2018 student climate assessment survey...

2018 STUDENT CLIMATE ASSESSMENT SURVEY REPORT J o s e p h L u d l u m , A s s i s t a n t D i r e c t o r

May 2019

G T C l i m a t e A s s e s s m e n t S u r v e y R e p o r t Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . i Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Survey Methodology and Quality Assurance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Data Limitations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Structure of this Report . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Differences by Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 Differences by Race/Ethnicity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Differences by Sexual Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Marginalization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Disparaging Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 Changes 2013-2018 . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 Disparaging Comments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Appendix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 Students

G e o r g i a T e c h O f f i c e o f A c a d e m i c E f f e c t i v e n e s s

Acknowledgements The Georgia Tech Climate Assessment Survey report was prepared by the Office of Academic Effectiveness in collaboration with Archie W. Ervin, vice president of Institute Diversity, with support and assistance from Keona Lewis, and Julie Ancis, both of Institute Diversity. The author would like to express appreciation to Shawn Carnley and Sue Woolard for their assistance with research support and design services. A very special thanks to Mary Frank Fox, professor of Public Policy and ADVANCE professor, for her assistance with reviewing and revising the Climate Assessment Survey’s basic questions and research issues explored in this project. The 2018 Climate Assessment Survey replicated the Climate Assessment Survey that was created and conducted in 2013. In Spring 2012, Provost Rafael L. Bras charged a Climate Assessment Task Force (CATF) to develop a survey to help define, measure, and assess Georgia Tech’s progress toward the goals articulated in its Strategic Plan:

We aspire to be an Institute that pursues excellence and embraces and leverages diversity in all of its forms. In the years ahead, we must continue to enhance a culture of collegiality, close collaboration, global perspective, intercultural sensitivity and respect, and thoughtful interaction among a community of scholars that includes all of our students, faculty, and staff...

(Georgia Institute of Technology, 2010, p. 5) The CATF was chaired by Ervin and co-chaired by Jonathan Gordon, director of the Office of Assessment (OOA). The task force was comprised of faculty, staff, and students and was tasked with developing a survey instrument that would assess the lived experiences, perceptions, and knowledge of faculty, staff, and students with respect to the following issue areas:

• a culture of collegiality

• close collaboration

• global perspective

• intercultural sensitivity and respect

• thoughtful interaction among a diverse community of scholars that includes all of our students, faculty, staff…

The 2018 survey questions were reviewed and revised for purposes of clarifying questions and survey question format in order to ensure compliance with the University System of Georgia’s (USG) Alternative Media Access Center (AMAC) accessibility requirements. Through a consultative and iterative process, the 2013 survey questions were reviewed by a small group that consisted of Ervin, Joe Ludlum, Ancis, and Lewis, with technical advisement from Fox. The content of the 2013 survey questions was not modified in order to analyze changes in survey responses from 2013 to 2018, which allows tracking of responses over time. The 2018 survey was administered to faculty and staff in November 2018. In separate sections, this report presents summary findings of the faculty survey, along with detailed appendices containing means and frequencies for colleges and various subgroups of respondents. These results serve as a baseline against which we may measure institutional progress in subsequent years.

1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Georgia Tech student body was invited to participate in the student survey. This section summarizes the results of the respondents. Of the 22,831 students contacted, a total of 2,724 completed the survey for an overall response rate of 11.9 percent. Among the highlights:

• Large majorities of responding students view the overall climate of GT positively. Over 80 percent of graduate and undergraduate respondents agreed that GT is a generally comfortable and inclusive environment, and over 85 percent that their academic aspirations are supported by GT. Among respondents, 79 percent of undergraduates and 86 percent of graduates agreed that they feel valued and respected by the GT community.

Differences in the perception of the GT climate among responding men and women are relatively small: over 80 percent of both genders agree that GT is a generally comfortable and inclusive environment. Among undergraduates, women were generally more likely to agree that students at GT were respected regardless of personal characteristics, with the exception of gender and gender identity: 73.3 percent compared to 82.8 percent of men.

Among responding Underrepresented Minority (URM) undergraduates, 78 percent agreed that GT is a generally comfortable and inclusive environment (compared to 86 percent of non-URM respondents). For graduate students, the differences were starker: 77.9 percent of URM respondents agreed versus 91.8 percent of non-URM respondents.

• A large majority of respondents agree that GT is supportive of diversity and inclusion goals: over 85 percent of undergraduate and 90 percent of graduate respondents agree that commitment to diversity is demonstrated by GT.

Among both graduate and undergraduate respondents, women felt diversity is integral to GT’s ability to fulfill its mission was more true than men (93.2 versus 81.4 percent).

Similarly, differences in attitudes arose by ethnicity, with undergraduate URM respondents less likely to agree that GT effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds (75.7 percent) than their non-URM cohorts (86 percent).

• While supportive of diversity, students did not indicate participating in intercultural activities to the same degree. Less than one in five students indicated often participating in student-focused cultural organizations, attending cultural celebrations and holidays, or arts and entertainment.

• Student perceptions and opinions have shifted. Compared to the respondents from 2013, students felt there was less respect based on various characteristics and reported overall less participation in activities outside of your own culture as well as comfort in discussing issues of diversity. Students also felt that language and culture were less of a barrier for interaction between U.S. and international students, and reported lower instances of disparaging remarks in the past year, with a few exceptions.

2

SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND QUALITY ASSURANCE All enrolled students were invited by email to complete the GT Climate Survey in February 2018. Two reminders were sent to increase response rates. Of the 22,831 students who were contacted, a total of 2,724 completed the survey for an overall response rate of 11.9 percent, and a sampling error (95% confidence interval) of 1.8%. Chi Square Goodness of Fit Tests (p < .01) revealed that the respondents were representative of the overall population based on ethnicity, race, and college, but not representative based on gender or citizenship. Measures of effect size on citizenship were relatively small, thus potential bias for this factor in the overall results is minimal. The Institute results in this report are weighted by gender, ethnicity and race, college, and student level to portray the population more accurately.1 Table 1. Student demographics

Respondent Frequency

Valid Respondent Percent 2

Student Population Percent

Gender Men 1324 56.1% 64.0% Women 1007 42.7% 36.0% Transgender / Other 28 1.2% Not specified 364 n/a Ethnicity Hispanic or Latino/a 172 7.4% 7.8% Not Hispanic or Latino/a 2165 92.6% 88.4% Not specified 386 3.8% Race Asian or Asian American 829 35.4% 34.5% Black or African American 136 5.8% 6.9% White or European American 1203 51.4% 50.4% Other 127 5.4% 4.2% Not specified 381 4.1% Student type Undergraduate 1422 60.4% 70.0% Graduate 932 39.6% 30.0% Not specified 369 n/a Citizenship U.S. Citizen 1621 69.0% 73.8% Resident Alien 322 13.7% 4.2% Non-resident Alien 406 17.3% 22.1% Not specified 374 n/a College Design 109 4.6% 4.1% Computing 340 14.5% 15.2% Engineering 1386 59.0% 56.3% Ivan Allen College 114 4.9% 4.6% Scheller College of Business 136 5.8% 7.6% Sciences 263 11.2% 10.8% Not specified 375 1.4%

1 The weighting slightly “overcounts” groups with lower response rates and “undercounts” groups with higher response rates. The specific weighting scheme is available upon request from the Office of Academic Effectiveness. 2 Valid response excludes “not specified” respondents from the overall percentage calculation.

3

Data Limitations A significant proportion (about 13 percent) of respondents elected not to provide any demographic information, including sex, race/ethnicity, and student type (undergraduate/graduate). A close analysis of this group of refusals found that while those who did not provide demographics tended to report lower levels of satisfaction, these differences were slight, with significant differences on only four items. Only one item, “Campus social opportunities have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech,” had a non-marginal difference. While the differences are borderline trivial, the trend highlights a possible non-response bias in the data—that is, the possibility that survey non-responders might differ in their opinions and perceptions from those who chose to participate in the survey. Consequently, generalizing student responses to the overall GT population of students should be approached with some degree of caution. Structure of this Report The structure of this report generally follows the structure of the survey instrument, and results are separately presented for undergraduates and graduates. Respondents were asked to describe the overall climate at Georgia Tech and the degree to which they feel supported by the GT community. Additionally, students were asked their opinions on the value of diversity and the degree to which the Institute is committed to policies that support the principles of diversity and inclusion. Respondents were also asked to reflect on the ways in which they interact with those who are different from them—both in their study habits and in their co- and extracurricular activities. Students were then asked to reflect on whether or not they experienced instances of marginalization (defined as a sense of exclusion or feeling left out) and were also asked to describe the frequency in which they heard other students make disparaging remarks about various groups of people. Open-ended questions were included after each section of the survey in order for participants to further elaborate on the quantitative items. These results were analyzed separately. Several survey items utilized a four-point Likert scale. The specific response anchors are presented in Table 2. For the purposes of this report, the percentages of those who “agree” are derived from combining responses of 3 and 4 and those who “disagree” are derived from combining responses of 1 and 2. Table 2 Survey response anchors based on a four-point Likert scale

Rating Agreement 4* Strongly Agree

3* Somewhat Agree

2 Somewhat Disagree

1 Strongly Disagree

* Sufficient score for percentages rating an item as “agree.” In reporting differences between some groups (such as males and females), large sample sizes make very small differences show up as statistically significant. To address this issue, this report highlights effect size alongside statistical significance between values. Effect size is a measure of “practical significance,” that compares the differences (between groups) or associations (for likelihoods and predictions) against the variance or “noise” in the data.

4

Two measures of effect size are used in this report depending on the nature of the comparisons: Phi and Cramer’s v.3.3 This is interpreted in the same way as correlations, where .1 is considered a small effect, .3 a moderate effect, and .5 to be a large effect (Cohen, 1988, 1992). It should also be noted that for some comparisons—particularly those between races/ethnicities, sample sizes are relatively small. Small samples mean low statistical power, making it difficult to discern significant differences between groups even if they exist in reality.

RESULTS Students were asked about the overall climate at Georgia Tech (see Chart 1). Among responding undergraduate and graduate students, large majorities agreed that GT supports their academic aspirations and is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment. About four in five respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community. Meanwhile, 11.9 percent of responding graduate students and 17.2 percent of responding undergraduates have considered leaving GT because of concerns about collegiality. Chart 1. Student responses on overall climate at Georgia Tech (percent “strongly” or “somewhat agreed”)

Students were also asked about the degree to which classroom and social opportunities affected their sense of inclusion on campus. As seen in Chart 2, responding students were generally positive about the contribution classroom and co-curricular activities had on their sense of belonging. For example, nearly 80 percent of responding undergraduates agreed that GT clubs, organizations, and activities had a positive effect on their sense of belonging, and that GT offers an array of programs that meet my social and cultural needs. Over three-quarters of responding undergraduates, and over 80 percent of responding graduate students, agreed that classroom experiences have had a positive effect on their sense of belonging. However, there was less agreement—particularly among responding undergraduates—that adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at GT.

3.3 Both statistics measure the strength of association in Chi-square tests—the extent to which membership in one category (such as being male or female) can predict the responses in another set of categories (i.e., the answer to the question being asked on the survey).

17.2%

79.0%

84.2%

86.0%

11.9%

86.5%

89.3%

89.3%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because ofconcerns about collegiality

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Techcommunity

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusiveenvironment for me

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported atGeorgia Tech.

Graduate Undergraduate

percent

5

Chart 2. Student responses on their sense of belonging at Georgia Tech (percent “strongly” or “somewhat agreed”)

Students were asked about the value of diversity and inclusion as well as the degree to which GT demonstrates its commitment to these values. As seen in Chart 3, responding students were substantially in agreement regarding both the value of diversity and GT’s fulfillment of its goals. For example, roughly 90 percent of graduate and 85 percent of undergraduate and graduate respondent agreed that Diversity is integral to GT’s ability to fulfill its mission and GT demonstrates its commitment to diversity. Over 80 percent of respondents agreed that GT effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds, is open to new ideas and traditions, and feel that while at Tech they have learned about different worldviews. However, a number of respondents also felt that language and cultural differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at Georgia Tech. Chart 3. Student responses on the value of diversity and inclusion at Georgia Tech (percent “strongly” or “somewhat agreed”)

54.4%

78.7%

75.7%

85.7%

85.3%

78.8%

82.5%

86.0%

79.3%

84.1%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Adequate processes are in place to address studentgrievances at Georgia Tech

The campus reputation of my academic major has affectedmy sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

My classroom experiences have had a positive effect on mysense of belonging at Georgia Tech

Campus social opportunities have had a positive effect onmy sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events thatmeet my social and cultural needs


35.3%

37.5%

79.0%

83.7%

85.4%

85.4%

85.9%

38.7%

40.4%

86.5%

87.0%

85.7%

88.8%

90.4%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Cultural differences act as a barrier to interaction betweenU.S. and international students at Georgia Tech

Language differences act as a barrier to interactionbetween U.S. and international students at Georgia Tech

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diversebackgrounds

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about differentworldviews

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech

Diversity is integral to Georgia Tech’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission


percent

percent

6

Asked about their comfort level in discussing diversity related issues, undergraduate and graduate respondents provided similar answers. Both groups were largely quite comfortable discussing these issues with personal friends and classmates, but somewhat less comfortable having discussions with GT faculty, administrators, and staff. Results are presented in Chart 4. Chart 4. Student responses on comfort level in discussing issues at Georgia Tech (percent responding “very” or “somewhat comfortable”)

Students were asked to gauge the frequency in which they studied with diverse groups. As seen in Chart 3.5, responding undergraduate and graduate students most frequently studied on their own. However, about 60 percent stated they often or very often studied in groups with students of different races or ethnicities, or in mixed-gender groups. Slightly over half (58.5 percent) of responding graduate students, and 34.5 percent of undergraduates stated they frequently studied in groups with both U.S. and international peers. Chart 5. Student responses on frequency of studying with diverse groups at Georgia Tech (percent responding “often” or “very often”)

48.2%

52.0%

53.9%

67.2%

66.2%

95.9%

62.8%

64.1%

62.7%

70.7%

75.1%

93.2%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Administration

Staff

Instructors/Faculty

Members of my fraternity/sorority

Classmates

Personal friends at Georgia Tech


35.7%

34.5%

59.4%

62.9%

89.8%

17.3%

58.5%

61.0%

59.9%

82.8%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

In groups with students of different majors

In groups with U.S. and international students

In groups comprised of men and women

In groups with students of different races or ethnicities

On your own


percent

percent

7

Students were asked about the amount of time they spent engaged in various activities outside their own culture while at Georgia Tech. For responding undergraduates, less than a quarter indicated they frequently engaged in arts and entertainment and educational forums outside their culture. Engagement by students in cultural celebrations or holidays, student cultural clubs, and religious or spiritual activities was less common. Responding graduate students expressed similar patterns of engagement, although they were more likely to report attending educational forums outside their own culture. Chart 6. Student responses on participation in different types of intercultural engagement (percent responding “often” or “very often”)

Students were asked whether or not various groups on campus were respected by the Georgia Tech community. As can be seen in Table 3, most responding undergraduate and graduate students agreed that these groups were respected. Two groups where opinions were more mixed for both graduates and undergraduates were socioeconomic status, and most extremely for political affiliation and opinions. Table 3. Student responses on respect based on identity

Based on my experiences, I feel that students at Georgia Tech are respected regardless of their:

Undergraduate Respondents

(n ≈ 1,540)

Graduate Respondents

(n ≈ 730) (percent responding “somewhat” or “strongly agree”)

Age 85.3 79.2 Gender/gender identity 78.2 75.9 Veteran status or military involvement 86.3 86.5 Status as a school athlete 79.8 83.8 National origin 82.6 78.8 Individual disabilities 78.0 78.9 Race or ethnicity 81.6 78.4 Socioeconomic status 73.9 72.1 Sexual orientation 78.0 76.7 Fraternity or sorority affiliation 79.8 79.5 Religion 77.9 77.3 Political affiliation/opinions 64.0 69.3

5.0%

7.5%

12.0%

13.8%

22.7%

23.6%

7.1%

5.1%

15.3%

19.6%

18.4%

45.1%

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

Other

Religious and/or spiritual activities

Student focused cultural organizations

Cultural celebrations and holidays

Arts and entertainment

Educational forums (lectures, presentations)


percent

8

Differences by Gender Responses were compared on the basis of gender. Few significant differences emerged, and those that did evidenced very small effect sizes. Generally, for both responding undergraduates and graduate students, both genders had high levels of agreement regarding the climate at Georgia Tech. Women, both graduate and undergraduate, were more likely to agree about the importance of diversity to the GT mission. On the other hand, graduate student women were less likely (82.9 percent of responding women, versus 88.3 percent of men) to state that their classroom experiences have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech. Table 4. Student differences by gender

Undergraduates Graduates *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 Effect size: Small .1; Medium .3; Large .5

Men

(n ≈ 925) Women (n ≈ 585) Sig.

Eff. Size

Men (n ≈ 520)

Women (n ≈ 205) Sig.

Eff. Size

(percent responding “somewhat” or “strongly agree”)

My classroom experiences have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

76.4% 75.2% 88.3% 82.9%

Campus social opportunities have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

84.2% 88.7% * .064 79.3% 80.3%

The campus reputation of my academic major has affected my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

80.1% 77.8% 84.5% 78.6%

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me

85.9% 84.1% 91.0% 86.6%

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 80.1% 79.6% 88.4% 84.2%

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality

16.2% 17.1% 10.9% 13.1%

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 87.7% 84.3% 90.4% 87.5%


81.4% 93.2% *** .165 88.5% 95.5% ** .108

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech 86.5% 86.0% 90.2% 86.9%

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 83.5% 85.2% 88.3% 85.4%

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needs

84.7% 88.0% 84.6% 84.5%

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech

56.6% 53.1% 80.6% 76.3%

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 82.8% 89.6% 86.1% 85.6%

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 79.0% 80.9% 89.0% 82.9% * .083

9

Very few differences, and only among undergraduates, were noted for questions regarding the respect for various identities by the GT community. Where significant differences were found, the magnitude of these differences (as measured by effect size) was small. One notable difference: among undergraduate students, 60.9 percent of male respondents agreed that students were respected regardless of political affiliation or opinions, compared to 69 percent of responding women. The results are presented in Table 5. Table 5. Student differences in respect for identity by gender


Men

(n ≈ 920) Women (n ≈ 587) Sig.

