North Carolina State University
Campus Climate Survey Trends (Undergraduate)

Tables of Results
by Disability Status

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 disability status.

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)
Disability Status		3.3	39.7%	51.4%	8.3%	0.6%	2,980
No disability	2004
	2010	3.4	44.5%	48.0%	6.6%	0.9%	3,011
Disability	2004	3.2	35.6%	49.3%	13.0%	2.1%	146
	2010	3.3	37.4%	53.6%	7.3%	1.7%	289

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)
Disability Status		3.9	1.2%	7.1%	21.6%	43.2%	27.0%	2,971
No disability	2004
	2010	3.7	4.5%	10.6%	19.4%	46.1%	19.4%	3,008
Disability	2004	3.6	3.4%	12.3%	27.4%	35.6%	21.2%	146
	2010	3.5	2.8%	12.1%	26.3%	46.0%	12.8%	289

Feel physically threatened ¹

Feel physically threatened		Mean	1: Never	2: Seldom	3: Occasionally	4: Often	5: Always	Total (N)
Disability Status		1.4	65.7%	28.6%	4.8%	0.6%	0.4%	2,971
No disability	2004
	2010	1.3	75.9%	20.6%	3.0%	0.3%	0.2%	3,008
Disability	2004	1.5	61.0%	31.5%	6.8%	0.7%	.	146
	2010	1.4	66.8%	28.4%	4.2%	0.3%	0.3%	289

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)
Disability Status*		3.8	28.8%	43.0%	13.8%	10.1%	4.3%	2,979
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	43.1%	41.6%	8.5%	4.0%	2.8%	2,412
Disability	2004	3.4	21.4%	33.1%	17.9%	17.2%	10.3%	145
	2010	3.9	35.3%	40.2%	11.8%	6.4%	6.4%	204

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)
Disability Status		3.9	25.1%	47.5%	22.7%	4.2%	0.5%	2,980
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	34.4%	47.0%	14.6%	2.9%	1.0%	2,628
Disability	2004	3.7	22.8%	43.4%	23.4%	6.2%	4.1%	145
	2010	3.9	26.1%	47.1%	19.7%	4.6%	2.5%	238

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)
Disability Status*		3.7	20.2%	37.9%	31.4%	8.4%	2.1%	2,977
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	37.2%	46.1%	13.4%	2.3%	1.0%	2,352
Disability	2004	3.4	19.4%	30.6%	28.5%	15.3%	6.3%	144
	2010	3.9	27.5%	46.5%	16.0%	5.5%	4.5%	200

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)
Disability Status		4.0	25.9%	54.7%	15.0%	4.1%	0.3%	2,969
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	33.0%	39.1%	21.7%	4.2%	2.0%	1,258
Disability	2004	4.0	33.1%	46.2%	13.1%	6.9%	0.7%	145
	2010	3.9	35.4%	36.2%	16.5%	7.1%	4.7%	127

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)
Disability Status		4.2	37.5%	47.0%	10.1%	4.8%	0.7%	2,968
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	43.9%	36.5%	12.0%	4.9%	2.9%	2,905
Disability	2004	4.1	43.8%	37.5%	6.9%	7.6%	4.2%	144
	2010	3.9	37.4%	34.5%	14.6%	8.5%	5.0%	281

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)
Disability Status		4.1	30.8%	51.0%	14.3%	3.5%	0.4%	2,957
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	35.6%	48.1%	12.7%	2.8%	0.8%	2,494
Disability	2004	3.9	29.2%	45.1%	15.3%	9.0%	1.4%	144
	2010	4.0	32.6%	46.0%	16.7%	2.5%	2.1%	239

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)
Disability Status*		4.1	28.3%	57.5%	11.0%	3.0%	0.3%	2,973
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	28.5%	47.8%	18.1%	3.8%	1.7%	2,364
Disability	2004	4.2	40.0%	46.2%	10.3%	2.8%	0.7%	145
	2010	3.9	27.8%	46.4%	16.9%	6.9%	2.0%	248

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)
Disability Status*		3.5	16.1%	40.5%	25.3%	16.0%	2.1%	2,970
No disability	2004
	2010	3.7	23.4%	41.1%	23.4%	7.9%	4.1%	1,378
Disability	2004	3.6	24.8%	40.0%	13.8%	17.9%	3.4%	145
	2010	3.5	20.9%	35.3%	28.1%	8.5%	7.2%	153

