North Carolina State University
Campus Climate Survey Trends (Undergraduate)

Tables of Results
First Year College

The NC State University Campus Climate Survey was conducted in two years: 2004 and 2010. This page shows trends in survey responses for items included in both survey waves, for students enrolled in the First Year College.

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

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

Section A: Your NC State Experience

Overall experience at NC State

Overall experience at NC State	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year	3.2	34.9%	52.4%	10.8%	1.8%	166
2004
2010	3.2	37.0%	51.1%	9.8%	2.2%	184

Feel like you have a good support network ¹

Feel like you have a good support network	Mean	1: Never	2: Seldom	3: Occasionally	4: Often	5: Always	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	1.8%	5.4%	22.9%	42.2%	27.7%	166
2004
2010	3.5	7.1%	10.3%	21.2%	44.6%	16.8%	184

Feel physically threatened ¹

Feel physically threatened	Mean	1: Never	2: Seldom	3: Occasionally	4: Often	5: Always	Total (N)
Year	1.4	68.1%	25.3%	5.4%	0.6%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	1.3	75.4%	19.1%	3.8%	.	1.6%	183

Comfort: Living in a campus residence hall ²

Comfort: Living in a campus residence hall	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.0	33.7%	47.0%	6.6%	9.6%	3.0%	166
2004
2010	4.1	38.0%	42.9%	9.8%	4.9%	4.3%	163

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

Comfort: Attending events/hanging out at Talley Student Center	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.0	32.5%	45.2%	16.3%	5.4%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	4.0	29.7%	50.0%	15.1%	3.5%	1.7%	172

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

Comfort: Attending events/hanging out at Witherspoon Center	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	25.9%	40.4%	26.5%	6.6%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	4.1	37.5%	43.4%	13.8%	3.9%	1.3%	152

Comfort: Participating in a research project with faculty ²

Comfort: Participating in research project with faculty	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	16.4%	54.5%	22.4%	6.7%	.	165
2004
2010	3.6	21.6%	35.2%	30.7%	5.7%	6.8%	88

Comfort: Meeting with academic advisor ²

Comfort: Meeting with academic advisor	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year*	4.4	50.3%	42.4%	4.8%	2.4%	.	165
2004
2010	4.4	57.9%	32.2%	4.4%	1.1%	4.4%	183

Comfort: Participating in student organizations ²

Comfort: Participating in student organizations	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.1	25.8%	57.1%	14.7%	2.5%	.	163
2004
2010	4.0	26.7%	52.1%	17.1%	2.1%	2.1%	146

Comfort: Interacting with college/department support staff ²

Comfort: Interacting with college/department support staff	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year	4.0	21.2%	60.6%	14.5%	3.6%	.	165
2004
2010	3.8	21.1%	48.0%	24.4%	4.9%	1.6%	123

Comfort: Interacting with top level administrators ²

Comfort: Interacting with top level administrators	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year*	3.4	8.5%	44.8%	27.3%	17.6%	1.8%	165
2004
2010	3.6	20.2%	40.4%	27.0%	6.7%	5.6%	89

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

Comfort: Interacting with faculty during office hrs/outside classroom	Mean	5: Very comfortable	4: Comfortable	3: Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable	2: Uncomfortable	1: Very uncomfortable	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	20.6%	66.1%	7.3%	6.1%	.	165
2004
2010	3.8	24.7%	46.9%	19.8%	4.9%	3.7%	162

Working hard leads to desired grade ⁴

Working hard leads to desired grade	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	24.1%	61.4%	7.8%	6.6%	.	166
2004
2010	3.8	19.9%	52.6%	15.8%	9.9%	1.8%	171

Ignored in class when attempting to participate ⁴

Ignored in class when attempting to participate	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	2.1	.	4.2%	15.8%	66.1%	13.9%	165
2004
2010	2.2	1.8%	4.7%	19.3%	59.6%	14.6%	171