Eff. Size

Men (n ≈ 510)

Women (n ≈ 205) Sig.

Eff. Size



Age 84.4% 86.3% 79.9% 76.6%

Gender/gender identity 82.8% 73.3% *** .113 77.1% 74.0%

Veteran status or military involvement 85.0% 88.3% 86.1% 87.2%

Status as a school athlete 79.7% 79.6% 83.5% 83.9%

National origin 81.5% 84.3% 79.5% 77.8%

Individual disabilities 78.8% 78.3% 80.3% 76.2%

Race or ethnicity 81.2% 83.4% 77.6% 80.6%

Socioeconomic status 74.8% 74.1% 70.8% 75.9%

Sexual orientation 79.5% 77.6% 76.0% 78.7%

Fraternity or sorority affiliation 78.1% 82.3% * .051 77.5% 83.9%

Religion 76.3% 80.6% * .051 76.8% 77.6%

Political affiliation/opinions 60.9% 69.0% ** .082 69.1% 70.8%

Differences by Race/Ethnicity Responses were also compared by race/ethnicity. Because there were low numbers of respondents in certain racial or ethnic groups, responses were combined to create two classifications: Underrepresented Minorities (URM) combined American Indian, Hispanic (regardless of race) and Black/African Americans, and multiracial. The non-URM group was comprised of Asian/Asian American, White/European Americans, and other. In contrast to gender, several differences were found for both graduate and undergraduate students, though these differences were still of limited magnitude, as expressed by effect size. URM respondents, particularly undergraduates, generally had less favorable views of the GT climate compared to Non-URM respondents. For example, URM respondents were slightly less likely to agree that GT effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds, and GT was a comfortable and inclusive environment, though both groups still report positively on these factors. For undergraduate students,

10

URM respondents were more likely to have considered leaving GT because of collegiality (23.3 percent for URM versus 15.5 percent for Non-URM). Among responding graduate students, language was a curious factor, with fewer URM students feeling that language differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students (32.4%, compared to 42.2 percent of their Non-URM student colleagues). Selected results are presented in Table 6. Table 6. Student differences by race/ethnicity


Not URM

(n ≈ 1,195) URM

(n ≈ 340) Sig. Eff. Size

Not URM

(n ≈ 600) URM




77.6% 69.3% ** .081 87.9% 77.5% ** .116


87.0% 81.3% ** .066 79.9% 76.7%


81.1% 70.5% *** .106 83.9% 75.8% * .083

Language differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at Georgia Tech

37.9% 36.2% 42.2% 32.4% * .077


86.0% 78.0% *** .092 91.8% 77.9% *** .170

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 80.0% 75.5% 87.7% 81.4%


15.5% 23.3% *** .086 12.2% 10.8%

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 87.4% 81.2% ** .075 89.9% 86.2%


86.5% 83.9% 91.0% 87.6%

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech 87.0% 80.0% ** .084 89.8% 84.3%

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 86.0% 75.7% *** .118 88.4% 81.0% * .085


87.4% 77.8% *** .113 86.5% 73.0% *** .142


54.7% 53.4% 80.9% 69.0% ** .110

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 86.1% 82.9% *** .094 88.0% 75.0% *** .142

Note: URM = Underrepresented Minorities.

11

Where many significant differences exist in response to questions about the respect for various identities by the GT community, the magnitude of these differences (as measured by effect size) were small. One notable difference was that while there was no difference for responding graduate students, among undergraduates 84.1 percent of non-URM respondents agreed that students were respected regardless of race or ethnicity, compared to 72.8 percent of URM respondents. The results are presented in Table 7.

Table 7. Student differences in respect for identity by Underrepresented Minority status


Not URM

(n ≈ 1,195) URM


Not URM

(n ≈ 590) URM




Age 86.3% 81.8% * .054 78.5% 82.1%

Gender/gender identity 78.3% 77.7% 75.3% 78.7% * .091


Status as a school athlete 80.1% 78.4% 82.5% 89.8% * .078

National origin 83.8% 78.5% * .057 77.2% 85.8% * .077

Individual disabilities 78.8% 75.0% 77.9% 83.4%

Race or ethnicity 84.1% 72.8% *** .122 78.3% 78.7%

Socioeconomic status 75.8% 67.0% ** .084 71.5% 75.0%

Sexual orientation 79.2% 73.9% * .051 74.4% 86.9% ** .115

Fraternity or sorority affiliation 79.4% 81.4% 77.7% 88.2% * .097

Religion 79.2% 73.4% * .057 76.8% 79.6%

Political affiliation/opinions 64.5% 62.1% 68.3% 73.7%

Note: URM = Underrepresented Minorities. Differences by Sexual Orientation Students were asked to categorize their sexual orientation—heterosexual, gay/lesbian, bisexual, or other. To facilitate statistical comparisons, respondents were grouped into two categories: heterosexual and LGBTQ (i.e., gay/lesbian, bisexual, or other). Statistically significant differences between the two groups were generally small to moderate, particularly for graduate respondents.

12

At both the undergraduate and graduate levels, both groups agree that diversity is integral to Georgia Tech’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission, but disagree as to what extent the climate supports this. At all levels, LGBTQ students were less likely than their heterosexual peers to agree that GT is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me, I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community, and that commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech. Similarly, they were more likely to have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality (27.4 percent for undergrads and 24.5 percent for grad respondents, compared to 15.2 percent and 10.6 percent of heterosexual respondents). Results are presented in Table 8. Table 8. Student differences by sexual orientation


Hetero-sexual

(n ≈ 1,270) LGBTQ (n ≈ 252) Sig.

Eff. Size

Hetero-sexual (n ≈ 655)

LGBTQ (n ≈ 72) Sig.

Eff. Size

(percent responding “somewhat” or “strongly agree”) My classroom experiences have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

76.2% 73.0% 87.7% 73.0% ** .121


86.8% 80.6% ** .066 80.2% 71.8%


80.1% 72.4% ** .072 83.5% 75.7%

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 86.5% 72.7% *** .140 91.5% 70.1% *** .212

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 80.9% 69.4% *** .106 88.9% 67.2% *** .197

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 15.2% 27.4% *** .120 10.6% 24.5% *** .132

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 87.7% 77.5% *** .110 90.3% 82.5%

Diversity is integral to Georgia Tech’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission 86.0% 86.2% 90.6% 88.4%


87.9% 73.4% *** .152 90.7% 70.7% *** .190

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 85.2% 77.0% ** .084 89.1% 69.0% *** .178


87.1% 77.0% *** .107 86.0% 67.7% *** .150


56.0% 47.8% * .061 80.8% 62.4% *** .132

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 85.0% 87.0% 86.8% 77.4% * .077

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 80.7% 72.1% 88.7% 68.4% *** .183

13

This sentiment is consistent to an extent with other items in the survey: among both undergraduates and graduate respondents, LGBTQ students were less likely than their heterosexual peers to agree that students are respected regardless of their gender / gender identity (Undergraduates: 81.1% heterosexuals agreed versus 62.9% LGBTQ; Graduates: 77.8% heterosexuals agreed versus 59.7% LGBTQ). A similar gap is seen in the response to respect accorded to other identities regarding sexual orientation, though not significantly so among graduate respondents. Results are presented in Table 9. Table 9. Student differences in respect for identity by sexual orientation


Hetero-sexual

(n ≈ 1,270) LGBTQ (n ≈ 252) Sig.

Eff. Size

Hetero-sexual (n ≈ 640)

LGBTQ (n ≈ 72) Sig.

Eff. Size



Age 85.3% 85.9% 79.3% 77.6%

Gender/gender identity 81.1% 62.9% *** .163 77.8% 59.7% *** .123


Status as a school athlete 80.0% 78.0% 84.0% 81.4%

National origin 81.9% 86.0% 79.6% 72.5%

Individual disabilities 80.0% 67.8% *** .109 79.6% 72.2%

Race or ethnicity 82.0% 79.7% 79.1% 71.1%

Socioeconomic status 75.5% 65.6% ** .082 73.3% 62.0% * .076

Sexual orientation 79.8% 68.9% *** .098 77.3% 71.5%

Fraternity or sorority affiliation 79.5% 81.2% 79.6% 79.2%

Religion 77.4% 80.6% 77.1% 77.7%

Political affiliation/opinions 62.6% 70.5% * .060 70.1% 66.0%

14

Marginalization Students were asked to what extent they had experienced marginalization—a sense of exclusion or feeling left out— in the past three years at Georgia Tech, based on various aspects of their identity and personal characteristics. To account for the small number of responses in some cells, the responses were recoded for statistical tests. Responses were reduced to two categories: Never, and Any (experienced marginalization slightly, somewhat, or greatly). While this does lose some of the details of the responses, the majority of those reporting “any” marginalization reported “slight” marginalization. The actual frequencies for these items can be found in Appendix A. The majority (73.4 percent of responding undergraduate students and 61.2 percent of responding graduate students) stated they had experienced some form of marginalization, based on at least one characteristic. Looking at the individual characteristics, gender, race, and political perspective were the most commonly cited by undergraduates. For graduate students who reported marginalization experiences, gender, race/ethnicity, national origin, and language differences were the most commonly cited attributions. Breaking out by demographics characteristics, differences are found (see Tables 10 and 11). For responding undergraduates, 63.7 percent of women stated they had experienced marginalization based on gender, compared to 18.7 percent of men. Similarly, for responding URM undergraduates, 56.3 percent experienced marginalization based on race or ethnicity, while 25.7 percent of non-URM students had a similar experience. For responding LGBTQ students, 48.9 percent had experienced marginalization based on sexual orientation, and 23.7 percent on gender identity/expression, compared to 7.8 and 7.9 percent of heterosexual respondents, respectively. For responding graduate students, the gender gap was less prevalent, though there was still a gap—43.3 percent of women experienced marginalization based on gender compared to 12.2 percent of men. URM graduate students also reported higher rates of marginalization based on race or ethnicity, 56.3% percent versus 25.7 percent for non-URM students. The difference in the percentage of heterosexual and LGBTQ graduate respondents who experienced marginalization on gender identity or sexual orientation was lower than among undergraduates, but still significant, with over a quarter of LGBTQ graduate respondents indicating they experienced some marginalization.

17

Disparaging Comments The survey asked students to describe in the past year how frequently they heard disparaging remarks about various groups made by their peers. Tables 12 and 13 provide selected results from these items by gender, race/ethnicity, and sexual orientation. According to respondents, the most common disparaging remarks were directed at people with specific political views. Among responding undergraduates, 62.4 percent of men and 75.7 percent of women heard insensitive remarks with respect to women. Disparaging remarks addressed about race/ethnicity were also relatively common: among responding undergraduates, 57.0 percent stated they overheard such remarks. Among undergraduates, URM respondents were slightly more likely to report overhearing such comments about people’s race or ethnicity, (67.3% of URM respondents reported hearing disparaging remarks frequently versus 54.1 percent of non-URM respondents), as well as comments about immigrants (50.2 percent of URM respondents, compared to 39.5 percent of non-URM respondents). Another common target of disparaging comments was gay/lesbian or bisexual people. Among responding undergraduates, 41.5 percent heard these comments, while 59.1 percent of those who self-identified as gay/lesbian or bisexual reported hearing disparaging remarks. The frequency of disparaging remarks for graduate students was overall lower than that reported by undergraduates (see Table 12), but follows similar patterns. Complete results for further identity groups are available in Appendix A.

20

2013-2018 COMPARISONS As a continuation of the research started with the 2013 survey, much of the content and format was kept the same, which allows the opportunity to make comparisons between the two survey administrations. This provides an opportunity to look for changes in the attitudes and experiences of students. For this analysis, the 2013 data was reweighted using the same procedures as the 2018 data. This puts both groups of responses at a close approximation to their respective populations. Because of this shift in weights, some of the numbers presented here vary slightly from what presented in the 2013 report. Select comparisons to highlight changes are presented here. Complete results are available in Appendix A.

Overall Climate & Respect Overall, student perspectives of the campus climate and belonging declined slightly from 2013. While undergrad attitudes about the impact of social opportunities and reputation of academic major on their sense of belonging showed marginal declines, there were also significant decreases in the view of language differences (37.5%, compared to 51.3 % in 2013) or cultural differences act as barriers to interactions (35.3%, from 41.3% in 2013). Select results are shown in Table 14.

Table 14. Changes in Overall Climate & Belonging: 2013-2018

*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001 Effect size: Small .1; Medium .3; Large .5

2013 Percent

Change 2013 to 2018

2018 Percent Sig. Eff

Size.

(percent “strongly” or “somewhat agreed”)

Undergraduate Campus social opportunities have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 89.0% 85.7% ** .049

Campus reputation of my academic major has affected my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 83.0% 78.7% ** .054

Language differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at GT 51.3%

37.5% *** .137

Cultural differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at GT 41.3%

35.3% *** .061

GT is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 83.0%

84.2%

Graduate Campus social opportunities have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 78.2% 79.3%

Campus reputation of my academic major has affected my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 85.4%

82.5%

Language differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at GT 47.2% 40.4% ** .068

Cultural differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at GT 40.7% 38.7%

GT is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 88.1% 89.3%

-3.2

-4.3

-13.8

-6.0

1.3

1.2

-2.0

1.2

-2.9

-6.8

21

Regarding the Institute’s efforts towards diversity, fewer students agreed that GT demonstrated commitment to diversity and efforts to recruit students from diverse backgrounds declined from over 90% in 2013, but remain high. Processes to address grievances remains a low point for undergraduates, while more graduate students feel this is true compared to where they were five years prior (78.8 percent, up from 70.4 in 2013). Compared to five years ago, fewer respondents indicated that students at GT are respected with regard to almost every attribute prompted, with the exception of student athlete and fraternity or sorority affiliation. Interestingly, the changes observed have resulted in student respect being similar for all traits, with the exception of political opinions (see Tables 15a and 15b). Table 15a. Changes in Inclusion and Respect: 2013-2018


2013 Percent

Change 2013 to 2018


Size.


Undergraduate Diversity is integral to GT’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission 82.4% 85.9% ** .047

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by GT 90.4% 85.4% *** .076

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 57.8% 54.4%

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to: Age 86.1% 85.3%

Gender /Gender identity 80.7%

78.2%

National origin 84.5%

82.6%

Race or ethnicity 85.5%

81.6% ** .052

Sexual orientation 82.7%

78.0% ** .059

Fraternity or sorority affiliation 60.9%

79.8% *** .202

Political affiliation / opinions 81.4%

64.0% *** .196

3.5

-4.9

-3.3

-0.8

-1.9

18.9

-17.4

-3.9

-4.7

-2.6

22

Table 15b. Changes in Inclusion and Respect: 2013-2018


2013 Percent

Change 2013 to 2018


Size.


Graduate Diversity is integral to GT’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission 87.8% 90.4%

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by GT 91.2% 88.8%

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 70.4% 78.8% *** .096

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to: Age 89.9% 79.2% *** .150

Gender /Gender identity 88.1%

75.9% *** .161

National origin 86.3%

78.8% *** .100

Race or ethnicity 88.4%

78.4% *** .135

Sexual orientation 86.8%

76.7% *** .132

Fraternity or sorority affiliation 79.6%

79.5%

Political affiliation / opinions 87.9%

69.3% *** .228

Behaviors: Discussion and Participation While relatively stable for graduate students, undergraduate participation in multicultural or diversity-related activities, and comfort in discussing issues of diversity has shown substantial declines from where they were in 2013. Students remained the most comfortable discussing issues with their friends (a marginal shift from 97.5 percent to 95.9 percent in 2018), but had larger declines in other groups, with Administration dropping to below half (48.2, from 60.8 in 2013).

2.6

-2.4

8.4

-10.7

-12.2

-7.5

-10.0

-10.1

0.0

-18.6

23

Table 16. Undergraduate Changes in Discussion and Participation: 2013-2018


2013 Percent

Change 2013 to 2018


Size.

How comfortable are you discussing issues of diversity with: (percent “somewhat” or “very comfortable”)

Personal friends at Georgia Tech 97.1% 95.9% * .033

Classmates 80.2% 66.2% *** .158

Instructors / Faculty 63.0%

53.9% *** .091

Administration 60.8%

48.2% *** .124

How often do you participate in the following activities (percent “often” or “very often”)

outside your own culture:

Arts and entertainment 29.2%

22.7% *** .073

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 29.8%

23.6% *** .068

Student focused cultural organizations 16.2%

12.0% *** .059

Table 17. Graduate Changes in Discussion and Participation: 2013-2018


2013 Percent

Change 2013 to 2018


Size.

How comfortable are you discussing issues of diversity with: (percent “somewhat” or “very comfortable”)

Personal friends at Georgia Tech 95.5% 93.2% * .050

Classmates 81.5%

75.1% ** .077

Instructors / Faculty 66.1%

62.7%

Administration 62.3%

62.8%

How often do you participate in the following activities (percent “often” or “very often”)

outside your own culture:

Arts and entertainment 18.1%

18.4%

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 44.0%

45.1%

Student focused cultural organizations 14.2%

15.3%

-1.2

-14.0

-9.1

-12.6

-6.5

-4.3

-6.2

-2.3

-6.4

-3.4

0.5

0.3

1.1

1.2

24

Disparaging Remarks1.5 Compared with the general stability and decline found in other areas of the climate survey, the reports regarding disparaging remarks present some hopeful gains. Compared to the 2013 survey, both graduate and undergraduate students reporting significantly fewer disparaging remarks regarding many groups. The biggest reductions in remarks reported for students of all levels was regarding language differences / accents. Among undergraduates, race/ethnicity also declined markedly, from almost 70 percent in 2013 to 57 percent in 2018. While similar, smaller shifts was found for most other groups, among undergraduates, disparaging remarks about two groups increased from 2013: Transgender people and people with particular political views. Comparisons are presented in Tables 18 and 19.

Table 18. Undergraduate Student Changes in Encountering Disparaging Remarks: 2013-2018


2013 Percent

Change 2013 to 2018


Size.