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)
Disability Status*		4.2	30.0%	58.4%	8.9%	2.5%	0.2%	2,971
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	32.1%	46.0%	15.1%	5.2%	1.6%	2,776
Disability	2004	4.2	43.4%	42.1%	8.3%	6.2%	.	145
	2010	4.0	31.8%	42.3%	17.9%	5.8%	2.2%	274

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)
Disability Status		4.0	26.8%	56.2%	8.2%	7.9%	0.9%	2,979
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	25.2%	52.6%	11.6%	9.4%	1.2%	2,810
Disability	2004	3.9	29.5%	47.3%	11.6%	10.3%	1.4%	146
	2010	3.6	20.3%	44.8%	16.2%	15.2%	3.4%	290

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)
Disability Status		2.1	0.6%	3.6%	16.9%	60.9%	18.0%	2,974
No disability	2004
	2010	2.0	0.9%	3.2%	14.7%	53.6%	27.5%	2,806
Disability	2004	2.2	0.7%	4.1%	23.3%	56.8%	15.1%	146
	2010	2.1	1.0%	5.2%	19.0%	51.0%	23.8%	290

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)
Disability Status		4.1	19.6%	70.1%	8.5%	1.5%	0.2%	2,977
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	25.7%	59.8%	11.7%	2.3%	0.6%	2,802
Disability	2004	4.1	21.9%	63.0%	14.4%	0.7%	.	146
	2010	4.0	26.4%	55.6%	14.6%	2.4%	1.0%	288

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)
Disability Status		2.0	1.0%	4.4%	12.5%	61.2%	20.9%	2,979
No disability	2004
	2010	2.0	1.2%	4.6%	12.2%	52.4%	29.6%	2,802
Disability	2004	2.2	1.4%	7.6%	17.9%	55.9%	17.2%	145
	2010	2.1	3.1%	6.6%	14.2%	52.9%	23.2%	289

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)
Disability Status		3.8	13.8%	55.9%	26.4%	3.5%	0.4%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	17.2%	50.9%	28.3%	3.1%	0.5%	2,799
Disability	2004	3.8	15.9%	57.2%	20.0%	6.9%	.	145
	2010	3.8	18.7%	49.8%	25.3%	4.5%	1.7%	289

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)
Disability Status*		2.3	2.7%	10.9%	23.0%	44.1%	19.3%	2,979
No disability	2004
	2010	2.0	2.0%	6.8%	15.9%	36.8%	38.5%	2,807
Disability	2004	2.4	3.4%	11.7%	26.2%	42.1%	16.6%	145
	2010	2.1	2.8%	6.6%	22.1%	30.8%	37.7%	289

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)
Disability Status		4.1	26.8%	62.1%	9.5%	1.3%	0.3%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	31.1%	54.0%	12.5%	2.1%	0.2%	2,802
Disability	2004	4.2	31.0%	54.5%	13.1%	1.4%	.	145
	2010	4.1	32.4%	48.6%	14.5%	2.8%	1.7%	290

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)
Disability Status		4.1	24.5%	63.9%	8.9%	2.3%	0.4%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	27.1%	58.1%	11.3%	2.7%	0.7%	2,804
Disability	2004	4.1	27.8%	57.6%	9.7%	2.8%	2.1%	144
	2010	3.9	24.8%	51.0%	17.9%	3.8%	2.4%	290

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)
Disability Status		4.0	37.7%	34.1%	21.4%	6.3%	0.5%	2,973
No disability	2004
	2010	4.3	50.2%	31.3%	13.9%	4.2%	0.4%	2,714
Disability	2004	4.0	38.5%	35.7%	18.9%	4.9%	2.1%	143
	2010	4.1	44.6%	31.7%	17.8%	3.5%	2.4%	287

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)
Disability Status		2.6	3.3%	10.5%	37.3%	41.1%	7.8%	2,865
No disability	2004
	2010	2.8	7.6%	14.8%	35.5%	31.5%	10.6%	2,506
Disability	2004	3.3	18.8%	23.2%	31.9%	23.9%	2.2%	138
	2010	3.2	18.8%	18.4%	33.3%	23.8%	5.7%	261

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)
Disability Status		4.0	37.7%	36.3%	19.2%	5.9%	0.7%	2,812
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	49.1%	30.8%	15.0%	4.3%	0.7%	2,534
Disability	2004	4.2	44.5%	36.5%	13.1%	3.6%	2.2%	137
	2010	4.2	50.0%	30.5%	13.4%	3.8%	2.3%	262