Comments taken seriously by instructor ⁴

Comments taken seriously by instructor	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.0	19.4%	67.3%	12.1%	1.2%	.	165
2004
2010	4.0	20.7%	60.4%	15.4%	2.4%	1.2%	169

Ignored by classmates/given trivial jobs during group work ⁴

Ignored by classmates/given trivial jobs during group work	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	2.1	0.6%	6.6%	12.7%	60.2%	19.9%	166
2004
2010	2.1	1.8%	5.8%	16.4%	55.6%	20.5%	171

Instructors recognize importance of ideas ⁴

Instructors recognize importance of ideas	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.7	9.6%	54.8%	33.1%	1.8%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	3.7	14.0%	50.3%	31.6%	2.9%	1.2%	171

Singled out to speak on behalf of specific group ⁴

Singled out to speak on behalf of specific group	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	2.5	3.6%	13.3%	27.1%	41.0%	15.1%	166
2004
2010	2.1	4.7%	7.6%	16.3%	37.8%	33.7%	172

Professors communicate welcomeness in course ⁴

Professors communicate welcomeness in course	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.1	24.2%	61.2%	12.7%	1.8%	.	165
2004
2010	4.0	30.6%	49.4%	13.5%	5.9%	0.6%	170

Comfortable among students in courses ^{4 5}

Comfortable among students in courses	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.0	20.5%	63.9%	12.7%	3.0%	.	166
2004
2010	4.0	22.7%	60.5%	12.8%	3.5%	0.6%	172

Back to Top

Section B: Interacting with Others

Interact with students from different race/ethnicity ⁶

Interact with students from different race/ethnicity	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	35.2%	31.5%	26.7%	6.7%	.	165
2004
2010	4.2	48.8%	30.2%	15.4%	4.9%	0.6%	162

Interact with students who have a disability ⁶

Interact with students who have a disability	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year*	2.5	1.3%	8.3%	37.8%	39.7%	12.8%	156
2004
2010	2.7	8.4%	11.2%	33.6%	33.6%	13.3%	143

Interact with students with different religious belief ⁶

Interact with students with different religious belief	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	3.9	34.2%	34.8%	23.9%	5.8%	1.3%	155
2004
2010	4.1	42.2%	35.7%	15.6%	5.8%	0.6%	154

Interact with students with different sexual orientation ⁶

Interact with students with different sexual orientation	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year*	2.7	6.3%	16.2%	34.5%	28.2%	14.8%	142
2004
2010	3.5	25.0%	25.0%	31.4%	9.3%	9.3%	140

Interact with students from different social/economic background ⁶

Interact with students from different social/economic background	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	4.1	35.7%	43.9%	16.6%	3.8%	.	157
2004
2010	4.2	43.7%	37.7%	12.6%	5.3%	0.7%	151

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

Socialized with student of different race/ethnicity than own within past year	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	4.0	38.8%	28.5%	26.7%	5.5%	0.6%	165
2004
2010	4.1	42.9%	34.2%	18.0%	3.7%	1.2%	161

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

Worked in class with student of different race/ethnicity within past year	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	3.8	32.1%	32.7%	24.8%	6.1%	4.2%	165
2004
2010	3.7	33.1%	28.8%	23.9%	6.7%	7.4%	163

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

Worked outside class with student of different race/ethnicity within past year	Mean	5: Very often	4: Often	3: Sometimes	2: Seldom	1: Never	Total (N)
Year	3.2	22.4%	17.6%	31.5%	13.9%	14.5%	165
2004
2010	3.3	25.5%	22.4%	24.2%	14.3%	13.7%	161

Number of classes taught by instructor of different race/ethnicity

Number of classes taught by instructor of different race/ethnicity	None	A few	Some	Most	All	Total (N)
Year*	7.8%	51.8%	23.5%	13.3%	3.6%	166
2004
2010	23.8%	34.1%	16.5%	12.2%	13.4%	164

Number of roommates of different race/ethnicity

Number of roommates of different race/ethnicity	Never had a roommate	Never	Once	Twice	Three or more times	Total (N)
Year	5.5%	56.4%	32.7%	4.2%	1.2%	165
2004
2010	3.7%	63.4%	27.4%	3.7%	1.8%	164