(percent “sometimes,” “often,” or “very often”)

Within the past year, how often have you heard a student make an insensitive or disparaging remark with respect to:

Women 71.0%

67.8% * .034

Men 47.1% 50.3%

People’s race or ethnicity 69.9% 57.0% *** .133

People with less education 62.5%

60.7%

Immigrants 51.1% 41.9% *** .091

People with language differences or accents 76.1% 52.1% *** .250

People with particular political views 66.7% 75.2% *** .091

Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 56.6% 44.3% *** .120

Transgender people 37.1%

45.0% *** .079

1.5 Marginalization is not compared between surveys. In 2018, 69.5% of students reported any instance of marginalization, compared to the 22.8% in 2013. Given the results found elsewhere, this tripling of marginalization seems unlikely. It is possible that the more detailed approach used in 2018 may have prompted more introspection on the topic, producing very different numbers than if the 2013 format was used.

-3.2

3.2

-13.0

-1.8

-9.2

-24.1

8.5

-12.3

7.9

25

Table 19. Graduate Student Changes in Encountering Disparaging Remarks: 2013-2018


2013 Percent

Change 2013 to 2018


Size.

(percent “sometimes,” “often,” or “very often”)

Within the past year, how often have you heard a student make an insensitive or disparaging remark with respect to:

Women 39.2%

34.9%

Men 21.1% 22.7%

People’s race or ethnicity 41.0% 37.5%

People with less education 38.9%

31.4% ** .078

Immigrants 35.2% 28.4% ** .071

People with language differences or accents 57.0% 37.3% *** .193

People with particular political views 42.9% 43.5%

Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 29.1% 15.0% *** .165

Transgender people 20.2%

15.9% * .055

CONCLUSION The results of the student climate survey add to the Institute’s understanding of the student experience and the ways in which students interact within the GT community. Generally, student respondents from all walks of life express high degrees of collegiality, support, and inclusion at GT. Substantial majorities believe that Tech offers a variety of activities, experiences, and opportunities to grow and come together as a community. However, it is rather striking that the majority students perceive diversity as highly valued at Georgia Tech, and a positive aspect of the Georgia Tech experience, yet few indicate that they have actively pursued engaging in diversity, either through specific intercultural experiences, or in day-to-day practice, such as discussing with others, or their choices in study groups. While there are some differences in the ways in which various groups on campus perceive the climate, these differences are generally small in magnitude. There are some concerns uncovered by the results regarding the adequacy of the grievance process at GT—and further investigation is likely necessary to more fully understand the specific issues involved in this aspect of student life. Among graduate students, women and URM respondents were more likely to report feelings of marginalization than their male and non-URM counterparts. While the numbers are still relatively high, URM respondents were less likely to agree that Tech is a comfortable and inclusive environment (86 percent for non-URM versus 78 percent for URM undergraduates and 92 percent versus 78 percent for graduates). Looking at the changes from 2013, there is a mix of shifts, with a broad decline in perceptions of respect for students, and for participation, or even comfort with discussing diversity. At the same time, students see a more positive environment for diversity, feeling that there are fewer barriers for interacting with international students, and with fewer respondents reporting disparaging remarks about various groups. As with the faculty and staff surveys, political views or affiliation is a sticking point – with lower respect and more disparaging remarks reported.

-4.3

1.6

-3.6

-7.6

-6.8

-19.7

0.6

-14.1

-4.3

26

The Office of Institute Diversity is expected to utilize data in this report to identify issues that merit additional attention and follow-up, including a report detailing qualitative analytic results in the form of student survey responses to open-ended questions and general comments. Planned focus group research will further complement the quantitative and qualitative analyses and is expected to contribute to the formulation of strategic actions that will enhance our campus climate. It is hoped that those currently engaged in campus initiatives addressing campus climate will use these survey results as a guide to their activities and programming, and that new initiatives might be launched to more deeply explore the issues raised by these data. Future iterations of this survey will assist the Institute in measuring its progress as it pursues its strategic goal of inclusive excellence.

27

References

Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin, 112(1), 155–159. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ:

Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Georgia Institute of Technology. (2010). Strategic Plan: Designing the future: Strengths to build on... Retrieved from http://www.gatech.edu/vision/sites/gatech.edu.vision/files/Georgia_Tech_Strategic_Plan.pdf

28

G T 2 0 1 8 S t u d e n t C l i m a t e S u r v e y A s s e s s m e n t R e p o r t

A p p e n d i x A – S t u d e n t D a t a Means Tables Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 1 Overall Means . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 2 Means by Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 6 Means by Underrepresented Minorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 14 Means by Sexual Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 22 Overall Frequencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 30 Frequencies by Gender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 40 Frequencies by Underrepresented Minorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 60 Frequencies by Sexual Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A- 80 Student 2013 – 2018 Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-100 Student 2013 – 2018 Changes by Gender, URM, & Orientation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-103 A p p e n d i x B – S u r v e y I n s t r u m e n t 2018 Student Climate Survey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B- 1 Appendix – Students

O f f i c e o f A c a d e m i c E f f e c t i v e n e s s

Appendix A - Student Data

A - 1

Means Tables Color Key

Below Above

Main Scale Items 2.50 3.20Reverse Scored on scale 2.50 3.20Marginalization & Disparaging Remarks

1.20 1.50

The mean cutoffs are based on the 1st and 3rd Quartiles of scale means for all items.

p is based on alpha of .05 or below. Cohen's d is based on rule of thumb of .2 or greater being at least a "small" effect size.

0.050 0.2000

Color codes for cell meansMean p value at

or belowd at or above

A - 2

This semester, how often have you studied in the following groups or environments: In groups with students of different majors

1563 2.32 0.965 1 4 745 1.83 0.850 1 4

In groups with students of different races or ethnicities 1564 2.85 0.945 1 4 746 2.81 1.011 1 4

In groups with U.S. and international students 1564 2.26 0.958 1 4 747 2.78 1.046 1 4

In groups comprised of men and women 1562 2.79 0.986 1 4 746 2.84 1.049 1 4

On your own 1564 3.53 0.688 1 4 745 3.38 0.800 1 4

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements: My classroom experiences have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

1539 2.86 0.769 1 4 736 3.19 0.777 1 4

Campus social opportunities (clubs, organizations, activities) have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech

1532 3.33 0.833 1 4 725 3.07 0.830 1 4


1530 3.06 0.846 1 4 731 3.15 0.882 1 4


1537 2.19 0.901 1 4 734 2.24 0.973 1 4

Cultural differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at Georgia Tech

1536 2.13 0.936 1 4 736 2.24 0.931 1 4

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 1535 3.22 0.813 1 4 735 3.40 0.768 1 4

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 1522 3.06 0.849 1 4 733 3.29 0.806 1 4

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 1534 1.58 0.894 1 4 731 1.44 0.803 1 4

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 1539 3.28 0.808 1 4 734 3.38 0.781 1 4

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements: Diversity is integral to Georgia Tech’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission

1534 3.30 0.850 1 4 737 3.42 0.776 1 4

Overall MeansGraduate

Mean Std. Dev. Min MaxN

Undergraduate


A - 3



Undergraduate

Mean Std. Dev. Min MaxNCommitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech 1532 3.20 0.788 1 4 735 3.33 0.751 1 4

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 1521 3.21 0.805 1 4 731 3.36 0.768 1 4

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needs 1525 3.19 0.812 1 4 730 3.17 0.808 1 4

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 1521 2.52 0.934 1 4 716 3.02 0.852 1 4

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 1531 3.23 0.764 1 4 731 3.23 0.770 1 4

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 1530 3.04 0.819 1 4 731 3.24 0.774 1 4

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following: Based on my experiences, students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to age

1544 3.25 0.791 1 4 739 3.11 0.912 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identity 1544 3.06 0.885 1 4 734 3.06 0.977 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to veteran status or military involvement

1511 3.27 0.816 1 4 711 3.27 0.846 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athlete 1521 3.11 0.840 1 4 699 3.15 0.824 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 1536 3.15 0.811 1 4 730 3.07 0.892 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilities 1530 3.07 0.859 1 4 724 3.12 0.947 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicity 1536 3.17 0.846 1 4 730 3.08 0.920 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic status 1528 3.00 0.905 1 4 719 2.94 0.971 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientation 1535 3.07 0.886 1 4 716 3.02 0.962 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation 1522 3.08 0.819 1 4 695 3.03 0.883 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to religion 1536 3.04 0.870 1 4 717 3.02 0.946 1 4

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to political affiliation/opinions 1534 2.71 0.909 1 4 713 2.84 0.941 1 4

A - 4



Undergraduate


How comfortable are you discussing issues of diversity with the following people or groups: Personal friends at Georgia Tech

1538 3.72 0.571 1 4 729 3.59 0.679 1 4

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Classmates 1535 2.75 0.825 1 4 731 2.95 0.845 1 4

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Members of my fraternity/sorority 1245 2.86 1.008 1 4 569 2.81 0.920 1 4

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Instructors/Faculty 1534 2.53 0.912 1 4 722 2.70 0.921 1 4

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Staff 1529 2.48 0.925 1 4 715 2.73 0.913 1 4

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Administration 1525 2.41 0.965 1 4 712 2.71 0.947 1 4

In your time at Georgia Tech, how often do you participate in the following types of activities outside of your own culture: Arts and entertainment

1519 2.03 0.855 1 4 726 1.97 0.791 1 4

Religious and/or spiritual activities 1515 1.40 0.715 1 4 722 1.38 0.635 1 4Cultural celebrations and holidays 1520 1.82 0.733 1 4 725 1.96 0.761 1 4

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 1516 2.01 0.871 1 4 725 2.42 0.943 1 4

Student focused cultural organizations 1521 1.62 0.832 1 4 722 1.76 0.818 1 4Other (specify below) 799 1.22 0.625 1 4 362 1.30 0.677 1 4

Within the last three years, to what extent have you experienced instances of marginalization (a sense of exclusion or feeling left out) at Georgia Tech based on the following personal identity or characteristics: Gender

1525 1.58 0.866 1 4 716 1.34 0.715 1 4

Marginalization: Age 1523 1.33 0.679 1 4 721 1.29 0.626 1 4Marginalization: Race/ethnicity 1523 1.50 0.825 1 4 716 1.47 0.756 1 4Marginalization: Disability 1496 1.19 0.596 1 4 689 1.15 0.529 1 4Marginalization: National origin 1515 1.23 0.572 1 4 715 1.40 0.733 1 4

Marginalization: Language difference/accent 1513 1.25 0.617 1 4 716 1.50 0.804 1 4

Marginalization: Political perspective 1523 1.62 0.902 1 4 710 1.35 0.735 1 4Marginalization: Religion 1517 1.37 0.721 1 4 710 1.22 0.582 1 4Marginalization: Sexual orientation 1520 1.24 0.653 1 4 709 1.13 0.476 1 4

Marginalization: Gender identity/expression 1520 1.19 0.602 1 4 710 1.13 0.480 1 4

Marginalization: Other 879 1.12 0.523 1 4 424 1.09 0.432 1 4

A - 5



Undergraduate

Mean Std. Dev. Min MaxNWithin the past year, how often have you heard a student make an insensitive or disparaging remark about any of these groups: Women

1524 1.96 0.863 1 4 708 1.44 0.688 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:Men 1517 1.66 0.780 1 4 707 1.28 0.575 1 4Disparaging Remarks:Older People 1516 1.41 0.657 1 4 702 1.24 0.523 1 4Disparaging Remarks:Younger People 1518 1.42 0.669 1 4 703 1.27 0.530 1 4Disparaging Remarks:People’s race or ethnicity 1518 1.75 0.786 1 4 704 1.45 0.659 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:People with disabilities 1506 1.41 0.695 1 4 702 1.12 0.409 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:People with less education 1516 1.95 0.954 1 4 703 1.44 0.749 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:Immigrants 1509 1.52 0.696 1 4 704 1.37 0.670 1 4Disparaging Remarks:People with language differences/accents 1518 1.70 0.800 1 4 702 1.47 0.716 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:People with specific political views 1516 2.26 0.983 1 4 702 1.63 0.841 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:People with particular religious affiliations 1516 1.62 0.808 1 4 696 1.32 0.636 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 1516 1.58 0.766 1 4 702 1.20 0.516 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:Transgender people 1512 1.62 0.812 1 4 700 1.22 0.567 1 4

Disparaging Remarks:Others (please specify below) 777 1.09 0.424 1 4 395 1.06 0.312 1 4

A - 6

Means by Gender

Student Type = Undergraduate


941 2.24 0.987 1 4 595 2.45 0.915 1 4 0.206 4.179 0.000 0.1208

In groups with students of different races or ethnicities 941 2.80 0.967 1 4 596 2.94 0.896 1 4 0.138 2.844 0.005 0.0695

In groups with U.S. and international students 941 2.27 0.964 1 4 596 2.27 0.948 1 4 -0.002 -0.037 0.971

In groups comprised of men and women 941 2.69 1.004 1 4 594 2.98 0.920 1 4 0.290 5.817 0.000 0.1441On your own 941 3.52 0.677 1 4 596 3.55 0.691 1 4 0.038 1.060 0.289


929 2.88 0.789 1 4 583 2.84 0.739 1 4 -0.043 -1.064 0.287


920 3.27 0.871 1 4 584 3.42 0.754 1 4 0.153 3.608 0.000 0.0683


921 3.09 0.845 1 4 581 3.02 0.836 1 4 -0.071 -1.588 0.112


926 2.21 0.918 1 4 584 2.17 0.874 1 4 -0.040 -0.846 0.397


926 2.14 0.965 1 4 582 2.11 0.889 1 4 -0.026 -0.529 0.597

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 925 3.24 0.797 1 4 583 3.23 0.791 1 4 -0.014 -0.333 0.739

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 918 3.09 0.856 1 4 577 3.07 0.816 1 4 -0.019 -0.422 0.673

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 925 1.53 0.863 1 4 583 1.61 0.907 1 4 0.081 1.720 0.086

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 930 3.32 0.795 1 4 582 3.24 0.811 1 4 -0.081 -1.903 0.057


922 3.17 0.929 1 4 585 3.51 0.661 1 4 0.333 8.126 0.000 0.1448

t

Man Woman

Mean Std. Dev. Min Max MeanN N Std. Dev. Min Max

t -test

Mean Diff p d

A - 7

Means by Gender

t

Man Woman


t -test

Mean Diff p d

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech 919 3.22 0.795 1 4 585 3.20 0.741 1 4 -0.023 -0.576 0.565

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 913 3.22 0.836 1 4 581 3.21 0.746 1 4 -0.012 -0.295 0.768

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needs 916 3.17 0.833 1 4 582 3.28 0.744 1 4 0.113 2.725 0.007 0.0525

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 912 2.57 0.936 1 4 582 2.48 0.908 1 4 -0.093 -1.903 0.057

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 923 3.20 0.799 1 4 584 3.30 0.704 1 4 0.103 2.623 0.009 0.0480

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 920 3.05 0.808 1 4 582 3.08 0.802 1 4 0.035 0.811 0.418


926 3.23 0.806 1 4 591 3.27 0.775 1 4 0.044 1.073 0.283

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identity 923 3.15 0.865 1 4 594 2.96 0.870 1 4 -0.185 -4.055 0.000 0.0938


904 3.25 0.845 1 4 581 3.30 0.775 1 4 0.055 1.279 0.201

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athlete 909 3.10 0.855 1 4 585 3.11 0.820 1 4 0.012 0.264 0.792

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 923 3.14 0.840 1 4 586 3.18 0.762 1 4 0.045 1.073 0.283

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilities 915 3.10 0.880 1 4 587 3.05 0.806 1 4 -0.044 -0.990 0.322

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicity 922 3.17 0.874 1 4 587 3.19 0.795 1 4 0.019 0.444 0.657

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic status 917 3.02 0.926 1 4 585 2.99 0.850 1 4 -0.030 -0.644 0.519

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientation 918 3.11 0.898 1 4 589 3.04 0.841 1 4 -0.073 -1.603 0.109

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation 916 3.02 0.840 1 4 582 3.16 0.775 1 4 0.135 3.180 0.002 0.0650

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to religion 922 3.01 0.915 1 4 587 3.08 0.802 1 4 0.071 1.582 0.114

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to political affiliation/opinions 923 2.65 0.956 1 4 584 2.81 0.815 1 4 0.156 3.375 0.001 0.0819

A - 8

Means by Gender

t

Man Woman


t -test

Mean Diff p d


923 3.69 0.607 1 4 588 3.79 0.479 1 4 0.096 3.430 0.001 0.0400

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Classmates 921 2.73 0.847 1 4 589 2.79 0.788 1 4 0.065 1.507 0.132

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Members of my fraternity/sorority 748 2.87 1.025 1 4 480 2.87 0.974 1 4 -0.005 -0.090 0.928

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Instructors/Faculty 920 2.54 0.945 1 4 587 2.51 0.856 1 4 -0.029 -0.609 0.543

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Staff 916 2.49 0.956 1 4 585 2.47 0.868 1 4 -0.027 -0.561 0.575

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Administration 914 2.45 0.988 1 4 584 2.36 0.910 1 4 -0.090 -1.805 0.071


909 1.97 0.876 1 4 582 2.12 0.819 1 4 0.155 3.459 0.001 0.1036

Religious and/or spiritual activities 909 1.39 0.722 1 4 578 1.42 0.706 1 4 0.038 0.994 0.320Cultural celebrations and holidays 909 1.79 0.739 1 4 584 1.87 0.718 1 4 0.081 2.101 0.036 0.0621

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 908 2.02 0.901 1 4 580 1.99 0.820 1 4 -0.028 -0.621 0.535

Student focused cultural organizations 911 1.56 0.801 1 4 583 1.71 0.854 1 4 0.151 3.426 0.001 0.1223Other (specify below) 511 1.22 0.621 1 4 274 1.22 0.643 1 4 0.005 0.096 0.923


914 1.28 0.649 1 4 583 1.98 0.918 1 4 0.705 16.156 0.000 0.5270

Marginalization: Age 912 1.34 0.694 1 4 583 1.30 0.640 1 4 -0.044 -1.267 0.205Marginalization: Race/ethnicity 913 1.50 0.799 1 4 582 1.51 0.865 1 4 0.009 0.201 0.841Marginalization: Disability 903 1.16 0.541 1 4 571 1.20 0.626 1 4 0.040 1.242 0.214Marginalization: National origin 910 1.24 0.585 1 4 581 1.21 0.541 1 4 -0.031 -1.060 0.289