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)
Disability Status*		2.9	11.1%	16.6%	32.1%	30.3%	9.8%	2,604
No disability	2004
	2010	3.4	23.3%	25.3%	28.8%	16.5%	6.1%	2,345
Disability	2004	3.2	19.2%	21.7%	23.3%	29.2%	6.7%	120
	2010	3.6	31.7%	21.8%	27.4%	13.5%	5.6%	252

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)
Disability Status		4.2	41.7%	39.3%	16.6%	2.3%	0.1%	2,851
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	43.3%	38.1%	15.4%	2.7%	0.6%	2,514
Disability	2004	4.1	38.7%	41.6%	14.6%	3.6%	1.5%	137
	2010	4.3	50.2%	31.3%	16.2%	1.2%	1.2%	259

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)
Disability Status		4.0	37.7%	32.3%	21.2%	7.4%	1.4%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	43.6%	28.8%	19.7%	5.6%	2.2%	2,688
Disability	2004	3.9	31.9%	35.4%	22.2%	6.9%	3.5%	144
	2010	4.0	43.3%	25.5%	22.7%	4.3%	4.3%	282

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)
Disability Status		3.9	31.6%	36.4%	23.5%	6.5%	2.0%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	34.8%	32.4%	22.8%	6.4%	3.6%	2,683
Disability	2004	3.8	29.0%	35.2%	28.3%	3.4%	4.1%	145
	2010	3.8	31.9%	33.0%	23.0%	7.8%	4.3%	282

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)
Disability Status		3.5	25.2%	27.7%	26.2%	12.7%	8.2%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	3.5	29.0%	25.1%	24.5%	11.3%	10.0%	2,657
Disability	2004	3.4	21.4%	27.6%	26.2%	15.2%	9.7%	145
	2010	3.5	27.0%	27.8%	23.1%	10.3%	11.7%	281

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)
Disability Status*		4.3%	34.3%	38.4%	19.2%	3.8%	2,982
No disability	2004
	2010	12.6%	37.7%	28.9%	14.3%	6.5%	2,722
Disability	2004	5.5%	30.1%	44.5%	17.1%	2.7%	146
	2010	12.5%	39.9%	35.1%	10.1%	2.4%	288

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)
Disability Status		12.1%	50.3%	24.4%	7.9%	5.3%	2,981
No disability	2004
	2010	9.4%	53.3%	23.4%	7.8%	6.1%	2,731
Disability	2004	24.7%	41.8%	17.8%	6.8%	8.9%	146
	2010	16.3%	42.4%	21.9%	11.8%	7.6%	288

Back to Top

Section C: Multicultural Activities on Campus

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course		Yes	No	Total (N)
Disability Status		18.3%	81.7%	2,951
No disability	2004
	2010	16.6%	83.4%	2,664
Disability	2004	22.2%	77.8%	144
	2010	16.6%	83.4%	290

Impact on thinking/understanding diversity: Ethnic Studies Course

Impact on thinking/understanding diversity: Ethnic Studies Course		Mean	5: Very positive	4: Positive	3: Neither positive nor negative	2: Negative	1: Very negative	Total (N)
Disability Status		4.1	33.6%	47.9%	14.5%	3.5%	0.6%	539
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	39.3%	41.6%	16.6%	1.4%	1.2%	433
Disability	2004	3.9	34.4%	40.6%	12.5%	3.1%	9.4%	32
	2010	4.3	47.8%	34.8%	17.4%	.	.	46

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course		Yes	No	Total (N)
Disability Status		6.6%	93.4%	2,910
No disability	2004
	2010	7.5%	92.5%	2,662
Disability	2004	12.8%	87.2%	141
	2010	15.9%	84.1%	290

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)
Disability Status*		4.1	36.5%	44.7%	14.2%	2.5%	2.0%	197
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	40.4%	33.7%	19.7%	3.6%	2.6%	193
Disability	2004	4.2	47.4%	36.8%	10.5%	.	5.3%	19
	2010	4.1	39.5%	39.5%	18.6%	.	2.3%	43