Back to Top

Section C: Multicultural Activities on Campus

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course

Have taken: Ethnic Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year	16.6%	83.4%	163
2004
2010	11.2%	88.8%	161

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	1: Very negative	Total (N)
Year	4.1	40.7%	40.7%	14.8%	3.7%	27
2004
2010	4.1	37.5%	37.5%	25.0%	.	16

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course

Have taken: Women's/Gender Studies course	Yes	No	Total (N)
Year	5.7%	94.3%	158
2004
2010	6.8%	93.2%	161

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	Total (N)
Year	4.4	44.4%	55.6%	.	.	9
2004
2010	3.6	20.0%	30.0%	40.0%	10.0%	10

Number of classes with diversity issues clearly integrated

Number of classes with diversity issues clearly integrated	None	A few	Some	Most	Total (N)
Year*	29.7%	53.9%	12.7%	3.6%	165
2004
2010	44.7%	36.0%	14.3%	5.0%	161

Impact of courses on thinking about/understanding of diversity

Impact of courses on thinking about/understanding of diversity	Mean	5: Very positive impact	4: Positive impact	3: Neither positive nor negative impact	2: Negative impact	1: Very negative impact	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	19.0%	42.2%	37.1%	0.9%	0.9%	116
2004
2010	3.8	10.2%	61.4%	25.0%	3.4%	.	88

Participation in diversity/multicultural events

Participation in diversity/multicultural events	Never	Once	Two or three times	Four or more times	Total (N)
Year	61.8%	13.3%	17.6%	7.3%	165
2004
2010	53.2%	15.8%	20.3%	10.8%	158

Reasons for not participating: Not aware ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not aware	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	67.5%	32.5%	166
2004
2010	67.9%	32.1%	84

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

Reasons for not participating: Event has nothing to do with me	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	34.9%	65.1%	166
2004
2010	38.1%	61.9%	84

Reasons for not participating: Not enough time ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not enough time	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	61.4%	38.6%	166
2004
2010	52.4%	47.6%	84

Reasons for not participating: Not convenient for schedule ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Not convenient for schedule	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	62.7%	37.3%	166
2004
2010	57.1%	42.9%	84

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uncomfortable	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	21.7%	78.3%	166
2004
2010	19.0%	81.0%	84

Reasons for not participating: Friends do not participate ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Friends do not participate	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	30.7%	69.3%	166
2004
2010	31.0%	69.0%	84

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Uninteresting topic	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year*	44.0%	56.0%	166
2004
2010	29.8%	70.2%	84

Reasons for not participating: Location ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Location	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year*	16.3%	83.7%	166
2004
2010	6.0%	94.0%	84

Reasons for not participating: Cost ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Cost	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	20.5%	79.5%	166
2004
2010	16.7%	83.3%	84

Reasons for not participating: Other ⁷

Reasons for not participating: Other	Yes, a reason	No, not a reason	Total (N)
Year	6.0%	94.0%	166
2004
2010	2.4%	97.6%	84

Back to Top

Section D: The Role of Diversity in Higher Education

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

NCSU provides environment for free expression of ideas/opinions/beliefs	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	21.8%	61.2%	12.1%	4.8%	.	165
2004
2010	4.2	36.6%	48.4%	9.8%	3.9%	1.3%	153

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

NCSU is good place to learn about multicultural issues/perspectives	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	3.6	7.9%	55.8%	28.5%	7.3%	0.6%	165
2004
2010	3.9	28.6%	46.8%	18.2%	3.9%	2.6%	154

NCSU places too much emphasis on diversity ⁸

NCSU places too much emphasis on diversity	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.0	10.9%	18.2%	35.8%	26.7%	8.5%	165
2004
2010	3.1	19.5%	18.2%	27.3%	24.7%	10.4%	154