Marginalization: Language difference/accent 908 1.26 0.639 1 4 581 1.23 0.572 1 4 -0.032 -1.001 0.317

Marginalization: Political perspective 918 1.66 0.941 1 4 578 1.54 0.828 1 4 -0.123 -2.648 0.008 0.1017Marginalization: Religion 910 1.35 0.713 1 4 582 1.40 0.727 1 4 0.049 1.268 0.205Marginalization: Sexual orientation 910 1.22 0.619 1 4 583 1.22 0.625 1 4 -0.006 -0.168 0.867

Marginalization: Gender identity/expression 911 1.15 0.521 1 4 582 1.15 0.540 1 4 -0.003 -0.093 0.926

Marginalization: Other 567 1.11 0.514 1 4 299 1.13 0.533 1 4 0.011 0.299 0.765

A - 9

Means by Gender

t

Man Woman


t -test

Mean Diff p d

Within the past year, how often have you heard a student make an insensitive or disparaging remark about any of these groups: Women

911 1.84 0.823 1 4 586 2.11 0.880 1 4 0.272 5.994 0.000 0.1851

Disparaging Remarks:Men 909 1.71 0.815 1 4 580 1.57 0.713 1 4 -0.144 -3.594 0.000 0.1234Disparaging Remarks:Older People 907 1.43 0.683 1 4 581 1.36 0.591 1 4 -0.070 -2.104 0.036 0.0702Disparaging Remarks:Younger People 911 1.41 0.677 1 4 580 1.41 0.639 1 4 -0.010 -0.279 0.781Disparaging Remarks:People’s race or ethnicity 909 1.71 0.780 1 4 582 1.79 0.784 1 4 0.078 1.888 0.059

Disparaging Remarks:People with disabilities 903 1.41 0.685 1 4 576 1.39 0.693 1 4 -0.018 -0.493 0.622

Disparaging Remarks:People with less education 908 1.88 0.945 1 4 581 2.02 0.934 1 4 0.132 2.654 0.008 0.0906

Disparaging Remarks:Immigrants 903 1.51 0.684 1 4 579 1.51 0.708 1 4 0.002 0.052 0.958Disparaging Remarks:People with language differences/accents 909 1.67 0.798 1 4 581 1.74 0.796 1 4 0.071 1.668 0.096

Disparaging Remarks:People with specific political views 911 2.26 1.023 1 4 578 2.24 0.918 1 4 -0.016 -0.306 0.760

Disparaging Remarks:People with particular religious affiliations 910 1.64 0.837 1 4 579 1.59 0.761 1 4 -0.050 -1.187 0.236

Disparaging Remarks:Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 909 1.56 0.749 1 4 580 1.58 0.755 1 4 0.021 0.520 0.603

Disparaging Remarks:Transgender people 909 1.58 0.791 1 4 575 1.62 0.787 1 4 0.041 0.975 0.330

Disparaging Remarks:Others (please specify below) 519 1.09 0.434 1 4 246 1.07 0.318 1 4 -0.020 -0.704 0.481

a. Student Type = Undergraduate

A - 10

Means by Gender

Student Type = Graduate


529 1.84 0.865 1 4 207 1.79 0.786 1 4 -0.052 -0.785 0.433

In groups with students of different races or ethnicities 528 2.79 1.010 1 4 209 2.85 1.010 1 4 0.053 0.647 0.518

In groups with U.S. and international students 529 2.76 1.067 1 4 209 2.84 0.987 1 4 0.079 0.954 0.341

In groups comprised of men and women 529 2.75 1.063 1 4 208 3.06 0.981 1 4 0.304 3.697 0.000 0.1637On your own 529 3.37 0.809 1 4 208 3.41 0.784 1 4 0.034 0.528 0.598


522 3.25 0.749 1 4 205 3.10 0.805 1 4 -0.144 -2.213 0.027 0.0815


514 3.06 0.813 1 4 204 3.10 0.842 1 4 0.032 0.457 0.648


517 3.18 0.870 1 4 205 3.11 0.886 1 4 -0.068 -0.935 0.350


520 2.23 0.964 1 4 205 2.26 0.994 1 4 0.031 0.380 0.704


522 2.23 0.934 1 4 205 2.27 0.912 1 4 0.041 0.539 0.590

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 522 3.45 0.729 1 4 205 3.30 0.817 1 4 -0.150 -2.289 0.022 0.0803


I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 520 1.41 0.768 1 4 203 1.46 0.846 1 4 0.055 0.811 0.418

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 522 3.39 0.759 1 4 205 3.40 0.809 1 4 0.011 0.162 0.871


524 3.36 0.820 1 4 205 3.58 0.625 1 4 0.218 3.860 0.000 0.1078

t -test

Mean Std. Dev. Min Max

Man Woman

Mean Diff t p dMean Std. Dev. Min MaxNN

A - 11

Means by Gender t -test


Man Woman



Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 521 3.38 0.739 1 4 202 3.35 0.804 1 4 -0.037 -0.574 0.566

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needs 518 3.18 0.799 1 4 204 3.20 0.818 1 4 0.023 0.348 0.728

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 508 3.08 0.805 1 4 200 2.91 0.929 1 4 -0.169 -2.258 0.024 0.1000

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 519 3.24 0.756 1 4 203 3.23 0.793 1 4 -0.007 -0.109 0.913

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 518 3.27 0.740 1 4 204 3.19 0.832 1 4 -0.076 -1.144 0.253


525 3.12 0.915 1 4 207 3.07 0.916 1 4 -0.046 -0.617 0.538

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identity 521 3.09 0.989 1 4 206 3.01 0.937 1 4 -0.075 -0.954 0.340


507 3.27 0.852 1 4 197 3.24 0.840 1 4 -0.030 -0.416 0.677

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athlete 496 3.14 0.829 1 4 196 3.13 0.817 1 4 -0.017 -0.246 0.806

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 518 3.10 0.898 1 4 204 3.01 0.863 1 4 -0.090 -1.253 0.211


Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicity 517 3.08 0.936 1 4 206 3.07 0.881 1 4 -0.011 -0.147 0.883

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic status 509 2.95 0.991 1 4 202 2.95 0.926 1 4 0.000 0.003 0.997


Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation 495 3.00 0.914 1 4 193 3.11 0.805 1 4 0.113 1.590 0.112

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to religion 509 3.02 0.960 1 4 201 3.00 0.922 1 4 -0.021 -0.264 0.792

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to political affiliation/opinions 505 2.86 0.952 1 4 200 2.82 0.922 1 4 -0.033 -0.421 0.674

A - 12



Man Woman



517 3.57 0.681 1 4 205 3.66 0.648 1 4 0.088 1.613 0.107

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Classmates 519 2.96 0.825 1 4 205 2.94 0.884 1 4 -0.024 -0.329 0.742






518 1.93 0.775 1 4 199 2.07 0.804 1 4 0.136 2.044 0.041 0.1065

Religious and/or spiritual activities 516 1.37 0.630 1 4 198 1.38 0.647 1 4 0.014 0.262 0.794Cultural celebrations and holidays 517 1.93 0.768 1 4 199 2.06 0.738 1 4 0.138 2.210 0.027 0.1084


Student focused cultural organizations 515 1.76 0.824 1 4 198 1.75 0.812 1 4 -0.009 -0.126 0.900Other (specify below) 276 1.30 0.677 1 4 84 1.28 0.688 1 4 -0.025 -0.286 0.775


506 1.18 0.545 1 4 204 1.67 0.895 1 4 0.491 7.293 0.000 0.4860

Marginalization: Age 508 1.25 0.588 1 4 205 1.35 0.679 1 4 0.096 1.768 0.077Marginalization: Race/ethnicity 507 1.46 0.749 1 4 202 1.47 0.750 1 4 0.009 0.149 0.882Marginalization: Disability 491 1.12 0.481 1 4 190 1.20 0.606 1 4 0.073 1.486 0.138Marginalization: National origin 506 1.41 0.746 1 4 203 1.35 0.665 1 4 -0.062 -1.078 0.281

Marginalization: Language difference/accent 506 1.52 0.811 1 4 202 1.46 0.774 1 4 -0.058 -0.892 0.373

Marginalization: Political perspective 505 1.36 0.738 1 4 198 1.33 0.700 1 4 -0.033 -0.556 0.578Marginalization: Religion 501 1.22 0.603 1 4 201 1.20 0.504 1 4 -0.019 -0.415 0.678Marginalization: Sexual orientation 503 1.09 0.408 1 4 199 1.17 0.549 1 4 0.081 1.878 0.061

Marginalization: Gender identity/expression 505 1.11 0.435 1 4 199 1.15 0.489 1 4 0.045 1.138 0.255


A - 13



Man Woman



500 1.37 0.638 1 4 201 1.60 0.751 1 4 0.229 3.801 0.000 0.2261

Disparaging Remarks:Men 499 1.29 0.601 1 4 200 1.24 0.503 1 4 -0.047 -1.057 0.291Disparaging Remarks:Older People 499 1.22 0.510 1 4 195 1.28 0.557 1 4 0.053 1.153 0.249Disparaging Remarks:Younger People 498 1.26 0.529 1 4 197 1.28 0.533 1 4 0.021 0.466 0.642Disparaging Remarks:People’s race or ethnicity 498 1.44 0.661 1 4 198 1.47 0.640 1 4 0.030 0.551 0.582

Disparaging Remarks:People with disabilities 496 1.11 0.368 1 4 198 1.14 0.465 1 4 0.038 1.021 0.308

Disparaging Remarks:People with less education 498 1.41 0.723 1 4 197 1.47 0.774 1 4 0.057 0.890 0.374



Disparaging Remarks:People with particular religious affiliations 493 1.33 0.653 1 4 196 1.26 0.558 1 4 -0.072 -1.457 0.146


Disparaging Remarks:Transgender people 496 1.18 0.523 1 4 197 1.27 0.592 1 4 0.092 1.899 0.058

Disparaging Remarks:Others (please specify below) 299 1.05 0.294 1 4 94 1.08 0.369 1 3 0.031 0.754 0.452

A - 14

Means by Race / Ethnicity



1222 2.30 0.966 1 4 341 2.38 0.961 1 4 0.078 1.330 0.184



In groups comprised of men and women 1221 2.80 0.991 1 4 341 2.78 0.965 1 4 -0.014 -0.244 0.808On your own 1224 3.54 0.680 1 4 340 3.49 0.715 1 4 -0.042 -0.976 0.329


1201 2.89 0.750 1 4 338 2.74 0.825 1 4 -0.146 -2.925 0.003 0.1007


1193 3.38 0.793 1 4 339 3.14 0.937 1 4 -0.243 -4.356 0.000 0.1490


1193 3.09 0.817 1 4 337 2.95 0.934 1 4 -0.141 -2.506 0.012 0.0900


1198 2.20 0.902 1 4 339 2.15 0.898 1 4 -0.048 -0.861 0.389


1199 2.10 0.945 1 4 338 2.24 0.894 1 4 0.132 2.370 0.018 0.0987


I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 1189 3.09 0.843 1 4 333 2.95 0.865 1 4 -0.147 -2.756 0.006 0.0938

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 1199 1.54 0.867 1 4 334 1.72 0.973 1 4 0.180 3.067 0.002 0.1626

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 1201 3.31 0.787 1 4 339 3.18 0.872 1 4 -0.127 -2.418 0.016 0.0772


1195 3.30 0.838 1 4 340 3.29 0.894 1 4 -0.012 -0.219 0.827

Mean Diff

Non-URM URM


t -test

t p d

A - 15


Mean Diff

Non-URM URM


t -test

t p d

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech 1193 3.23 0.759 1 4 338 3.07 0.873 1 4 -0.162 -3.093 0.002 0.1016

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 1182 3.25 0.773 1 4 339 3.04 0.888 1 4 -0.214 -4.023 0.000 0.1346

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needs 1188 3.25 0.782 1 4 337 2.99 0.881 1 4 -0.264 -4.964 0.000 0.1684

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 1184 2.53 0.930 1 4 338 2.49 0.951 1 4 -0.039 -0.668 0.504




1206 3.26 0.783 1 4 338 3.19 0.818 1 4 -0.067 -1.351 0.177

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identity 1205 3.08 0.896 1 4 338 3.00 0.841 1 4 -0.080 -1.521 0.128


1180 3.28 0.808 1 4 331 3.22 0.845 1 4 -0.066 -1.273 0.203


Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 1201 3.19 0.795 1 4 335 3.01 0.853 1 4 -0.178 -3.421 0.001 0.1129

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilities 1192 3.10 0.858 1 4 338 2.97 0.856 1 4 -0.123 -2.336 0.020 0.0776

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicity 1200 3.23 0.822 1 4 336 2.94 0.892 1 4 -0.291 -5.381 0.000 0.1874

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic status 1192 3.05 0.893 1 4 336 2.82 0.928 1 4 -0.231 -4.059 0.000 0.1501

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientation 1199 3.09 0.893 1 4 335 2.97 0.853 1 4 -0.122 -2.286 0.022 0.0762

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation 1186 3.08 0.817 1 4 336 3.08 0.826 1 4 -0.007 -0.130 0.897

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to religion 1201 3.08 0.854 1 4 335 2.90 0.911 1 4 -0.174 -3.135 0.002 0.1121


A - 16


Mean Diff

Non-URM URM


t -test

t p d


1201 3.74 0.535 1 4 337 3.67 0.680 1 4 -0.065 -1.627 0.104







1184 2.01 0.860 1 4 334 2.09 0.837 1 4 0.079 1.516 0.130

Religious and/or spiritual activities 1182 1.39 0.708 1 4 332 1.45 0.738 1 4 0.064 1.406 0.160Cultural celebrations and holidays 1186 1.81 0.722 1 4 334 1.84 0.771 1 4 0.028 0.591 0.555

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 1184 1.98 0.861 1 4 332 2.13 0.896 1 4 0.156 2.818 0.005 0.1239

Student focused cultural organizations 1187 1.57 0.782 1 4 334 1.80 0.968 1 4 0.224 3.890 0.000 0.2057Other (specify below) 626 1.19 0.590 1 4 174 1.32 0.729 1 4 0.128 2.122 0.034 0.1581


1192 1.57 0.855 1 4 333 1.61 0.902 1 4 0.040 0.727 0.467

Marginalization: Age 1191 1.30 0.645 1 4 332 1.45 0.778 1 4 0.149 3.196 0.001 0.1685Marginalization: Race/ethnicity 1189 1.36 0.688 1 4 334 2.01 1.046 1 4 0.646 10.664 0.000 0.5772Marginalization: Disability 1175 1.17 0.564 1 4 321 1.27 0.698 1 4 0.101 2.393 0.017 0.1309Marginalization: National origin 1187 1.19 0.511 1 4 328 1.38 0.732 1 4 0.191 4.421 0.000 0.2426

Marginalization: Language difference/accent 1185 1.20 0.524 1 4 328 1.43 0.851 1 4 0.227 4.593 0.000 0.2798

Marginalization: Political perspective 1190 1.61 0.891 1 4 333 1.65 0.942 1 4 0.035 0.602 0.547Marginalization: Religion 1188 1.36 0.695 1 4 329 1.41 0.809 1 4 0.047 0.959 0.338Marginalization: Sexual orientation 1189 1.23 0.622 1 4 332 1.30 0.751 1 4 0.075 1.666 0.096



A - 17


Mean Diff

Non-URM URM


t -test

t p d


1190 1.98 0.856 1 4 334 1.90 0.883 1 4 -0.080 -1.472 0.141

Disparaging Remarks:Men 1184 1.67 0.768 1 4 332 1.61 0.820 1 4 -0.058 -1.157 0.247Disparaging Remarks:Older People 1183 1.41 0.654 1 4 332 1.42 0.667 1 4 0.016 0.380 0.704Disparaging Remarks:Younger People 1186 1.42 0.680 1 4 332 1.40 0.632 1 4 -0.025 -0.628 0.530Disparaging Remarks:People’s race or ethnicity 1186 1.69 0.751 1 4 333 1.96 0.868 1 4 0.271 5.168 0.000 0.2391



Disparaging Remarks:Immigrants 1179 1.47 0.654 1 4 330 1.68 0.810 1 4 0.205 4.238 0.000 0.2107Disparaging Remarks:People with language differences/accents 1186 1.67 0.777 1 4 332 1.81 0.871 1 4 0.137 2.595 0.010 0.1260

Disparaging Remarks:People with specific political views 1183 2.24 0.958 1 4 333 2.33 1.065 1 4 0.092 1.419 0.156

Disparaging Remarks:People with particular religious affiliations 1184 1.60 0.782 1 4 331 1.68 0.894 1 4 0.083 1.540 0.124


Disparaging Remarks:Transgender people 1181 1.59 0.783 1 4 331 1.72 0.899 1 4 0.138 2.537 0.011 0.1298



A - 18




612 1.85 0.839 1 4 133 1.77 0.900 1 4 -0.083 -0.976 0.329



In groups comprised of men and women 611 2.84 1.020 1 4 134 2.82 1.176 1 4 -0.026 -0.241 0.810On your own 611 3.36 0.807 1 4 134 3.48 0.761 1 4 0.118 1.615 0.107


602 3.23 0.751 1 4 133 3.02 0.865 1 4 -0.216 -2.671 0.008 0.1485


596 3.07 0.830 1 4 129 3.04 0.836 1 4 -0.031 -0.385 0.700


601 3.17 0.856 1 4 130 3.05 0.992 1 4 -0.118 -1.255 0.210


601 2.28 0.985 1 4 133 2.02 0.890 1 4 -0.261 -2.995 0.003 0.2105


603 2.27 0.911 1 4 133 2.10 1.010 1 4 -0.165 -1.733 0.083



I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 599 1.44 0.817 1 4 132 1.42 0.738 1 4 -0.013 -0.176 0.860

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 601 3.38 0.761 1 4 132 3.42 0.869 1 4 0.041 0.498 0.619


604 3.42 0.756 1 4 133 3.42 0.861 1 4 -0.006 -0.072 0.943

Max

t -test


Non-URM URM

Mean Diff t p dMinN N Mean Std. Dev.

