	19.4%	1.6%	.	191
Asian	2004	4.0	19.5%	61.0%	19.5%	.	.	118
	2010	4.0	28.8%	46.8%	24.5%	.	.	139
Hispanic/Latino	2004	4.1	34.0%	44.7%	21.3%	.	.	47
	2010	4.2	33.9%	47.5%	18.6%	.	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.9	15.8%	55.7%	27.4%	0.9%	0.1%	2,461
	2010	3.9	23.9%	45.5%	29.4%	0.9%	0.4%	2,109

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.9	17.4%	55.0%	26.6%	0.9%	0.1%	3,120
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.9	25.2%	45.5%	28.2%	0.8%	0.3%	2,622
International student	2004	4.0	33.3%	33.3%	33.3%	.	.	12
	2010	4.2	38.5%	42.3%	19.2%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.9	17.5%	54.3%	27.4%	0.6%	0.2%	624
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.9	25.0%	44.6%	28.7%	1.4%	0.3%	579
Middle class	2004	3.9	17.9%	55.3%	25.7%	1.0%	0.1%	1,524
	2010	4.0	26.1%	45.9%	27.1%	0.7%	0.2%	1,289
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.9	16.7%	54.9%	27.5%	0.9%	.	977
	2010	3.9	24.3%	45.7%	28.9%	0.5%	0.7%	766

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student		3.9	19.9%	55.3%	24.4%	0.4%	.	246
First generation student	2004
	2010	4.0	29.3%	43.9%	25.8%	0.5%	0.5%	198
Not first generation	2004	3.9	17.3%	54.9%	26.8%	0.9%	0.1%	2,881
	2010	3.9	25.1%	45.8%	28.0%	0.8%	0.3%	2,419

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation*		3.9	17.2%	55.1%	26.7%	0.9%	0.1%	3,020
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.9	25.1%	45.8%	27.9%	0.8%	0.3%	2,441
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	4.0	26.3%	51.5%	22.2%	.	.	99
	2010	4.0	32.6%	37.5%	29.2%	.	0.7%	144

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.9	17.6%	54.9%	26.5%	0.9%	0.0%	2,966
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	25.6%	45.9%	27.5%	0.8%	0.3%	2,363
Disability	2004	3.8	16.1%	55.2%	27.3%	.	1.4%	143
	2010	3.8	22.5%	41.8%	33.7%	1.1%	1.1%	285

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different race/ethnicity		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age*		3.9	17.5%	55.3%	26.1%	1.0%	0.1%	2,884
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.9	25.4%	45.5%	27.9%	0.8%	0.3%	2,506
Non-Traditional	2004	3.8	16.9%	50.4%	32.7%	.	.	248
	2010	3.9	23.2%	43.7%	32.4%	.	0.7%	142

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	13.3%	39.0%	44.2%	2.1%	1.3%	3,139
2004
2010	3.8	23.4%	37.4%	35.9%	2.0%	1.2%	2,649

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Gender*		3.5	9.3%	34.2%	51.8%	2.8%	1.9%	1,413
Male	2004
	2010	3.6	18.2%	32.3%	43.7%	3.3%	2.5%	1,182
Female	2004	3.7	16.5%	43.0%	38.1%	1.6%	0.9%	1,726
	2010	4.0	27.6%	41.4%	29.7%	1.0%	0.2%	1,467

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Race/Ethnicity*		3.8	20.5%	43.8%	33.7%	0.8%	1.2%	258
African American/Black	2004
	2010	4.0	29.7%	39.1%	28.6%	2.6%	.	192
Asian	2004	3.7	12.6%	46.2%	38.7%	0.8%	1.7%	119
	2010	3.9	23.0%	45.3%	29.5%	0.7%	1.4%	139
Hispanic/Latino	2004	3.8	23.4%	38.3%	36.2%	2.1%	.	47
	2010	3.9	27.1%	39.0%	32.2%	1.7%	.	59
White/Caucasian	2004	3.6	12.1%	38.9%	45.6%	2.2%	1.2%	2,467
	2010	3.8	22.5%	37.0%	37.1%	2.2%	1.2%	2,108

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Residency*		3.6	13.2%	39.1%	44.2%	2.1%	1.3%	3,127
U.S. resident	2004
	2010	3.8	23.3%	37.5%	35.9%	2.1%	1.3%	2,623
International student	2004	3.6	16.7%	25.0%	58.3%	.	.	12
	2010	4.0	38.5%	23.1%	38.5%	.	.	26

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Socioeconomic Background*		3.6	12.0%	37.4%	46.6%	2.7%	1.3%	625
Poor/Working class	2004
	2010	3.8	22.8%	38.3%	35.4%	2.1%	1.4%	579
Middle class	2004	3.6	13.5%	40.8%	42.1%	1.8%	1.8%	1,529
	2010	3.8	23.4%	38.7%	34.9%	1.9%	1.1%	1,288
Upper middle/Upper class	2004	3.6	13.6%	37.4%	46.1%	2.2%	0.6%	978
	2010	3.8	24.1%	34.9%	37.5%	2.2%	1.3%	768

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
First Generation College Student*		3.6	15.9%	37.4%	42.7%	1.6%	2.4%	246
First generation student	2004
	2010	3.9	27.4%	40.6%	29.4%	0.5%	2.0%	197
Not first generation	2004	3.6	13.0%	39.2%	44.4%	2.2%	1.2%	2,888
	2010	3.8	23.1%	37.4%	36.1%	2.2%	1.1%	2,421

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Sexual Orientation		3.6	12.8%	39.2%	44.5%	2.1%	1.4%	3,027
Heterosexual	2004
	2010	3.8	22.6%	37.8%	36.2%	2.2%	1.2%	2,442
Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual	2004	3.8	27.3%	32.3%	37.4%	2.0%	1.0%	99
	2010	4.0	38.2%	29.2%	30.6%	.	2.1%	144

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.6	13.4%	39.3%	44.0%	2.2%	1.1%	2,973
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	23.4%	37.9%	35.7%	1.8%	1.2%	2,364
Disability	2004	3.5	11.2%	35.7%	47.6%	1.4%	4.2%	143
	2010	3.7	23.9%	32.6%	38.2%	3.9%	1.4%	285

Influence of NCSU: Comfort interacting with people of different sexual orientation		Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Age		3.6	13.3%	39.5%	43.7%	2.1%	1.4%	2,892
Traditional	2004
	2010	3.8	23.5%	37.4%	35.8%	2.1%	1.2%	2,508
Non-Traditional	2004	3.6	13.0%	33.6%	50.6%	2.0%	0.8%	247
	2010	3.8	22.0%	36.9%	39.0%	0.7%	1.4%	141

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