Number of classes with diversity issues clearly integrated

Number of classes with diversity issues clearly integrated		None	A few	Some	Most	All	Total (N)
Disability Status		34.3%	45.3%	15.1%	4.6%	0.6%	2,964
No disability	2004
	2010	35.1%	41.1%	16.7%	5.9%	1.2%	2,652
Disability	2004	34.3%	39.9%	19.6%	4.9%	1.4%	143
	2010	28.6%	42.1%	18.6%	10.0%	0.7%	290

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)
Disability Status		3.7	12.0%	51.6%	32.7%	3.4%	0.3%	1,942
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	16.2%	50.7%	29.3%	2.8%	1.0%	1,712
Disability	2004	3.6	16.8%	43.2%	30.5%	5.3%	4.2%	95
	2010	3.8	19.3%	49.8%	27.1%	3.4%	0.5%	207

Participation in diversity/multicultural events

Participation in diversity/multicultural events		Never	Once	Two or three times	Four or more times	Total (N)
Disability Status		65.9%	8.2%	16.0%	9.9%	2,961
No disability	2004
	2010	51.9%	14.2%	20.3%	13.6%	2,639
Disability	2004	64.4%	10.3%	17.1%	8.2%	146
	2010	55.0%	14.5%	15.9%	14.5%	289

Reasons for not participating: Not aware ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not aware		Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Disability Status		64.3%	35.7%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	60.1%	39.9%	1,369
Disability	2004	62.3%	37.7%	146
	2010	59.7%	40.3%	159

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)
Disability Status		37.3%	62.7%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	42.4%	57.6%	1,369
Disability	2004	36.3%	63.7%	146
	2010	41.5%	58.5%	159

Reasons for not participating: Not enough time ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not enough time		Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Disability Status		67.1%	32.9%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	62.9%	37.1%	1,369
Disability	2004	60.3%	39.7%	146
	2010	64.2%	35.8%	159

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)
Disability Status		63.3%	36.7%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	61.7%	38.3%	1,369
Disability	2004	59.6%	40.4%	146
	2010	60.4%	39.6%	159

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable		Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Disability Status		18.7%	81.3%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	11.9%	88.1%	1,369
Disability	2004	21.9%	78.1%	146
	2010	18.9%	81.1%	159

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)
Disability Status		30.6%	69.4%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	34.2%	65.8%	1,369
Disability	2004	28.1%	71.9%	146
	2010	35.2%	64.8%	159

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic		Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Disability Status		43.9%	56.1%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	38.7%	61.3%	1,369
Disability	2004	52.7%	47.3%	146
	2010	42.8%	57.2%	159

Reasons for not participating: Location ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Location		Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Disability Status*		12.1%	87.9%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	9.8%	90.2%	1,369
Disability	2004	24.7%	75.3%	146
	2010	15.1%	84.9%	159

Reasons for not participating: Cost ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Cost		Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Disability Status		19.1%	80.9%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	13.0%	87.0%	1,369
Disability	2004	16.4%	83.6%	146
	2010	19.5%	80.5%	159

Reasons for not participating: Other ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Other		Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Disability Status		4.8%	95.2%	2,988
No disability	2004
	2010	3.5%	96.5%	1,369
Disability	2004	8.9%	91.1%	146
	2010	4.4%	95.6%	159

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)
Disability Status*		3.9	17.9%	63.0%	12.7%	5.9%	0.4%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	31.7%	50.9%	11.6%	4.2%	1.7%	2,498
Disability	2004	3.7	18.5%	45.9%	21.9%	11.0%	2.7%	146
	2010	3.9	27.1%	50.7%	12.5%	6.9%	2.8%	288

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)
Disability Status*		3.6	8.7%	55.6%	27.0%	8.0%	0.7%	2,971
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	20.4%	48.3%	24.7%	5.4%	1.3%	2,490
Disability	2004	3.5	9.6%	45.9%	32.2%	11.0%	1.4%	146
	2010	3.7	22.4%	39.2%	29.0%	6.6%	2.8%	286

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)
Disability Status		3.1	10.5%	21.0%	39.1%	24.2%	5.2%	2,980
No disability	2004
	2010	3.0	15.2%	19.8%	28.3%	25.4%	11.3%	2,495
Disability	2004	3.2	17.9%	16.6%	42.1%	17.2%	6.2%	145
	2010	3.0	18.1%	13.9%	33.8%	20.9%	13.2%	287

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)
Disability Status*		4.2	35.7%	49.7%	12.3%	1.8%	0.4%	2,972
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	37.3%	46.8%	13.0%	1.8%	1.2%	2,500
Disability	2004	4.1	29.0%	55.2%	13.8%	0.7%	1.4%	145
	2010	4.1	37.5%	38.9%	18.1%	3.1%	2.4%	288