A - 19


Max

t -test


Non-URM URM









607 3.09 0.926 1 4 133 3.17 0.844 1 4 0.076 0.923 0.356

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identity 601 3.03 0.981 1 4 134 3.18 0.957 1 4 0.147 1.596 0.111


580 3.21 0.869 1 4 131 3.52 0.683 1 4 0.303 4.335 0.000 0.1781

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athlete 578 3.10 0.826 1 4 121 3.37 0.781 1 4 0.268 3.398 0.001 0.1684

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 599 3.04 0.905 1 4 131 3.22 0.816 1 4 0.183 2.275 0.023 0.1148

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilities 591 3.09 0.962 1 4 132 3.26 0.862 1 4 0.174 2.054 0.040 0.1059

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicity 597 3.06 0.925 1 4 133 3.15 0.896 1 4 0.083 0.958 0.338

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic status 587 2.92 0.974 1 4 132 3.05 0.952 1 4 0.125 1.353 0.177

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientation 584 2.98 0.980 1 4 131 3.23 0.854 1 4 0.252 2.967 0.003 0.1533




A - 20


Max

t -test


Non-URM URM



597 3.61 0.645 1 4 132 3.47 0.808 1 4 -0.145 -1.937 0.053



Comfortable discussing diversity with: Instructors/Faculty 590 2.74 0.894 1 4 132 2.52 1.015 1 4 -0.224 -2.336 0.020 0.1662

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Staff 585 2.73 0.910 1 4 130 2.74 0.931 1 4 0.014 0.161 0.872



595 1.95 0.762 1 4 131 2.10 0.906 1 4 0.150 1.760 0.079

Religious and/or spiritual activities 592 1.38 0.632 1 4 130 1.36 0.653 1 4 -0.027 -0.430 0.668Cultural celebrations and holidays 596 1.95 0.733 1 4 129 2.01 0.883 1 4 0.059 0.713 0.476

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 594 2.40 0.936 1 4 131 2.53 0.974 1 4 0.134 1.433 0.152

Student focused cultural organizations 594 1.76 0.844 1 4 128 1.72 0.686 1 4 -0.048 -0.692 0.489Other (specify below) 306 1.26 0.606 1 4 56 1.50 0.957 1 4 0.240 1.817 0.070


589 1.33 0.712 1 4 127 1.34 0.729 1 4 0.008 0.107 0.915

Marginalization: Age 593 1.28 0.622 1 4 128 1.29 0.646 1 4 0.008 0.125 0.901Marginalization: Race/ethnicity 589 1.46 0.747 1 4 127 1.54 0.798 1 4 0.079 1.027 0.305Marginalization: Disability 564 1.15 0.525 1 4 124 1.14 0.549 1 4 -0.018 -0.326 0.744Marginalization: National origin 589 1.41 0.742 1 4 127 1.36 0.693 1 4 -0.048 -0.696 0.487

Marginalization: Language difference/accent 588 1.54 0.828 1 4 128 1.35 0.663 1 4 -0.183 -2.697 0.007 0.1940

Marginalization: Political perspective 583 1.35 0.730 1 4 128 1.36 0.759 1 4 0.005 0.074 0.941Marginalization: Religion 582 1.21 0.551 1 4 128 1.26 0.704 1 4 0.055 0.826 0.409Marginalization: Sexual orientation 584 1.14 0.494 1 4 125 1.07 0.381 1 4 -0.063 -1.595 0.111


Marginalization: Other 358 1.09 0.429 1 4 66 1.08 0.448 1 4 -0.009 -0.144 0.886

A - 21


Max

t -test


Non-URM URM



584 1.44 0.681 1 4 124 1.45 0.726 1 4 0.009 0.128 0.898




Disparaging Remarks:Immigrants 580 1.37 0.676 1 4 124 1.34 0.643 1 4 -0.036 -0.556 0.579Disparaging Remarks:People with language differences/accents 579 1.49 0.738 1 4 123 1.38 0.594 1 4 -0.108 -1.754 0.080



Disparaging Remarks:Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 578 1.20 0.518 1 4 124 1.17 0.507 1 4 -0.027 -0.546 0.585

Disparaging Remarks:Transgender people 576 1.23 0.584 1 4 124 1.17 0.476 1 4 -0.060 -1.220 0.223


A - 22

Means by Sexual Orientation



1299 2.30 0.958 1 4 254 2.41 1.006 1 4 0.111 1.623 0.105



In groups comprised of men and women 1299 2.81 0.977 1 4 253 2.73 1.023 1 4 -0.075 -1.078 0.281On your own 1300 3.55 0.659 1 4 254 3.43 0.804 1 4 -0.122 -2.280 0.023 0.0810


1276 2.86 0.759 1 4 252 2.84 0.832 1 4 -0.017 -0.297 0.766


1268 3.34 0.815 1 4 253 3.25 0.906 1 4 -0.098 -1.589 0.112


1267 3.08 0.838 1 4 253 2.95 0.876 1 4 -0.130 -2.165 0.031 0.0909


1274 2.19 0.904 1 4 252 2.16 0.872 1 4 -0.031 -0.516 0.606


1275 2.15 0.945 1 4 251 2.03 0.886 1 4 -0.116 -1.867 0.062






1271 3.29 0.842 1 4 253 3.39 0.869 1 4 0.106 1.781 0.075

dMin Max Mean Diff t p

t -test

Std. Dev.N N

Hetero LGBTQ

Mean Std. Dev. Min Max Mean

A - 23



t -test

Std. Dev.N N

Hetero LGBTQ






While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 1271 3.22 0.755 1 4 249 3.30 0.811 1 4 0.078 1.411 0.159

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 1267 3.08 0.792 1 4 252 2.89 0.918 1 4 -0.192 -3.097 0.002 0.1389


1281 3.23 0.795 1 4 254 3.34 0.760 1 4 0.110 2.086 0.037 0.0713



1254 3.26 0.834 1 4 248 3.32 0.721 1 4 0.068 1.318 0.188

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athlete 1262 3.11 0.845 1 4 250 3.11 0.824 1 4 0.002 0.031 0.975

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 1275 3.14 0.827 1 4 251 3.22 0.726 1 4 0.078 1.527 0.127

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilities 1268 3.10 0.844 1 4 252 2.90 0.919 1 4 -0.194 -3.108 0.002 0.1376



Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientation 1273 3.10 0.869 1 4 253 2.90 0.949 1 4 -0.206 -3.193 0.001 0.1446




A - 24



t -test

Std. Dev.N N

Hetero LGBTQ



1277 3.72 0.572 1 4 252 3.75 0.556 1 4 0.032 0.825 0.409


Comfortable discussing diversity with: Members of my fraternity/sorority 1042 2.90 1.010 1 4 194 2.69 0.989 1 4 -0.207 -2.671 0.008 0.1467

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Instructors/Faculty 1273 2.53 0.917 1 4 252 2.55 0.892 1 4 0.019 0.311 0.756




1258 1.98 0.842 1 4 252 2.27 0.887 1 4 0.291 4.796 0.000 0.2420

Religious and/or spiritual activities 1254 1.43 0.736 1 4 251 1.27 0.580 1 4 -0.162 -3.838 0.000 0.1904Cultural celebrations and holidays 1259 1.81 0.733 1 4 252 1.86 0.733 1 4 0.054 1.057 0.291


Student focused cultural organizations 1260 1.60 0.814 1 4 252 1.72 0.906 1 4 0.114 1.859 0.063Other (specify below) 681 1.24 0.652 1 4 114 1.12 0.436 1 4 -0.113 -2.356 0.019 0.1528


1269 1.51 0.818 1 4 247 1.92 1.013 1 4 0.401 5.860 0.000 0.3725

Marginalization: Age 1266 1.33 0.689 1 4 247 1.30 0.624 1 4 -0.033 -0.746 0.456Marginalization: Race/ethnicity 1267 1.48 0.798 1 4 246 1.61 0.944 1 4 0.135 2.094 0.036 0.1376Marginalization: Disability 1254 1.16 0.529 1 4 234 1.40 0.851 1 4 0.239 4.158 0.000 0.3251Marginalization: National origin 1263 1.24 0.577 1 4 243 1.18 0.534 1 4 -0.061 -1.619 0.106

Marginalization: Language difference/accent 1263 1.25 0.608 1 4 242 1.27 0.635 1 4 0.019 0.431 0.667

Marginalization: Political perspective 1268 1.62 0.920 1 4 245 1.62 0.805 1 4 0.008 0.132 0.895Marginalization: Religion 1264 1.38 0.717 1 4 243 1.36 0.738 1 4 -0.015 -0.288 0.773Marginalization: Sexual orientation 1264 1.12 0.448 1 4 246 1.89 1.049 1 4 0.774 11.382 0.000 0.8926

Marginalization: Gender identity/expression 1265 1.13 0.488 1 4 246 1.48 0.953 1 4 0.352 5.644 0.000 0.4714


A - 25



t -test

Std. Dev.N N

Hetero LGBTQ



1268 1.91 0.826 1 4 247 2.21 1.001 1 4 0.297 4.373 0.000 0.2536

Disparaging Remarks:Men 1261 1.67 0.780 1 4 246 1.55 0.766 1 4 -0.125 -2.329 0.020 0.1313Disparaging Remarks:Older People 1260 1.39 0.625 1 4 246 1.49 0.779 1 4 0.101 1.916 0.055Disparaging Remarks:Younger People 1263 1.42 0.658 1 4 246 1.42 0.726 1 4 0.004 0.078 0.938Disparaging Remarks:People’s race or ethnicity 1263 1.73 0.761 1 4 245 1.85 0.904 1 4 0.128 2.076 0.038 0.1249

Disparaging Remarks:People with disabilities 1256 1.38 0.667 1 4 241 1.57 0.814 1 4 0.186 3.335 0.001 0.2114





Disparaging Remarks:Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 1262 1.52 0.706 1 4 244 1.90 0.971 1 4 0.379 5.805 0.000 0.3787




A - 26




662 1.82 0.844 1 4 72 1.92 0.906 1 4 0.094 0.846 0.398



In groups comprised of men and women 661 2.82 1.039 1 4 73 3.05 1.078 1 4 0.225 1.702 0.089On your own 661 3.38 0.813 1 4 73 3.44 0.676 1 4 0.066 0.777 0.438


654 3.23 0.744 1 4 72 2.97 0.995 1 4 -0.258 -2.137 0.033 0.2201


646 3.08 0.808 1 4 71 2.98 0.987 1 4 -0.100 -0.824 0.410


650 3.17 0.867 1 4 72 3.03 0.974 1 4 -0.144 -1.200 0.230


652 2.21 0.964 1 4 72 2.47 1.027 1 4 0.259 2.046 0.041 0.2157


653 2.23 0.928 1 4 72 2.35 0.970 1 4 0.124 1.037 0.300






655 3.42 0.770 1 4 72 3.51 0.826 1 4 0.093 0.915 0.360

t -testHetero LGBTQ

Min MaxStd. Dev. Min Mean Diff t p dStd. Dev.MeanMax NMeanN

A - 27

Means by Sexual Orientation t -testHetero LGBTQ







Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 649 3.28 0.732 1 4 71 2.92 1.024 1 4 -0.358 -2.876 0.004 0.3105


657 3.12 0.915 1 4 73 3.01 0.916 1 4 -0.109 -0.965 0.335



632 3.26 0.844 1 4 71 3.33 0.874 1 4 0.068 0.618 0.537


Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 648 3.10 0.881 1 4 72 2.90 0.990 1 4 -0.196 -1.613 0.107





Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation 617 3.03 0.881 1 4 69 3.13 0.917 1 4 0.105 0.908 0.364



A - 28




648 3.61 0.656 1 4 72 3.37 0.810 1 4 -0.243 -2.471 0.014 0.1967


Comfortable discussing diversity with: Members of my fraternity/sorority 505 2.85 0.910 1 4 58 2.56 0.950 1 4 -0.292 -2.227 0.026 0.2454





644 1.97 0.771 1 4 71 2.07 0.964 1 4 0.108 0.915 0.361

Religious and/or spiritual activities 642 1.36 0.612 1 4 71 1.52 0.807 1 4 0.163 1.655 0.098Cultural celebrations and holidays 644 1.94 0.734 1 4 71 2.11 0.941 1 4 0.163 1.417 0.157

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 643 2.42 0.939 1 4 72 2.49 0.969 1 4 0.069 0.574 0.566

Student focused cultural organizations 643 1.75 0.810 1 4 69 1.81 0.870 1 4 0.063 0.580 0.562Other (specify below) 326 1.30 0.674 1 4 33 1.28 0.739 1 4 -0.016 -0.117 0.907


635 1.29 0.668 1 4 73 1.74 0.965 1 4 0.450 3.884 0.000 0.5333

Marginalization: Age 638 1.25 0.575 1 4 73 1.56 0.905 1 4 0.317 2.922 0.004 0.4277Marginalization: Race/ethnicity 636 1.43 0.714 1 4 72 1.79 0.978 1 4 0.356 3.002 0.003 0.4023Marginalization: Disability 611 1.12 0.475 1 4 69 1.37 0.850 1 4 0.243 2.328 0.020 0.3877Marginalization: National origin 635 1.38 0.701 1 4 72 1.56 0.949 1 4 0.178 1.546 0.123

Marginalization: Language difference/accent 636 1.47 0.780 1 4 71 1.73 0.925 1 4 0.262 2.291 0.022 0.2840

Marginalization: Political perspective 630 1.32 0.694 1 4 71 1.60 0.999 1 4 0.281 2.304 0.022 0.3367Marginalization: Religion 630 1.20 0.566 1 4 71 1.27 0.674 1 4 0.071 0.861 0.390Marginalization: Sexual orientation 629 1.08 0.374 1 4 71 1.52 0.920 1 4 0.437 3.976 0.000 0.7280

Marginalization: Gender identity/expression 631 1.10 0.412 1 4 71 1.41 0.800 1 4 0.316 3.290 0.001 0.5299


A - 29




627 1.42 0.666 1 4 72 1.63 0.843 1 4 0.203 1.978 0.048 0.2476


Disparaging Remarks:People with disabilities 620 1.10 0.363 1 4 72 1.30 0.676 1 4 0.199 2.457 0.014 0.3664





Disparaging Remarks:Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 621 1.16 0.450 1 4 72 1.52 0.854 1 4 0.361 3.526 0.000 0.5569



A - 30

Overall Frequencies

Never 310 19.8% 297 39.9%

Sometimes 695 44.4% 319 42.7%

Often 310 19.8% 85 11.4%

Very Often 248 15.9% 44 5.9%

Total 1563 745Never 127 8.1% 84 11.2%

Sometimes 454 29.0% 216 28.9%

Often 512 32.7% 208 27.8%

Very Often 471 30.1% 239 32.0%

Total 1564 746Never 347 22.2% 100 13.3%

Sometimes 676 43.2% 211 28.2%

Often 322 20.6% 192 25.7%

Very Often 219 14.0% 244 32.7%

Total 1564 747Never 159 10.2% 95 12.7%

Sometimes 476 30.5% 196 26.2%

Often 456 29.2% 191 25.6%

Very Often 471 30.2% 264 35.5%

Total 1562 746Never 8 0.5% 11 1.5%

Sometimes 152 9.7% 117 15.7%

Often 414 26.4% 193 25.9%

Very Often 991 63.4% 424 57.0%

Total 1564 745

Strongly disagree 103 6.7% 31 4.2%

Somewhat disagree 270 17.6% 72 9.8%

Somewhat agree 907 58.9% 357 48.5%

Strongly agree 259 16.8% 277 37.6%

Total 1539 736Strongly disagree 72 4.7% 39 5.3%


Somewhat agree 520 34.0% 339 46.7%

Strongly agree 793 51.7% 237 32.7%



Somewhat agree 699 45.7% 310 42.4%

Strongly agree 506 33.1% 293 40.1%

Total 1530 731

Undergraduate Graduate

Count Percent Count Percent



This semester, how often have you studied in the following groups or environments:

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements:





On your own


A - 31

Overall Frequencies Undergraduate Graduate




Somewhat agree 466 30.3% 218 29.7%

Strongly agree 110 7.2% 79 10.7%



Somewhat agree 419 27.3% 214 29.1%




Somewhat agree 650 42.3% 256 34.9%

Strongly agree 643 41.9% 399 54.4%



Somewhat agree 697 45.8% 293 39.9%

Strongly agree 506 33.2% 342 46.6%



Somewhat agree 182 11.9% 58 8.0%




Somewhat agree 615 39.9% 265 36.1%

Strongly agree 710 46.1% 390 53.1%

Total 1539 734





I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community


I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech.