Diversity is good for NCSU ⁸

Diversity is good for NCSU	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.3	46.1%	40.0%	12.7%	0.6%	0.6%	165
2004
2010	4.1	36.4%	42.9%	17.5%	1.3%	1.9%	154

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

Efforts to increase diversity lead to admission of less qualified students	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	3.0	10.3%	25.5%	35.2%	16.4%	12.7%	165
2004
2010	3.4	20.9%	20.9%	39.9%	11.8%	6.5%	153

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

Efforts to increase diversity lead to less qualified faculty/staff/admin	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	2.8	7.3%	18.3%	35.4%	25.0%	14.0%	164
2004
2010	3.2	15.8%	20.4%	40.8%	15.1%	7.9%	152

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

Enhancing ability to partic in multicultural society should be part of university mission	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.9	26.1%	44.8%	24.8%	3.0%	1.2%	165
2004
2010	3.7	17.5%	48.1%	26.0%	7.1%	1.3%	154

Fostering intellectual diversity should be goal of NCSU ⁸

Fostering intellectual diversity should be goal of NCSU	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.0	27.9%	52.7%	16.4%	1.8%	1.2%	165
2004
2010	3.9	22.9%	47.1%	27.5%	2.6%	.	153

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

Building diverse/inclusive community should be key goal of NCSU	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.8	21.2%	49.1%	20.6%	7.9%	1.2%	165
2004
2010	3.9	22.1%	50.6%	24.0%	1.3%	1.9%	154

Easy to find diversity info on NCSU website ⁸

Easy to find diversity info on NCSU website	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	3.4	5.5%	35.2%	49.7%	9.7%	.	165
2004
2010	3.7	16.9%	40.3%	39.6%	0.6%	2.6%	154

Learning about different cultures is important part of college education ⁸

Learning about different cultures is important part of college education	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	24.4%	57.3%	13.4%	4.9%	.	164
2004
2010	4.2	38.3%	45.5%	14.3%	1.3%	0.6%	154

Including diversity in curriculum detracts from more important knowledge ⁸

Including diversity in curriculum detracts from more important knowledge	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year*	3.0	10.4%	25.0%	27.4%	30.5%	6.7%	164
2004
2010	3.3	23.4%	21.4%	26.0%	23.4%	5.8%	154

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

Developing respect for diversity will better enable me to work in chosen field	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.1	32.9%	49.4%	12.8%	4.9%	.	164
2004
2010	4.1	34.4%	48.1%	14.9%	1.3%	1.3%	154

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

Developing respect for diversity will better enable me live in my community	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	4.1	28.7%	54.9%	11.6%	4.9%	.	164
2004
2010	4.1	35.7%	48.1%	13.0%	1.9%	1.3%	154

Interaction with different people is essential part of college education ⁸

Interaction with different people is essential part of college education	Mean	5: Strongly agree	4: Agree	3: Neither agree nor disagree	2: Disagree	1: Strongly disagree	Total (N)
Year	3.9	25.0%	46.3%	20.7%	5.5%	2.4%	164
2004
2010	4.0	37.7%	33.8%	21.4%	3.9%	3.2%	154

Back to Top

Section E: Campus Climate

Faculty respect for students in general

Faculty respect for students in general	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.2	23.6%	70.3%	5.5%	0.6%	165
2004
2010	3.4	48.0%	47.3%	4.7%	.	148

Faculty respect for minority students

Faculty respect for minority students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	3.1	24.8%	64.2%	10.9%	.	165
2004
2010	3.4	46.3%	46.9%	6.1%	0.7%	147

Student respect for faculty

Student respect for faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	Total (N)
Year*	3.0	14.6%	72.0%	13.4%	164
2004
2010	3.2	34.0%	55.8%	10.2%	147

Student respect for minority faculty

Student respect for minority faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	2.9	12.1%	69.7%	15.2%	3.0%	165
2004
2010	3.2	36.1%	51.0%	12.2%	0.7%	147

Faculty respect for female students

Faculty respect for female students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	Total (N)
Year*	3.1	21.2%	70.3%	8.5%	165
2004
2010	3.4	45.3%	51.4%	3.4%	148