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)
Disability Status		3.2	13.7%	29.9%	30.6%	19.3%	6.6%	2,974
No disability	2004
	2010	3.2	15.2%	26.1%	32.4%	16.5%	9.9%	2,497
Disability	2004	3.3	21.2%	22.6%	32.2%	16.4%	7.5%	146
	2010	3.2	16.0%	23.3%	36.5%	15.3%	9.0%	288

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)
Disability Status		3.1	10.3%	23.0%	35.5%	24.0%	7.1%	2,978
No disability	2004
	2010	3.0	13.1%	19.9%	34.8%	20.9%	11.3%	2,481
Disability	2004	3.2	19.9%	17.8%	34.2%	20.5%	7.5%	146
	2010	3.1	15.0%	18.5%	36.7%	18.5%	11.2%	286

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)
Disability Status		3.8	23.8%	48.5%	18.1%	7.8%	1.8%	2,972
No disability	2004
	2010	3.7	19.0%	43.8%	27.8%	7.0%	2.3%	2,485
Disability	2004	3.7	22.1%	40.0%	25.5%	9.0%	3.4%	145
	2010	3.7	20.7%	43.5%	21.8%	9.8%	4.2%	285

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)
Disability Status		4.1	28.5%	53.1%	14.1%	3.7%	0.6%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	29.8%	46.0%	19.9%	3.4%	0.9%	2,494
Disability	2004	3.9	25.3%	52.1%	14.4%	6.2%	2.1%	146
	2010	3.9	32.3%	39.2%	21.5%	4.2%	2.8%	288

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)
Disability Status		3.7	19.2%	44.9%	23.0%	11.1%	1.8%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	24.0%	45.8%	23.1%	5.4%	1.7%	2,493
Disability	2004	3.5	18.5%	39.0%	26.7%	9.6%	6.2%	146
	2010	3.8	23.7%	44.6%	21.3%	7.0%	3.5%	287

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)
Disability Status*		3.3	6.0%	31.7%	52.4%	8.7%	1.2%	2,965
No disability	2004
	2010	3.6	13.7%	34.4%	46.1%	4.9%	0.9%	2,496
Disability	2004	3.2	6.9%	28.3%	47.6%	15.2%	2.1%	145
	2010	3.6	15.0%	34.8%	43.2%	5.2%	1.7%	287

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)
Disability Status		3.9	25.8%	50.3%	16.2%	6.5%	1.3%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	35.7%	43.3%	14.5%	4.6%	2.0%	2,502
Disability	2004	3.9	27.4%	44.5%	16.4%	9.6%	2.1%	146
	2010	4.0	34.8%	41.5%	16.0%	4.5%	3.1%	287

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)
Disability Status		3.0	9.3%	24.7%	27.9%	29.2%	8.8%	2,971
No disability	2004
	2010	3.1	13.7%	25.3%	25.4%	25.7%	9.9%	2,499
Disability	2004	3.0	16.4%	20.5%	24.0%	27.4%	11.6%	146
	2010	3.1	15.0%	24.7%	25.8%	25.1%	9.4%	287

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)
Disability Status		4.0	31.2%	48.2%	14.6%	4.8%	1.2%	2,972
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	32.8%	44.7%	16.6%	4.1%	1.8%	2,498
Disability	2004	3.9	27.6%	44.8%	17.2%	6.9%	3.4%	145
	2010	3.9	33.7%	38.5%	18.4%	6.9%	2.4%	288

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)
Disability Status		4.0	28.2%	49.9%	15.6%	5.2%	1.1%	2,974
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	31.8%	45.0%	17.2%	4.2%	1.8%	2,501
Disability	2004	3.9	28.8%	43.2%	17.1%	7.5%	3.4%	146
	2010	3.9	30.9%	39.9%	20.8%	4.5%	3.8%	288

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)
Disability Status*		3.8	26.1%	43.6%	17.8%	9.8%	2.7%	2,980
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	31.8%	38.5%	19.2%	6.8%	3.8%	2,501
Disability	2004	3.5	21.5%	34.7%	22.9%	14.6%	6.3%	144
	2010	3.8	31.3%	31.9%	25.3%	6.6%	4.9%	288