A - 32





Somewhat agree 551 35.9% 253 34.4%

Strongly agree 768 50.0% 413 56.1%



Somewhat agree 718 46.9% 306 41.7%

Strongly agree 590 38.6% 346 47.1%



Somewhat agree 652 42.9% 258 35.3%

Strongly agree 621 40.8% 378 51.7%



Somewhat agree 702 46.0% 335 45.9%

Strongly agree 599 39.2% 279 38.2%



Somewhat agree 612 40.2% 350 48.9%

Strongly agree 217 14.2% 214 29.9%



Somewhat agree 681 44.5% 327 44.7%

Strongly agree 626 40.9% 299 40.9%



Somewhat agree 741 48.4% 333 45.6%

Strongly agree 468 30.6% 299 41.0%

Total 1530 731


Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:


While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews



Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds


A - 33





Somewhat agree 654 42.4% 294 39.7%

Strongly agree 663 42.9% 291 39.4%



Somewhat agree 665 43.0% 262 35.6%

Strongly agree 542 35.1% 296 40.3%



Somewhat agree 619 40.9% 284 39.9%

Strongly agree 685 45.3% 331 46.6%



Somewhat agree 662 43.5% 331 47.3%

Strongly agree 551 36.2% 255 36.5%



Somewhat agree 697 45.4% 311 42.7%

Strongly agree 572 37.2% 264 36.1%



Somewhat agree 663 43.3% 267 36.9%

Strongly agree 530 34.7% 304 42.0%



Somewhat agree 635 41.3% 295 40.5%

Strongly agree 619 40.3% 277 37.9%

Total 1536 730

Gender/gender identity

Veteran status or military involvement

Status as a school athlete

National origin

Individual disabilities

Race or ethnicity


Age

A - 34





Somewhat agree 622 40.7% 279 38.8%

Strongly agree 507 33.2% 240 33.3%



Somewhat agree 650 42.3% 288 40.2%

Strongly agree 548 35.7% 261 36.5%



Somewhat agree 712 46.8% 329 47.3%

Strongly agree 503 33.1% 224 32.2%



Somewhat agree 692 45.0% 303 42.2%

Strongly agree 505 32.9% 251 35.1%



Somewhat agree 688 44.9% 306 42.9%

Strongly agree 293 19.1% 188 26.4%

Total 1534 713

Very uncomfortable 16 1.1% 15 2.1%

Somewhat uncomfortable 47 3.1% 35 4.8%

Somewhat comfortable 282 18.3% 187 25.6%

Very comfortable 1193 77.5% 493 67.5%

Total 1538 729Very uncomfortable 121 7.9% 49 6.8%




Total 1535 731


Classmates


Socioeconomic status

Sexual orientation

Fraternity or sorority affiliation

Religion

Political affiliation/opinions

How comfortable are you discussing issues of diversity with the following people or groups:

A - 35



















Total 1525 712

Never 420 27.6% 194 26.7%

Sometimes 755 49.7% 398 54.9%

Often 228 15.0% 91 12.6%

Very Often 116 7.6% 42 5.8%

Total 1519 726Never 1065 70.3% 498 69.0%

Sometimes 336 22.2% 187 25.9%

Often 69 4.6% 25 3.5%

Very Often 45 3.0% 12 1.6%

Total 1515 722Never 531 35.0% 197 27.2%

Sometimes 779 51.2% 386 53.2%

Often 168 11.0% 115 15.8%

Very Often 42 2.8% 27 3.7%

Total 1520 725



Instructors/Faculty

Staff

Administration




In your time at Georgia Tech, how often do you participate in the following types of activities outside of your own culture:

A - 36



Never 455 30.0% 126 17.4%

Sometimes 703 46.4% 271 37.4%

Often 246 16.2% 220 30.4%

Very Often 112 7.4% 107 14.8%

Total 1516 725Never 837 55.0% 318 44.1%

Sometimes 502 33.0% 293 40.6%

Often 100 6.5% 78 10.9%

Very Often 82 5.4% 32 4.4%

Total 1521 722Never 688 86.1% 291 80.3%

Sometimes 71 8.9% 46 12.6%

Often 16 2.0% 16 4.5%

Very Often 24 3.0% 10 2.6%

Total 799 362

Not at all 958 62.8% 562 78.4%

Slightly 317 20.8% 86 12.0%

Somewhat 182 11.9% 51 7.1%

Greatly 68 4.5% 17 2.4%

Total 1525 716Not at all 1176 77.2% 573 79.5%

Slightly 223 14.6% 99 13.7%

Somewhat 96 6.3% 40 5.5%

Greatly 29 1.9% 9 1.3%

Total 1523 721Not at all 1029 67.6% 480 67.1%

Slightly 277 18.2% 148 20.7%

Somewhat 160 10.5% 74 10.4%

Greatly 56 3.6% 14 1.9%

Total 1523 716Not at all 1325 88.5% 628 91.1%

Slightly 87 5.8% 29 4.2%

Somewhat 53 3.6% 22 3.2%

Greatly 32 2.1% 10 1.5%

Total 1496 689


Marginalization: Gender



Other (specify below)

Marginalization: Age

Marginalization: Race/ethnicity

Marginalization: Disability

Within the last three years, to what extent have you experienced instances of marginalization at Georgia Tech based on the following personal identity or characteristics

A - 37



Not at all 1262 83.3% 520 72.7%

Slightly 176 11.6% 118 16.5%

Somewhat 59 3.9% 64 8.9%

Greatly 18 1.2% 14 2.0%

Total 1515 715Not at all 1256 83.0% 474 66.3%

Slightly 159 10.5% 146 20.4%

Somewhat 75 5.0% 73 10.2%

Greatly 23 1.5% 23 3.2%

Total 1513 716Not at all 942 61.9% 548 77.2%

Slightly 300 19.7% 93 13.0%

Somewhat 202 13.3% 49 6.9%

Greatly 79 5.2% 20 2.9%

Total 1523 710Not at all 1132 74.6% 607 85.5%

Slightly 236 15.6% 64 9.0%

Somewhat 115 7.6% 29 4.1%

Greatly 34 2.2% 10 1.5%

Total 1517 710Not at all 1300 85.5% 653 92.1%

Slightly 103 6.8% 31 4.4%

Somewhat 83 5.4% 16 2.3%

Greatly 34 2.2% 8 1.2%

Total 1520 709Not at all 1361 89.6% 652 91.8%

Slightly 68 4.4% 32 4.5%

Somewhat 57 3.7% 19 2.7%

Greatly 34 2.3% 8 1.1%

Total 1520 710Not at all 828 94.1% 405 95.6%

Slightly 16 1.8% 6 1.5%

Somewhat 16 1.8% 7 1.7%

Greatly 19 2.2% 5 1.2%

Total 879 424


Marginalization: National origin

Marginalization: Language difference/accent

Marginalization: Political perspective

Marginalization: Religion

Marginalization: Sexual orientation

Marginalization: Gender identity/expression

Marginalization: Other

A - 38



Never 490 32.2% 461 65.1%

Sometimes 714 46.8% 193 27.3%

Often 212 13.9% 40 5.7%

Very Often 108 7.1% 13 1.9%

Total 1524 708Never 754 49.7% 546 77.3%

Sometimes 588 38.8% 135 19.1%

Often 117 7.7% 15 2.2%

Very Often 58 3.8% 10 1.4%

Total 1517 707Never 1014 66.9% 561 80.0%

Sometimes 410 27.1% 118 16.9%

Often 65 4.3% 17 2.4%

Very Often 26 1.7% 5 0.7%

Total 1516 702Never 1013 66.7% 543 77.2%

Sometimes 406 26.7% 138 19.7%

Often 71 4.7% 18 2.6%

Very Often 28 1.9% 4 0.6%

Total 1518 703Never 653 43.0% 440 62.5%

Sometimes 655 43.1% 224 31.9%

Often 153 10.1% 26 3.7%

Very Often 57 3.8% 13 1.9%

Total 1518 704Never 1028 68.2% 635 90.5%

Sometimes 368 24.4% 53 7.6%

Often 76 5.0% 10 1.4%

Very Often 35 2.3% 4 0.6%

Total 1506 702Never 596 39.3% 483 68.6%

Sometimes 541 35.6% 152 21.6%

Often 243 16.1% 47 6.8%

Very Often 136 21Total 1516 703Never 878 58.1% 504 71.6%

Sometimes 515 34.1% 158 22.4%

Often 87 5.8% 25 3.5%

Very Often 30 2.0% 17 2.4%

Total 1509 704

Disparaging Remarks:Older People

Disparaging Remarks:Younger People

Disparaging Remarks:People’s race or ethnicity

Disparaging Remarks:People with disabilities

Disparaging Remarks:People with less education

Disparaging Remarks:Immigrants

Disparaging Remarks:Men

Disparaging Remarks: Women

Within the past year, how often have you heard a student make an insensitive or disparaging remark about any of these groups:

A - 39



Never 728 47.9% 440 62.7%

Sometimes 577 38.0% 211 30.1%

Often 157 10.3% 29 4.2%

Very Often 56 3.7% 21 3.0%

Total 1518 702Never 377 24.8% 397 56.5%

Sometimes 587 38.7% 202 28.8%

Often 342 22.5% 72 10.2%

Very Often 211 13.9% 31 4.5%

Total 1516 702Never 831 54.8% 527 75.7%

Sometimes 494 32.6% 129 18.5%

Often 128 8.4% 27 3.9%

Very Often 63 4.1% 13 1.8%

Total 1516 696Never 844 55.7% 597 85.0%

Sometimes 521 34.4% 80 11.4%

Often 96 6.3% 19 2.7%

Very Often 55 3.6% 6 0.9%

Total 1516 702Never 831 55.0% 589 84.1%

Sometimes 499 33.0% 81 11.5%

Often 114 7.5% 19 2.8%

Very Often 68 4.5% 11 1.6%

Total 1512 700Never 729 93.8% 380 96.3%

Sometimes 33 4.2% 8 2.0%

Often 4 0.6% 6 1.5%

Very Often 11 1.4% 1 0.2%

Total 777 395

Disparaging Remarks:Others

Disparaging Remarks:People with language differences/accents

Disparaging Remarks:People with specific political views

Disparaging Remarks:People with particular religious affiliations

Disparaging Remarks:Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people

Disparaging Remarks:Transgender people


A - 40

Frequencies by Gender

Never 225 23.9% 77 12.9%

Sometimes 411 43.6% 272 45.7%

Often 159 16.9% 148 24.9%

Very Often 147 15.6% 98 16.5%

Total 941 595Never 94 10.0% 28 4.6%

Sometimes 270 28.7% 176 29.5%

Often 307 32.6% 199 33.4%

Very Often 270 28.7% 194 32.5%

Total 941 596Never 214 22.8% 124 20.9%

Sometimes 390 41.4% 273 45.8%

Often 207 22.0% 114 19.1%

Very Often 130 13.8% 85 14.2%

Total 941 596Never 120 12.8% 32 5.4%

Sometimes 303 32.2% 161 27.0%

Often 265 28.2% 188 31.7%

Very Often 253 26.9% 214 35.9%

Total 941 594Never 4 0.4% 2 0.3%

Sometimes 86 9.1% 62 10.5%

Often 271 28.8% 135 22.6%

Very Often 580 61.6% 397 66.5%

Total 941 596



Somewhat agree 538 57.9% 354 60.7%

Strongly agree 173 18.6% 84 14.4%



Somewhat agree 324 35.2% 191 32.6%

Strongly agree 451 49.0% 328 56.1%

Total 920 584

Undergraduate





Percent





Man Woman

On your own

Count Percent Count

A - 41

Frequencies by Gender Undergraduate

Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count



Somewhat agree 415 45.0% 277 47.6%

Strongly agree 323 35.0% 176 30.2%



Somewhat agree 275 29.7% 180 30.8%




Somewhat agree 260 28.0% 147 25.3%




Somewhat agree 399 43.1% 245 42.0%

Strongly agree 395 42.7% 246 42.2%



Somewhat agree 414 45.1% 274 47.5%

Strongly agree 321 35.0% 185 32.1%



Somewhat agree 110 11.9% 65 11.1%




Somewhat agree 367 39.4% 238 40.8%

Strongly agree 449 48.3% 253 43.4%

Total 930 582









A - 42


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count



Somewhat agree 340 36.9% 202 34.6%

Strongly agree 410 44.5% 343 58.6%



Somewhat agree 423 46.0% 289 49.4%

Strongly agree 372 40.5% 214 36.6%



Somewhat agree 367 40.2% 276 47.5%

Strongly agree 395 43.3% 220 37.8%



Somewhat agree 427 46.7% 264 45.4%

Strongly agree 348 38.0% 248 42.6%



Somewhat agree 368 40.4% 240 41.2%

Strongly agree 147 16.2% 69 11.9%



Somewhat agree 393 42.6% 276 47.4%

Strongly agree 371 40.2% 246 42.2%



Somewhat agree 448 48.7% 286 49.0%

Strongly agree 279 30.3% 185 31.8%

Total 920 582









A - 43


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count



Somewhat agree 389 42.0% 249 42.2%

Strongly agree 392 42.4% 261 44.1%



Somewhat agree 403 43.7% 259 43.7%

Strongly agree 361 39.1% 176 29.6%



Somewhat agree 359 39.7% 248 42.7%

Strongly agree 409 45.2% 265 45.6%



Somewhat agree 395 43.4% 257 43.8%

Strongly agree 330 36.3% 210 35.8%



Somewhat agree 406 44.0% 279 47.6%

Strongly agree 347 37.5% 215 36.7%



Somewhat agree 378 41.3% 277 47.1%

Strongly agree 343 37.5% 183 31.2%



Somewhat agree 365 39.6% 262 44.6%

Strongly agree 383 41.6% 228 38.8%



Somewhat agree 360 39.3% 257 44.0%

Strongly agree 325 35.4% 176 30.1%

Total 917 585


Race or ethnicity


National origin


Age




A - 44


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count



Somewhat agree 373 40.6% 271 45.9%

Strongly agree 357 38.9% 186 31.6%



Somewhat agree 436 47.6% 267 45.8%

Strongly agree 279 30.4% 212 36.5%



Somewhat agree 392 42.5% 284 48.3%

Strongly agree 311 33.8% 189 32.3%



Somewhat agree 385 41.7% 296 50.6%

Strongly agree 177 19.2% 107 18.4%

Total 923 584

















Total 920 587

Instructors/Faculty

Sexual orientation


Religion




Classmates



A - 45


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count









Total 914 584

Never 298 32.8% 114 19.6%

Sometimes 410 45.1% 333 57.3%

Often 136 14.9% 85 14.6%

Very Often 66 7.3% 50 8.6%

Total 909 582Never 654 71.9% 395 68.4%

Sometimes 193 21.2% 133 23.1%

Often 29 3.2% 38 6.5%

Very Often 33 3.7% 12 2.0%

Total 909 578Never 341 37.5% 175 30.0%

Sometimes 444 48.8% 328 56.1%

Often 101 11.1% 63 10.7%

Very Often 24 2.6% 18 3.1%

Total 909 584Never 282 31.1% 165 28.4%

Sometimes 404 44.5% 288 49.7%

Often 144 15.9% 95 16.3%

Very Often 78 8.6% 33 5.6%

Total 908 580Never 539 59.2% 285 48.8%

Sometimes 277 30.4% 219 37.5%

Often 52 5.8% 44 7.5%

Very Often 42 4.7% 36 6.2%

Total 911 583Never 440 86.1% 236 86.2%

Sometimes 45 8.9% 24 8.7%

Often 12 2.3% 5 1.7%

Very Often 14 2.8% 9 3.4%

Total 511 274

Staff

Administration









A - 46


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count

Not at all 744 81.3% 212 36.3%

Slightly 104 11.4% 208 35.7%

Somewhat 50 5.4% 125 21.4%

Greatly 17 1.9% 39 6.6%

Total 914 583Not at all 700 76.7% 459 78.7%

Slightly 134 14.7% 86 14.7%

Somewhat 60 6.6% 29 4.9%

Greatly 19 2.1% 10 1.7%

Total 912 583Not at all 604 66.2% 408 70.2%

Slightly 195 21.4% 77 13.2%

Somewhat 82 9.0% 73 12.5%

Greatly 32 3.5% 24 4.1%

Total 913 582Not at all 810 89.8% 506 88.7%

Slightly 53 5.9% 28 5.0%

Somewhat 23 2.5% 21 3.7%

Greatly 16 1.8% 15 2.6%

Total 903 571Not at all 749 82.3% 493 84.8%

Slightly 117 12.9% 57 9.8%

Somewhat 31 3.4% 28 4.8%

Greatly 14 1.5% 3 0.5%

Total 910 581Not at all 751 82.7% 486 83.7%

Slightly 93 10.3% 61 10.6%

Somewhat 47 5.1% 29 4.9%

Greatly 17 1.9% 5 0.9%

Total 908 581Not at all 557 60.7% 373 64.5%

Slightly 173 18.8% 119 20.7%

Somewhat 131 14.3% 66 11.4%

Greatly 57 6.2% 20 3.5%

Total 918 578Not at all 696 76.5% 419 72.0%

Slightly 127 13.9% 106 18.2%

Somewhat 67 7.3% 44 7.6%

Greatly 20 2.2% 13 2.2%

Total 910 582










A - 47


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count

Not at all 786 86.4% 509 87.3%

Slightly 62 6.8% 32 5.6%

Somewhat 45 5.0% 30 5.2%

Greatly 17 1.8% 11 1.9%

Total 910 583Not at all 824 90.5% 534 91.7%

Slightly 46 5.0% 18 3.2%

Somewhat 28 3.1% 21 3.6%

Greatly 12 1.3% 9 1.5%

Total 911 582Not at all 536 94.5% 282 94.0%

Slightly 11 1.9% 5 1.5%

Somewhat 8 1.4% 7 2.3%

Greatly 13 2.3% 6 2.1%

Total 567 299

Never 342 37.6% 143 24.3%

Sometimes 418 45.9% 288 49.1%

Often 101 11.1% 102 17.3%

Very Often 49 5.4% 54 9.2%

Total 911 586Never 429 47.2% 312 53.9%

Sometimes 354 39.0% 222 38.2%

Often 84 9.2% 31 5.3%

Very Often 41 4.6% 15 2.6%

Total 909 580Never 600 66.2% 403 69.5%

Sometimes 247 27.2% 153 26.4%

Often 40 4.4% 19 3.3%

Very Often 20 2.2% 5 0.9%

Total 907 581Never 611 67.1% 387 66.6%

Sometimes 241 26.4% 159 27.5%

Often 39 4.3% 27 4.7%

Very Often 20 2.2% 7 1.2%

Total 911 580










A - 48


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count

Never 415 45.6% 229 39.3%

Sometimes 373 41.0% 271 46.6%

Often 90 9.9% 58 10.0%

Very Often 31 3.4% 24 4.1%

Total 909 582Never 614 68.0% 404 70.1%

Sometimes 225 24.9% 132 22.9%

Often 45 4.9% 25 4.4%

Very Often 19 2.1% 15 2.5%

Total 903 576Never 393 43.2% 195 33.6%

Sometimes 301 33.1% 235 40.5%

Often 143 15.7% 98 16.8%


Sometimes 309 34.2% 194 33.6%

Often 54 5.9% 29 5.1%

Very Often 15 1.6% 14 2.5%

Total 903 579Never 461 50.7% 253 43.6%

Sometimes 315 34.7% 252 43.3%

Often 104 11.5% 50 8.7%

Very Often 28 3.1% 26 4.4%

Total 909 581Never 249 27.3% 123 21.3%

Sometimes 320 35.1% 259 44.8%

Often 202 22.2% 129 22.3%

Very Often 140 15.4% 67 11.6%

Total 911 578Never 500 54.9% 319 55.0%

Sometimes 286 31.4% 199 34.4%

Often 80 8.8% 43 7.4%

Very Often 44 4.9% 18 3.1%

Total 910 579Never 518 56.9% 319 55.0%

Sometimes 305 33.5% 207 35.7%

Often 59 6.5% 34 5.8%

Very Often 28 3.1% 20 3.5%

Total 909 580










A - 49


Percent

Man Woman

Count Percent Count

Never 518 56.9% 307 53.4%

Sometimes 295 32.4% 200 34.8%

Often 59 6.5% 46 8.0%

Very Often 38 4.2% 21 3.7%

Total 909 575Never 490 94.4% 230 93.8%

Sometimes 18 3.5% 14 5.7%

Often 3 0.6% 0 0.0%

Very Often 8 1.5% 1 0.5%

Total


Disparaging Remarks:Others (please specify below)