Student respect for female faculty

Student respect for female faculty	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	Total (N)
Year*	3.1	18.2%	74.5%	7.3%	165
2004
2010	3.3	39.9%	52.7%	7.4%	148

Friendships between students of different racial/ethnic groups

Friendships between students of different racial/ethnic groups	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	2.9	17.7%	62.2%	15.2%	4.9%	164
2004
2010	3.3	37.2%	51.4%	10.8%	0.7%	148

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students

Friendships between heterosexual and GLBT students	Mean	4: Excellent	3: Good	2: Fair	1: Poor	Total (N)
Year*	2.5	8.5%	47.3%	32.1%	12.1%	165
2004
2010	3.0	27.7%	46.6%	19.6%	6.1%	148

NCSU Supportiveness: African American students

NCSU Supportiveness: African American students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.1	29.5%	53.6%	14.5%	2.4%	166
2004
2010	4.3	41.8%	47.9%	8.2%	2.1%	146

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students

NCSU Supportiveness: Native American/Alaska Native students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	16.9%	45.2%	33.7%	4.2%	166
2004
2010	4.1	35.4%	43.1%	18.8%	2.8%	144

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students

NCSU Supportiveness: Asian students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	21.7%	56.6%	20.5%	1.2%	166
2004
2010	4.2	38.4%	47.9%	13.0%	0.7%	146

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students

NCSU Supportiveness: Hispanic/Latino students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.8	17.6%	48.5%	26.7%	7.3%	165
2004
2010	4.1	36.6%	44.1%	16.6%	2.8%	145

NCSU Supportiveness: White students

NCSU Supportiveness: White students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.2	40.4%	45.2%	12.7%	1.8%	.	166
2004
2010	4.3	51.0%	36.1%	8.8%	2.0%	2.0%	147

NCSU Supportiveness: International students

NCSU Supportiveness: International students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.1	25.5%	59.4%	13.3%	1.8%	165
2004
2010	4.4	44.2%	46.9%	8.8%	.	147

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students

NCSU Supportiveness: Female students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	25.3%	57.2%	15.1%	1.8%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	4.3	41.5%	48.3%	10.2%	.	.	147

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students

NCSU Supportiveness: Male students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year	4.1	27.9%	55.8%	14.5%	0.6%	1.2%	165
2004
2010	4.2	42.9%	41.5%	13.6%	1.4%	0.7%	147

NCSU Supportiveness: Gay, lesbian and bisexual students

NCSU Supportiveness: Gay, lesbian and bisexual students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.5	9.0%	39.8%	41.6%	8.4%	1.2%	166
2004
2010	4.0	32.4%	40.0%	21.4%	4.1%	2.1%	145

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

NCSU Supportiveness: Christian students

NCSU Supportiveness: Christian students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.1	34.8%	45.7%	17.1%	0.6%	1.8%	164
2004
2010	4.4	51.7%	38.1%	7.5%	1.4%	1.4%	147

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students

NCSU Supportiveness: Nontraditional students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	12.7%	51.8%	33.1%	1.8%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	4.1	32.9%	44.5%	19.2%	3.4%	.	146

NCSU Supportiveness: Poor/working class students

NCSU Supportiveness: Poor/working class students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.7	15.2%	52.1%	23.6%	8.5%	0.6%	165
2004
2010	4.1	33.6%	48.6%	14.4%	2.7%	0.7%	146

NCSU Supportiveness: Middle class students

NCSU Supportiveness: Middle class students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.9	18.2%	55.2%	23.0%	3.6%	.	165
2004
2010	4.1	34.7%	49.7%	12.2%	2.7%	0.7%	147

NCSU Supportiveness: Upper class/wealthy students

NCSU Supportiveness: Upper class/wealthy students	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	1: Strongly nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	4.0	29.5%	45.8%	22.9%	1.8%	.	166
2004
2010	4.3	45.2%	41.1%	11.6%	1.4%	0.7%	146