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)
Disability Status*		3.2	29.0%	62.8%	8.0%	0.3%	2,974
No disability	2004
	2010	3.4	44.8%	50.0%	4.9%	0.3%	2,429
Disability	2004	3.2	30.1%	55.5%	13.7%	0.7%	146
	2010	3.3	44.4%	46.9%	7.3%	1.4%	288

Faculty respect for minority students

Faculty respect for minority students		Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.2	28.7%	62.0%	8.6%	0.7%	2,977
No disability	2004
	2010	3.4	44.3%	50.6%	4.8%	0.3%	2,421
Disability	2004	3.2	30.8%	61.0%	7.5%	0.7%	146
	2010	3.4	43.4%	49.0%	6.9%	0.7%	288

Student respect for faculty

Student respect for faculty		Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.0	16.9%	66.3%	15.9%	0.9%	2,974
No disability	2004
	2010	3.1	29.0%	56.4%	13.9%	0.7%	2,420
Disability	2004	3.0	14.4%	67.8%	16.4%	1.4%	146
	2010	3.0	26.8%	53.0%	18.1%	2.1%	287

Student respect for minority faculty

Student respect for minority faculty		Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Disability Status*		2.9	16.1%	59.7%	20.6%	3.6%	2,972
No disability	2004
	2010	3.0	26.8%	52.8%	18.1%	2.4%	2,415
Disability	2004	2.9	16.4%	64.4%	14.4%	4.8%	146
	2010	3.0	26.4%	47.9%	22.2%	3.5%	288

Faculty respect for female students

Faculty respect for female students		Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.2	26.2%	65.4%	7.9%	0.4%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	3.4	45.0%	49.9%	5.0%	0.1%	2,421
Disability	2004	3.2	29.9%	59.7%	9.0%	1.4%	144
	2010	3.3	43.6%	43.6%	12.2%	0.7%	287

Student respect for female faculty

Student respect for female faculty		Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Disability Status*		3.1	23.1%	66.8%	9.5%	0.6%	2,966
No disability	2004
	2010	3.2	32.5%	55.7%	11.2%	0.6%	2,421
Disability	2004	3.1	22.6%	64.4%	11.6%	1.4%	146
	2010	3.1	32.3%	50.3%	14.6%	2.8%	288

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)
Disability Status		3.0	23.1%	54.3%	18.3%	4.3%	2,963
No disability	2004
	2010	3.1	29.3%	55.5%	12.6%	2.6%	2,416
Disability	2004	2.9	24.7%	48.6%	23.3%	3.4%	146
	2010	3.1	30.1%	48.3%	18.5%	3.1%	286

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students		Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Disability Status*		2.6	13.5%	46.2%	30.8%	9.5%	2,956
No disability	2004
	2010	2.8	19.8%	46.2%	27.0%	7.1%	2,410
Disability	2004	2.5	13.8%	35.9%	39.3%	11.0%	145
	2010	2.8	25.3%	37.5%	26.7%	10.5%	285

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)
Disability Status*		4.2	34.1%	53.8%	10.2%	1.6%	0.3%	2,984
No disability	2004
	2010	4.3	40.9%	46.8%	10.7%	1.4%	0.2%	2,428
Disability	2004	4.1	38.2%	41.7%	16.7%	3.5%	.	144
	2010	4.3	44.3%	40.8%	13.5%	1.4%	.	289

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.8	16.9%	47.4%	31.3%	3.7%	0.7%	2,975
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	24.5%	45.3%	26.8%	3.1%	0.3%	2,424
Disability	2004	3.7	19.4%	36.8%	38.2%	5.6%	.	144
	2010	3.9	28.7%	37.6%	29.1%	4.3%	0.4%	282

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status*		4.1	26.1%	56.2%	16.0%	1.5%	0.2%	2,977
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	33.6%	49.4%	15.5%	1.3%	0.1%	2,426
Disability	2004	4.0	27.1%	49.3%	20.1%	3.5%	.	144
	2010	4.2	37.0%	43.3%	18.0%	1.7%	.	289

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.8	18.0%	52.4%	24.4%	4.8%	0.4%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	27.1%	49.2%	21.0%	2.5%	0.3%	2,420
Disability	2004	3.8	21.0%	46.9%	25.2%	5.6%	1.4%	143
	2010	3.9	30.7%	39.0%	24.7%	5.6%	.	287