NCSU Supportiveness: Students with children

NCSU Supportiveness: Students with children	Mean	5: Strongly supportive	4: Supportive	3: Neutral	2: Nonsupportive	Total (N)
Year*	3.6	10.2%	41.0%	45.8%	3.0%	166
2004
2010	4.0	29.0%	46.9%	22.1%	2.1%	145

Back to Top

Section F: Shaping Attitudes about Diversity

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

Influence on thinking about diversity: Interaction with students in class	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year	3.8	13.9%	58.2%	23.6%	3.0%	1.2%	165
2004
2010	4.0	25.0%	47.1%	26.4%	0.7%	0.7%	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	18.2%	51.5%	24.8%	4.8%	0.6%	165
2004
2010	3.9	23.6%	49.3%	23.6%	0.7%	2.9%	140

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	8.4%	56.0%	31.9%	3.6%	.	166
2004
2010	3.8	19.4%	48.2%	30.9%	0.7%	0.7%	139

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*	3.5	5.4%	36.7%	56.0%	1.8%	.	166
2004
2010	3.8	20.8%	41.7%	36.7%	.	0.8%	120

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	6.7%	41.8%	47.9%	3.6%	.	165
2004
2010	3.8	18.2%	43.8%	35.0%	2.2%	0.7%	137

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	27.7%	52.4%	18.7%	0.6%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	4.1	31.7%	49.6%	18.7%	.	.	139

Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls ⁹

Influence on thinking about diversity: Living in residence halls	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year	3.7	18.8%	41.2%	32.7%	6.1%	1.2%	165
2004
2010	3.9	23.5%	43.9%	28.0%	3.8%	0.8%	132

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	10.9%	41.8%	47.3%	.	.	165
2004
2010	3.9	23.3%	48.8%	25.6%	0.8%	1.6%	129

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

Influence on thinking about diversity: Campus-wide activities/events	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year*	3.5	6.7%	43.9%	47.0%	2.4%	.	164
2004
2010	3.9	19.4%	51.5%	27.6%	0.7%	0.7%	134

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	Total (N)
Year*	3.6	6.7%	47.2%	43.6%	2.5%	163
2004
2010	3.8	18.0%	46.6%	33.8%	1.5%	133

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	3.9	23.5%	52.4%	15.7%	7.8%	0.6%	166
2004
2010	3.9	25.4%	45.8%	21.1%	5.6%	2.1%	142

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	Total (N)
Year	3.8	13.3%	53.0%	32.5%	1.2%	166
2004
2010	3.9	23.4%	43.4%	32.4%	0.7%	145

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	18.1%	42.2%	39.8%	.	.	166
2004
2010	3.9	24.8%	41.4%	31.7%	0.7%	1.4%	145

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language

Influence of NCSU: Likelihood of notifying others about offensive language	Mean	5: Very positive influence	4: Positive influence	3: Neither positive nor negative influence	2: Negative influence	1: Very negative influence	Total (N)
Year	3.7	15.1%	40.4%	42.8%	1.8%	.	166
2004
2010	3.7	20.0%	37.9%	38.6%	2.8%	0.7%	145

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	Total (N)
Year	3.8	16.3%	52.4%	29.5%	1.8%	166
2004
2010	3.9	24.3%	43.1%	31.3%	1.4%	144

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	14.5%	56.0%	28.3%	1.2%	.	166
2004
2010	4.0	24.1%	50.3%	24.8%	.	0.7%	145

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	Total (N)
Year	3.9	17.1%	55.5%	26.8%	0.6%	164
2004
2010	3.9	23.6%	47.9%	27.8%	0.7%	144

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	Total (N)
Year	3.8	16.4%	55.2%	25.5%	3.0%	165
2004
2010	4.0	24.3%	47.2%	27.8%	0.7%	144

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	12.0%	41.6%	44.6%	1.8%	.	166
2004
2010	3.8	21.5%	43.1%	30.6%	2.1%	2.8%	144

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