NCSU Supportiveness: White students

NCSU Supportiveness: White students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status		4.1	37.4%	44.7%	13.1%	3.5%	1.2%	2,983
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	43.1%	35.1%	16.7%	3.6%	1.4%	2,427
Disability	2004	3.8	33.8%	34.5%	19.3%	5.5%	6.9%	145
	2010	4.0	39.4%	30.0%	21.6%	6.6%	2.4%	287

NCSU Supportiveness: International students

NCSU Supportiveness: International students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status*		4.1	28.2%	56.4%	13.4%	1.6%	0.4%	2,977
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	38.0%	48.7%	12.4%	1.0%	0.0%	2,420
Disability	2004	4.0	30.8%	45.5%	21.7%	2.1%	.	143
	2010	4.2	39.9%	44.1%	13.9%	2.1%	.	288

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status		4.1	27.0%	58.6%	12.7%	1.5%	0.2%	2,980
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	37.7%	49.8%	11.9%	0.6%	0.0%	2,424
Disability	2004	4.0	27.8%	51.4%	17.4%	2.8%	0.7%	144
	2010	4.2	35.1%	45.8%	18.4%	0.7%	.	288

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status		4.1	31.2%	51.3%	14.5%	2.4%	0.6%	2,980
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	37.6%	40.7%	18.2%	2.4%	1.0%	2,428
Disability	2004	4.0	36.1%	39.6%	16.0%	7.6%	0.7%	144
	2010	4.0	37.2%	36.1%	21.9%	3.8%	1.0%	288

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)
Disability Status*		3.5	13.0%	37.8%	37.4%	9.5%	2.3%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	25.1%	41.5%	25.1%	6.9%	1.3%	2,421
Disability	2004	3.4	14.6%	30.6%	37.5%	14.6%	2.8%	144
	2010	3.7	24.4%	33.8%	31.4%	8.0%	2.4%	287

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)
Disability Status		4.0	29.8%	49.3%	16.9%	3.4%	0.6%	2,981
No disability	2004
	2010	4.2	44.6%	38.6%	14.8%	1.5%	0.6%	2,424
Disability	2004	4.1	34.3%	42.7%	18.2%	4.2%	0.7%	143
	2010	4.2	44.8%	35.1%	15.6%	3.5%	1.0%	288

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students		Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Disability Status		3.8	16.5%	54.4%	23.9%	4.8%	0.4%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	3.9	23.8%	46.4%	25.7%	3.5%	0.6%	2,418
Disability	2004	3.7	15.3%	50.0%	25.0%	8.3%	1.4%	144
	2010	3.7	22.5%	40.7%	25.6%	9.1%	2.1%	285

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)
Disability Status*		3.7	15.7%	48.9%	26.4%	7.4%	1.5%	2,973
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	29.4%	46.9%	20.1%	2.9%	0.7%	2,418
Disability	2004	3.6	16.8%	39.2%	30.1%	11.9%	2.1%	143
	2010	3.9	26.1%	45.3%	20.6%	5.9%	2.1%	287

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)
Disability Status		3.8	17.2%	56.1%	21.2%	4.5%	0.9%	2,970
No disability	2004
	2010	4.0	29.7%	46.9%	19.9%	2.9%	0.6%	2,416
Disability	2004	3.8	17.5%	53.1%	21.0%	6.3%	2.1%	143
	2010	3.9	26.1%	46.0%	23.0%	3.1%	1.7%	287

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)
Disability Status		4.0	29.1%	49.3%	18.8%	2.4%	0.4%	2,976
No disability	2004
	2010	4.1	37.6%	41.2%	17.7%	2.6%	0.9%	2,417
Disability	2004	4.0	31.9%	43.8%	19.4%	3.5%	1.4%	144
	2010	4.0	37.6%	35.2%	21.3%	4.2%	1.7%	287

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)
Disability Status		3.6	11.7%	43.1%	38.2%	6.0%	1.0%	2,971
No disability	2004
	2010	3.8	21.4%	41.9%	31.3%	4.9%	0.6%	2,417
Disability	2004	3.4	13.4%	31.0%	41.5%	11.3%	2.8%	142
	2010	3.7	19.5%	38.7%	30.7%	9.8%	1.4%	287

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)
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 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)
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 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)
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 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)
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: 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)
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: 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)
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: 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)
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: 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)
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-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)
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: 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)
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: 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)
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 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)
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 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)
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 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)
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: 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)
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: 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)
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: 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)
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: 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)
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 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)
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

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