A - 50


NeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotal

Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal









On your own

212 40.1% 82 39.5%

222 41.9% 95 45.7%

61 11.6% 23 11.0%

34 6.4% 8 3.8%

529 20759 11.2% 23 10.8%

156 29.6% 57 27.3%

146 27.6% 59 28.4%

166 31.5% 70 33.5%

528 20978 14.7% 19 9.3%

146 27.6% 63 30.1%

131 24.8% 59 28.3%

174 32.9% 68 32.4%

529 20978 14.8% 16 7.5%

146 27.6% 48 22.9%

134 25.3% 55 26.2%

171 32.3% 90 43.4%

529 2089 1.6% 2 1.1%

85 16.2% 31 15.1%

136 25.7% 54 25.8%

299 56.5% 120 57.9%

529 208

18 3.5% 11 5.3%

43 8.3% 24 11.9%

253 48.4% 103 50.2%

208 39.9% 67 32.7%

522 20524 4.6% 11 5.6%

83 16.1% 29 14.0%

244 47.5% 93 45.4%

164 31.8% 71 34.9%

514 204

Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

A - 51


Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal









Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

39 7.5% 13 6.4%

42 8.1% 31 15.0%

227 43.8% 82 40.0%

210 40.6% 79 38.6%

517 205140 27.0% 58 28.4%

176 33.9% 58 28.2%

149 28.6% 66 32.3%

55 10.6% 23 11.1%

520 205129 24.7% 49 23.7%

199 38.1% 69 33.6%

142 27.2% 71 34.8%

53 10.1% 16 7.9%

522 20513 2.6% 9 4.6%

34 6.4% 18 8.8%

177 34.0% 78 38.1%

298 57.0% 100 48.5%

522 20517 3.2% 12 6.0%

43 8.3% 20 9.9%

220 42.3% 72 35.5%

241 46.2% 99 48.6%

522 203381 73.2% 146 71.7%

83 15.9% 31 15.1%

40 7.6% 17 8.1%

17 3.2% 10 5.0%

520 20319 3.6% 8 4.0%

31 6.0% 17 8.5%

199 38.1% 63 30.9%

273 52.3% 116 56.6%

522 205

A - 52











Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

28 5.3% 3 1.4%

32 6.2% 6 3.2%

186 35.5% 64 31.5%

278 53.0% 131 64.0%

524 20510 1.9% 10 4.9%

42 7.9% 17 8.2%

229 43.8% 75 37.0%

242 46.4% 102 49.9%

522 20410 1.9% 6 3.1%

51 9.8% 23 11.5%

189 36.4% 67 33.1%

271 51.9% 106 52.3%

521 20224 4.6% 10 4.9%

56 10.8% 22 10.6%

242 46.8% 90 43.9%

196 37.8% 83 40.6%

518 20424 4.7% 24 12.2%

75 14.7% 23 11.5%

248 48.9% 99 49.8%

161 31.7% 53 26.6%

508 20014 2.7% 8 4.0%

58 11.2% 21 10.4%

235 45.2% 89 43.8%

212 40.8% 85 41.8%

519 20317 3.2% 10 4.7%

41 7.8% 25 12.4%

247 47.7% 85 41.6%

214 41.3% 84 41.3%

518 204

A - 53


Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal


Race or ethnicity


National origin


Age




Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

43 8.3% 16 7.5%

62 11.9% 33 15.8%

208 39.7% 80 38.5%

211 40.2% 79 38.1%

525 20757 11.0% 18 8.6%

62 12.0% 36 17.4%

179 34.5% 79 38.3%

222 42.6% 74 35.8%

521 20631 6.2% 13 6.5%

39 7.7% 12 6.3%

195 38.5% 85 43.4%

241 47.5% 86 43.8%

507 19729 5.8% 11 5.8%

53 10.6% 20 10.4%

232 46.8% 96 49.3%

182 36.7% 68 34.6%

496 19639 7.5% 14 7.1%

68 13.1% 31 15.2%

212 40.9% 96 47.0%

200 38.5% 63 30.7%

518 20443 8.4% 23 11.4%

58 11.4% 25 12.4%

183 35.6% 81 39.9%

229 44.6% 74 36.3%

513 20345 8.7% 16 7.9%

71 13.7% 24 11.5%

196 38.0% 95 46.0%

204 39.5% 71 34.6%

517 20657 11.2% 21 10.6%

92 18.0% 27 13.4%

181 35.5% 93 46.3%

180 35.3% 60 29.6%

509 202

A - 54


Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal

Very uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotal

Instructors/Faculty

Sexual orientation


Religion




Classmates



Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

57 11.3% 20 9.9%

64 12.7% 23 11.5%

190 37.7% 92 45.3%

193 38.3% 68 33.4%

505 20348 9.7% 11 5.6%

63 12.8% 20 10.4%

226 45.7% 99 51.2%

158 31.9% 63 32.7%

495 19356 10.9% 20 10.0%

62 12.3% 25 12.4%

207 40.7% 91 45.4%

184 36.1% 65 32.3%

509 20157 11.3% 24 11.7%

99 19.6% 35 17.4%

208 41.3% 95 47.5%

140 27.8% 47 23.3%

505 200

11 2.1% 3 1.4%

24 4.6% 11 5.3%

143 27.7% 40 19.4%

340 65.6% 151 73.8%

517 20531 5.9% 17 8.0%

95 18.3% 37 18.2%

258 49.7% 94 45.9%

135 26.1% 57 27.9%

519 20547 11.5% 20 13.2%

67 16.2% 30 19.9%

208 50.4% 63 42.3%

91 21.9% 37 24.6%

413 15056 11.0% 28 13.7%

119 23.3% 62 30.2%

239 46.8% 70 33.9%

96 18.9% 46 22.2%

510 205

A - 55


Very uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotal

NeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotal

Staff

Administration









Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

58 11.3% 22 11.0%

122 24.1% 53 26.0%

224 44.2% 84 41.8%

103 20.4% 43 21.2%

507 20263 12.5% 30 14.7%

120 23.8% 49 24.1%

214 42.3% 82 40.7%

108 21.4% 41 20.5%

505 202

150 28.9% 42 21.1%

278 53.7% 117 58.8%

66 12.7% 24 12.2%

24 4.7% 16 7.8%

518 199359 69.7% 137 68.8%

130 25.3% 51 25.9%

18 3.5% 7 3.4%

8 1.6% 4 1.9%

516 198154 29.7% 41 20.4%

268 51.9% 113 56.8%

76 14.6% 38 19.1%

20 3.8% 7 3.8%

517 19993 18.0% 32 16.1%

189 36.5% 81 40.4%

159 30.6% 59 29.4%

77 14.9% 28 14.1%

518 199229 44.4% 87 44.1%

206 40.0% 82 41.3%

57 11.1% 20 10.1%

23 4.5% 9 4.4%

515 198221 79.8% 68 81.3%

34 12.3% 12 13.9%

16 5.7% 0 0.6%

6 2.2% 4 4.3%

276 84

A - 56


Not at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotal










Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

444 87.8% 115 56.7%

36 7.1% 49 23.8%

20 4.0% 30 14.7%

6 1.1% 10 4.7%

506 204415 81.7% 155 75.6%

64 12.6% 32 15.5%

23 4.6% 15 7.5%

6 1.1% 3 1.4%

508 205344 67.7% 134 66.4%

102 20.1% 45 22.1%

53 10.4% 19 9.4%

9 1.7% 4 2.0%

507 202455 92.7% 169 88.8%

17 3.4% 9 4.9%

14 2.8% 8 4.3%

5 1.1% 4 2.0%

491 190366 72.3% 151 74.2%

81 16.0% 36 17.6%

49 9.8% 14 7.0%

10 2.0% 2 1.2%

506 203331 65.4% 138 68.5%

104 20.6% 40 20.0%

55 10.8% 17 8.6%

16 3.2% 6 2.9%

506 202389 77.0% 155 78.2%

65 12.9% 27 13.9%

37 7.3% 10 5.2%

14 2.8% 5 2.7%

505 198431 86.0% 170 84.3%

39 7.8% 24 11.8%

22 4.4% 7 3.5%

9 1.7% 1 0.4%

501 201

A - 57


Not at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotal

NeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotal










Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

472 93.9% 177 89.0%

18 3.7% 12 5.9%

9 1.7% 7 3.7%

4 0.8% 3 1.4%

503 199471 93.4% 179 89.6%

18 3.5% 13 6.5%

12 2.3% 6 3.0%

4 0.8% 2 0.8%

505 199307 95.9% 96 94.6%

5 1.5% 2 1.6%

6 1.8% 1 1.4%

3 0.8% 3 2.5%

320 102

353 70.6% 107 53.3%

116 23.2% 74 36.9%

24 4.9% 14 6.8%

6 1.3% 6 3.1%

500 201385 77.1% 158 79.1%

94 18.9% 36 18.1%

10 2.1% 5 2.5%

10 1.9% 1 0.3%

499 200406 81.4% 150 76.6%

76 15.3% 40 20.4%

14 2.7% 4 1.8%

3 0.5% 2 1.2%

499 195389 78.2% 150 76.0%

93 18.7% 41 20.7%

12 2.5% 6 2.9%

3 0.7% 1 0.4%

498 197

A - 58


NeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotal










Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

319 64.0% 119 60.0%

151 30.3% 69 34.8%

19 3.8% 8 3.9%

10 1.9% 3 1.4%

498 198453 91.2% 176 89.3%

36 7.3% 16 8.1%

7 1.3% 3 1.7%

1 0.2% 2 1.0%

496 198351 70.5% 130 66.1%

99 19.9% 50 25.1%

38 7.5% 9 4.6%

11 8498 197365 73.2% 136 68.6%

105 21.2% 49 24.7%

19 3.8% 6 2.9%

9 1.8% 7 3.8%

498 198316 63.7% 120 60.4%

146 29.4% 64 32.4%

21 4.3% 7 3.6%

13 2.6% 7 3.6%

496 199281 56.6% 115 57.8%

137 27.7% 60 30.3%

54 10.8% 17 8.7%

24 4.9% 6 3.2%

496 198369 75.0% 156 79.4%

94 19.1% 32 16.1%

18 3.7% 8 3.8%

11 2.2% 1 0.7%

493 196436 87.7% 157 79.2%

44 8.9% 36 18.1%

13 2.6% 5 2.4%

4 0.8% 1 0.3%

497 198

A - 59


NeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotalNeverSometimesOftenVery OftenTotal




Graduate

Woman

Count Percent

Man

Count Percent

431 86.8% 155 78.9%

47 9.6% 32 16.3%

11 2.3% 7 3.4%

7 1.3% 3 1.4%

496 197289 96.7% 89 94.9%

6 2.0% 2 2.1%

3 1.0% 3 3.0%

1 0.3% 0.0%

A - 60

Frequencies by Race / Ethnicity

Never 252 20.6% 58 16.9%

Sometimes 539 44.1% 155 45.6%

Often 241 19.8% 69 20.2%

Very Often 189 15.5% 59 17.3%

Total 1222 341Never 94 7.7% 32 9.5%

Sometimes 354 28.9% 100 29.5%

Often 421 34.4% 91 26.7%

Very Often 354 29.0% 117 34.3%

Total 1223 341Never 283 23.2% 64 18.8%

Sometimes 524 42.9% 152 44.6%

Often 244 20.0% 78 22.8%

Very Often 171 14.0% 47 13.8%

Total 1223 341Never 124 10.2% 35 10.3%

Sometimes 377 30.9% 99 29.0%

Often 344 28.1% 113 33.1%

Very Often 377 30.8% 94 27.7%

Total 1221 341Never 4 0.3% 3 1.0%

Sometimes 118 9.6% 34 10.1%

Often 320 26.1% 94 27.6%

Very Often 782 63.9% 209 61.4%

Total 1224 340



Somewhat agree 723 60.2% 184 54.4%

Strongly agree 209 17.4% 50 14.8%



Somewhat agree 388 32.5% 133 39.2%

Strongly agree 650 54.5% 143 42.7%



Somewhat agree 572 47.9% 127 37.7%

Strongly agree 396 33.1% 110 32.8%

Total 1193 337





Undergraduate


Not URM URM

On your own






A - 61

Frequencies by Race / Ethnicity Undergraduate


Not URM URM



Somewhat agree 365 30.5% 101 29.8%




Somewhat agree 302 25.2% 117 34.7%




Somewhat agree 509 42.4% 141 42.1%

Strongly agree 524 43.6% 120 35.8%



Somewhat agree 535 45.0% 162 48.6%

Strongly agree 416 35.0% 90 27.0%



Somewhat agree 128 10.6% 55 16.4%




Somewhat agree 484 40.3% 131 38.6%

Strongly agree 565 47.1% 144 42.6%

Total 1201 339



Somewhat agree 442 37.0% 108 31.9%

Strongly agree 591 49.5% 177 52.0%



Somewhat agree 564 47.3% 154 45.5%

Strongly agree 474 39.7% 117 34.5%

Total 1193 338











A - 62



Not URM URM



Somewhat agree 513 43.4% 139 40.8%

Strongly agree 503 42.6% 118 34.8%



Somewhat agree 540 45.4% 162 48.2%

Strongly agree 499 42.0% 100 29.6%



Somewhat agree 479 40.4% 133 39.5%

Strongly agree 170 14.3% 47 13.9%



Somewhat agree 539 45.3% 142 41.8%

Strongly agree 486 40.8% 140 41.1%



Somewhat agree 586 49.2% 155 45.6%

Strongly agree 368 30.9% 101 29.6%

Total 1190 340



Somewhat agree 517 42.9% 137 40.5%

Strongly agree 524 43.4% 139 41.2%



Somewhat agree 499 41.4% 166 49.0%

Strongly agree 445 36.9% 97 28.7%



Somewhat agree 477 40.4% 142 42.8%

Strongly agree 544 46.1% 141 42.4%

Total 1180 331







Age




A - 63



Not URM URM



Somewhat agree 510 43.0% 152 45.3%

Strongly agree 440 37.1% 111 33.0%



Somewhat agree 534 44.5% 162 48.5%

Strongly agree 472 39.3% 100 30.0%



Somewhat agree 506 42.5% 156 46.3%

Strongly agree 433 36.4% 97 28.7%



Somewhat agree 488 40.7% 147 43.7%

Strongly agree 522 43.5% 97 29.0%



Somewhat agree 480 40.3% 141 42.0%

Strongly agree 423 35.5% 84 25.0%



Somewhat agree 499 41.6% 150 44.9%

Strongly agree 450 37.5% 97 29.1%



Somewhat agree 546 46.0% 166 49.2%

Strongly agree 395 33.3% 108 32.1%



Somewhat agree 536 44.6% 156 46.5%

Strongly agree 415 34.5% 90 26.9%

Total 1201 335


Race or ethnicity


Sexual orientation


Religion

National origin



A - 64



Not URM URM



Somewhat agree 529 44.2% 160 47.1%

Strongly agree 243 20.3% 51 15.0%

Total 1196 338

























Total 1189 336

Staff

Administration

Instructors/Faculty




Classmates



A - 65



Not URM URM

Never 336 28.4% 83 25.0%

Sometimes 597 50.4% 158 47.2%

Often 155 13.1% 73 21.9%

Very Often 96 8.1% 20 5.9%

Total 1184 334Never 842 71.2% 223 67.0%

Sometimes 257 21.8% 78 23.5%

Often 46 3.9% 23 6.9%

Very Often 36 3.1% 9 2.6%

Total 1182 332Never 413 34.9% 118 35.3%

Sometimes 614 51.8% 165 49.4%

Often 129 10.9% 39 11.6%

Very Often 30 2.5% 13 3.7%

Total 1186 334Never 371 31.3% 84 25.3%

Sometimes 553 46.7% 150 45.2%

Often 178 15.0% 68 20.5%

Very Often 82 7.0% 30 9.0%

Total 1184 332Never 675 56.8% 162 48.6%

Sometimes 392 33.0% 110 33.1%

Often 73 6.1% 27 8.1%

Very Often 48 4.1% 34 10.2%

Total 1187 334Never 550 88.0% 137 79.1%

Sometimes 46 7.4% 25 14.5%

Often 13 2.1% 3 1.8%

Very Often 16 2.5% 8 4.6%

Total 626 174








A - 66



Not URM URM

Not at all 751 63.0% 207 62.1%

Slightly 250 21.0% 67 20.2%

Somewhat 141 11.8% 41 12.3%

Greatly 50 4.2% 18 5.5%

Total 1192 333Not at all 943 79.2% 232 70.0%

Slightly 160 13.4% 63 18.9%

Somewhat 70 5.8% 26 7.8%

Greatly 18 1.5% 11 3.3%

Total 1191 332Not at all 884 74.3% 146 43.7%

Slightly 202 17.0% 75 22.5%

Somewhat 83 6.9% 78 23.3%

Greatly 20 1.7% 35 10.5%

Total 1189 334Not at all 1052 89.6% 272 84.7%

Slightly 68 5.8% 19 5.8%

Somewhat 30 2.6% 23 7.1%

Greatly 24 2.1% 8 2.4%

Total 1175 321Not at all 1020 85.9% 242 73.7%

Slightly 117 9.9% 59 18.0%

Somewhat 42 3.6% 16 4.9%

Greatly 7 0.6% 11 3.3%

Total 1187 328Not at all 1009 85.1% 247 75.4%

Slightly 120 10.1% 39 12.0%

Somewhat 52 4.4% 23 7.0%

Greatly 5 0.4% 18 5.6%

Total 1185 328Not at all 738 62.0% 204 61.3%

Slightly 233 19.6% 67 20.0%

Somewhat 163 13.7% 39 11.7%

Greatly 56 4.7% 23 7.0%

Total 1190 333Not at all 886 74.6% 246 74.7%

Slightly 190 16.0% 46 14.1%

Somewhat 93 7.8% 21 6.5%

Greatly 19 1.6% 15 4.7%

Total 1188 329










A - 67



Not URM URM

Not at all 1023 86.0% 278 83.8%

Slightly 84 7.1% 19 5.9%

Somewhat 60 5.1% 22 6.8%

Greatly 22 1.8% 12 3.6%

Total 1189 332Not at all 1060 89.2% 301 90.9%

Slightly 57 4.8% 10 3.1%

Somewhat 46 3.8% 11 3.3%

Greatly 25 2.1% 9 2.7%

Total 1188 332Not at all 660 94.7% 168 92.2%

Slightly 14 2.0% 2 1.3%

Somewhat 9 1.3% 7 3.9%

Greatly 14 2.1% 5 2.6%

Total 697 182

Never 364 30.6% 126 37.9%

Sometimes 576 48.4% 138 41.2%

Often 164 13.8% 48 14.3%

Very Often 86 7.2% 22 6.6%

Total 1190 334Never 568 48.0% 186 55.9%

Sometimes 482 40.7% 106 31.9%

Often 92 7.8% 25 7.6%

Very Often 42 3.5% 16 4.7%

Total 1184 332Never 793 67.0% 221 66.6%

Sometimes 324 27.4% 87 26.1%

Often 45 3.8% 20 6.0%

Very Often 22 1.8% 4 1.3%

Total 1183 332Never 790 66.6% 223 67.1%

Sometimes 315 26.6% 91 27.3%

Often 56 4.7% 15 4.4%

Very Often 24 2.0% 4 1.2%

Total 1186 332










A - 68



Not URM URM

Never 544 45.9% 109 32.7%

Sometimes 502 42.3% 153 46.0%

Often 106 8.9% 47 14.2%

Very Often 33 2.8% 24 7.1%

Total 1186 333Never 791 67.4% 236 71.3%

Sometimes 302 25.7% 66 19.9%

Often 55 4.7% 20 6.1%

Very Often 26 2.2% 9 2.7%

Total 1175 331Never 470 39.6% 126 38.4%

Sometimes 436 36.7% 105 31.9%

Often 186 15.6% 58 17.6%


Sometimes 393 33.3% 122 36.9%

Often 57 4.8% 30 9.0%

Very Often 16 1.4% 14 4.2%

Total 1179 330Never 585 49.3% 142 42.9%

Sometimes 444 37.4% 133 40.1%

Often 122 10.3% 35 10.5%

Very Often 35 2.9% 22 6.5%

Total 1186 332Never 292 24.7% 84 25.4%

Sometimes 464 39.3% 122 36.7%

Often 283 23.9% 59 17.8%

Very Often 144 12.2% 67 20.2%

Total 1183 333Never 654 55.2% 176 53.2%

Sometimes 387 32.7% 108 32.5%

Often 105 8.9% 23 6.9%

Very Often 38 3.2% 24 7.4%

Total 1184 331Never 664 56.1% 179 54.1%

Sometimes 411 34.7% 110 33.3%

Often 73 6.2% 22 6.7%

Very Often 35 3.0% 20 5.9%

Total 1184 332










A - 69



Not URM URM

Never 662 56.1% 169 51.0%

Sometimes 392 33.2% 107 32.4%

Often 81 6.9% 32 9.8%

Very Often 46 3.9% 23 6.8%

Total 1181 331Never 574 94.8% 155 90.6%

Sometimes 20 3.3% 13 7.3%

Often 4 0.6% 0 0.3%

Very Often 8 1.3% 3 1.8%

Total 606 171




A - 70



Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal





On your own






233 38.1% 64 48.2%

274 44.8% 45 33.5%

69 11.3% 16 11.8%

35 5.8% 9 6.5%

612 13362 10.2% 21 15.9%

188 30.7% 28 20.6%

180 29.5% 27 20.3%

181 29.6% 58 43.1%

611 13472 11.7% 28 20.6%

178 29.1% 33 24.2%

167 27.3% 25 18.5%

195 31.8% 49 36.7%

613 13470 11.4% 25 18.6%

164 26.8% 32 23.7%

171 27.9% 20 15.1%

207 33.9% 57 42.6%

611 13410 1.6% 1 0.7%

98 16.0% 19 14.2%

164 26.9% 29 21.4%

339 55.5% 86 63.6%

611 134

22 3.6% 9 6.9%

51 8.5% 21 15.7%

295 48.9% 62 46.3%

235 39.0% 42 31.1%

602 13333 5.5% 6 4.7%

87 14.6% 24 18.6%

281 47.1% 58 44.6%

195 32.8% 41 32.1%

596 12940 6.7% 14 11.0%

56 9.4% 17 13.2%

264 44.0% 46 35.2%

240 39.9% 53 40.6%

601 130

Graduate


Not URM URM

A - 71


Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal












Graduate


Not URM URM

157 26.1% 45 34.2%

191 31.7% 44 33.4%

180 30.0% 38 28.4%

73 12.2% 5 4.0%

601 133136 22.6% 45 33.8%

224 37.2% 46 34.4%

188 31.2% 26 19.5%

55 9.0% 16 12.2%

603 13318 3.0% 6 4.8%

31 5.2% 23 17.3%

219 36.4% 37 28.2%

334 55.4% 65 49.7%

603 13222 3.7% 10 7.2%

52 8.6% 15 11.3%

249 41.6% 43 32.3%

276 46.0% 66 49.2%

599 133436 72.9% 93 70.3%

89 14.9% 25 18.9%

47 7.8% 12 8.8%

26 4.4% 3 2.0%

599 13221 3.6% 8 5.8%

39 6.5% 11 8.0%

232 38.6% 33 24.9%

309 51.3% 81 61.3%

601 132

22 3.7% 8 6.1%

32 5.3% 8 6.3%

217 36.0% 36 27.2%

333 55.1% 81 60.4%

604 13310 1.6% 12 8.9%

51 8.6% 9 6.8%

258 42.9% 48 36.0%

282 46.9% 65 48.4%

601 133

A - 72


Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal

Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal







Age




Graduate


Not URM URM

11 1.8% 7 5.5%

59 9.8% 18 13.4%

213 35.6% 45 34.3%

317 52.8% 61 46.8%

600 13124 3.9% 11 8.3%

57 9.6% 25 18.7%

286 47.9% 49 37.1%

231 38.6% 48 35.9%

598 13333 5.7% 18 13.5%

78 13.4% 23 17.5%

295 50.5% 54 41.6%

178 30.5% 36 27.4%

585 13114 2.4% 9 6.7%

58 9.6% 24 18.2%

286 47.7% 42 31.5%

242 40.4% 57 43.5%

599 13222 3.7% 5 3.9%

53 8.9% 18 13.8%

276 46.1% 57 43.1%

247 41.4% 52 39.2%

597 133

52 8.6% 7 5.2%

78 12.9% 17 12.7%

238 39.2% 56 42.0%

238 39.3% 53 40.0%

607 13365 10.9% 11 8.4%

83 13.9% 17 12.9%

220 36.6% 42 31.3%

232 38.7% 63 47.4%

601 13442 7.2% 2 1.9%

45 7.7% 7 5.1%

241 41.6% 43 32.6%

252 43.5% 79 60.4%

580 131

A - 73




Race or ethnicity


Sexual orientation


Religion

National origin



Graduate


Not URM URM

35 6.1% 5 4.2%

66 11.4% 7 6.0%

284 49.1% 47 38.7%

193 33.4% 62 51.1%

578 12149 8.1% 7 5.1%

88 14.7% 12 9.1%

254 42.3% 58 44.2%

209 34.9% 54 41.6%

599 13160 10.1% 7 5.3%

71 11.9% 15 11.3%

220 37.2% 47 35.6%

241 40.7% 63 47.8%

591 13254 9.0% 8 6.2%

76 12.7% 20 15.1%

247 41.3% 49 36.7%

221 37.0% 56 42.0%

597 13368 11.5% 12 8.9%

100 17.0% 21 16.1%

230 39.3% 48 36.5%

189 32.2% 51 38.5%

587 13269 11.8% 9 7.1%

81 13.8% 8 6.0%

230 39.4% 57 43.8%

205 35.0% 56 43.1%

584 13154 9.4% 5 3.9%

74 12.9% 10 7.9%

274 48.0% 54 44.2%

169 29.7% 54 44.1%

571 12362 10.6% 14 10.3%

74 12.7% 13 10.0%

252 43.1% 51 38.3%

197 33.7% 55 41.4%

585 132

A - 74


Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal

Very uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotal

Staff

Administration

Instructors/Faculty




Classmates



Graduate


Not URM URM

72 12.5% 8 6.1%

111 19.2% 27 20.3%

252 43.4% 54 40.8%

145 24.9% 43 32.9%

581 132

11 1.8% 4 3.0%

20 3.4% 14 10.9%

157 26.4% 30 22.4%

408 68.4% 84 63.7%

597 13236 6.0% 13 10.1%

100 16.7% 33 24.7%

305 50.9% 50 38.4%

158 26.4% 35 26.8%

599 13254 11.8% 14 13.3%

74 16.0% 24 23.0%

228 49.3% 45 42.8%

106 22.9% 22 20.9%

463 10663 10.7% 24 18.6%

141 24.0% 40 30.7%

269 45.6% 40 30.7%

117 19.7% 26 20.0%

590 13267 11.5% 14 10.4%

140 23.9% 36 27.8%

261 44.7% 50 38.7%

117 20.0% 30 23.0%

585 13077 13.2% 18 13.8%

135 23.2% 35 26.8%

250 42.9% 47 36.4%

121 20.7% 30 23.0%

583 129

A - 75










Graduate


Not URM URM

159 26.8% 35 26.5%

337 56.6% 62 47.2%

70 11.7% 22 16.5%

29 4.9% 13 9.8%

595 131404 68.2% 94 72.6%

160 27.0% 27 20.8%

19 3.2% 7 5.1%

10 1.6% 2 1.5%

592 130156 26.2% 41 31.8%

332 55.7% 54 41.7%

89 14.9% 26 20.1%

19 3.2% 8 6.4%

596 129109 18.3% 18 13.5%

218 36.7% 53 40.7%

188 31.6% 32 24.7%

80 13.4% 28 21.1%

594 131267 44.9% 52 40.5%

231 38.9% 62 48.2%

65 11.0% 13 10.2%

31 5.2% 1 1.0%

594 128248 81.1% 43 75.9%

43 14.0% 3 5.0%

9 3.1% 7 12.4%

6 1.9% 4 6.7%

306 56

A - 76


Not at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotal










Graduate


Not URM URM

463 78.5% 99 78.0%

70 11.8% 16 12.7%

43 7.3% 8 6.3%

14 2.3% 4 2.9%

589 127471 79.5% 102 79.4%

81 13.7% 17 13.6%

33 5.6% 7 5.2%

7 1.2% 2 1.7%

593 128399 67.8% 81 63.8%

122 20.7% 26 20.4%

56 9.6% 18 14.1%

11 2.0% 2 1.7%

589 127512 90.7% 116 93.0%

25 4.5% 4 3.1%

20 3.6% 2 1.4%

7 1.2% 3 2.5%

564 124425 72.1% 95 75.1%

99 16.9% 18 14.5%

52 8.8% 12 9.5%

13 2.2% 1 0.9%

589 127380 64.6% 94 73.9%

123 20.8% 23 18.2%

64 11.0% 9 6.7%

21 3.6% 2 1.2%

588 128448 76.9% 100 78.3%

79 13.6% 13 10.3%

38 6.6% 11 8.5%

17 2.9% 4 2.9%

583 128498 85.5% 109 85.1%

54 9.3% 10 7.7%

25 4.2% 4 3.4%

5 0.9% 5 3.9%

582 128

A - 77


Not at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotal











Graduate


Not URM URM

534 91.4% 119 95.5%

28 4.8% 3 2.6%

15 2.5% 1 0.9%

7 1.2% 1 1.0%

584 125536 91.4% 117 93.6%

27 4.7% 5 3.7%

17 2.9% 2 1.8%

6 1.1% 1 1.0%

586 125341 95.3% 64 96.8%

6 1.8% 0.0%

6 1.7% 1 1.6%

4 1.2% 1 1.6%

358 66

379 64.8% 83 66.6%

164 28.0% 30 24.0%

31 5.3% 9 7.3%

11 1.8% 3 2.2%

584 124450 77.2% 96 77.7%

111 19.0% 24 19.5%

14 2.3% 2 1.3%

8 1.4% 2 1.5%

583 124466 80.3% 96 78.3%

94 16.3% 24 19.6%

15 2.6% 2 1.8%

5 0.8% 0 0.3%

580 122450 77.7% 93 74.6%

111 19.2% 27 22.0%

16 2.7% 2 1.9%

2 0.4% 2 1.5%

579 124

A - 78












Graduate


Not URM URM

366 63.1% 74 59.7%

179 31.0% 45 36.1%

22 3.9% 4 3.2%

12 2.1% 1 1.0%

579 124518 89.6% 117 94.8%

48 8.3% 5 4.2%

10 1.7% 0.0%

3 0.5% 1 1.0%

579 123402 69.5% 80 64.8%

119 20.5% 33 26.9%

40 6.9% 8 6.1%

18 3579 124413 71.2% 92 73.8%

133 22.9% 25 20.4%

20 3.4% 5 4.1%

15 2.6% 2 1.7%

580 124359 62.0% 81 66.2%

174 30.1% 37 30.2%

26 4.5% 3 2.6%

20 3.4% 1 1.0%

579 123330 57.0% 67 54.3%

158 27.4% 44 35.1%

65 11.3% 6 5.2%

25 4.3% 7 5.4%

578 124437 76.4% 90 72.9%

102 17.8% 27 21.9%

23 4.1% 4 3.0%

10 1.8% 3 2.2%

572 124488 84.5% 108 87.4%

69 11.9% 11 8.9%

15 2.7% 3 2.7%

5 0.9% 1 1.0%

578 124

A - 79






Graduate


Not URM URM

482 83.6% 107 86.4%

67 11.6% 14 11.2%

18 3.1% 2 1.4%

10 1.7% 1 1.0%

576 124326 96.2% 55 96.6%

8 2.4% 1 1.8%

5 1.4% 1 1.6%

0 0.0% 0 0.0%

338 57

A - 80

Frequencies by Orientation

Never 260 20.0% 48 18.8%

Sometimes 585 45.1% 103 40.6%

Often 255 19.7% 54 21.1%

Very Often 198 15.3% 50 19.5%

Total 1299 254Never 99 7.6% 24 9.5%

Sometimes 372 28.6% 79 31.1%

Often 450 34.6% 59 23.4%

Very Often 380 29.2% 91 36.0%

Total 1300 254Never 284 21.8% 60 23.6%

Sometimes 554 42.6% 117 46.0%

Often 277 21.3% 44 17.3%

Very Often 185 14.2% 33 13.2%

Total 1300 254Never 130 10.0% 27 10.7%

Sometimes 377 29.0% 94 37.0%

Often 403 31.0% 52 20.7%

Very Often 389 29.9% 80 31.7%

Total 1299 253Never 5 0.4% 3 1.1%

Sometimes 107 8.3% 42 16.6%

Often 358 27.6% 53 20.8%

Very Often 830 63.8% 156 61.5%

Total 1300 254



Somewhat agree 763 59.8% 134 53.3%

Strongly agree 209 16.4% 50 19.7%



Somewhat agree 441 34.8% 77 30.3%

Strongly agree 660 52.0% 127 50.2%

Total 1268 253




Undergraduate


Hetero LGBTQ

On your own






A - 81

Frequencies by Orientation Undergraduate


Hetero LGBTQ



Somewhat agree 586 46.3% 108 42.9%

Strongly agree 429 33.9% 75 29.5%



Somewhat agree 381 29.9% 81 32.2%




Somewhat agree 349 27.4% 64 25.3%




Somewhat agree 545 42.9% 98 38.7%

Strongly agree 555 43.6% 86 34.0%



Somewhat agree 582 46.1% 111 44.2%

Strongly agree 439 34.8% 63 25.2%



Somewhat agree 138 10.8% 45 17.7%




Somewhat agree 507 39.7% 103 41.0%

Strongly agree 613 48.0% 91 36.4%

Total 1278 251









A - 82



Hetero LGBTQ



Somewhat agree 479 37.7% 69 27.2%

Strongly agree 614 48.3% 149 59.1%



Somewhat agree 602 47.5% 110 43.5%

Strongly agree 513 40.4% 76 29.9%



Somewhat agree 536 42.5% 112 44.6%

Strongly agree 538 42.7% 81 32.4%



Somewhat agree 577 45.7% 121 48.1%

Strongly agree 522 41.4% 73 28.9%



Somewhat agree 517 41.1% 94 37.2%

Strongly agree 188 14.9% 27 10.6%



Somewhat agree 578 45.4% 98 39.3%

Strongly agree 503 39.6% 119 47.6%



Somewhat agree 624 49.2% 114 45.2%

Strongly agree 399 31.5% 68 26.8%

Total 1267 252









A - 83



Hetero LGBTQ



Somewhat agree 559 43.6% 92 36.2%

Strongly agree 534 41.7% 126 49.7%



Somewhat agree 572 44.7% 86 33.9%

Strongly agree 467 36.4% 74 29.0%



Somewhat agree 507 40.4% 109 44.1%

Strongly agree 568 45.3% 112 45.2%



Somewhat agree 552 43.7% 104 41.5%

Strongly agree 458 36.3% 91 36.5%



Somewhat agree 570 44.7% 121 48.2%

Strongly agree 475 37.2% 95 37.8%



Somewhat agree 565 44.6% 95 37.6%

Strongly agree 450 35.4% 76 30.2%



Somewhat agree 514 40.3% 117 45.9%

Strongly agree 531 41.7% 86 33.7%



Somewhat agree 518 40.9% 98 39.0%

Strongly agree 438 34.6% 67 26.6%

Total 1267 252


Race or ethnicity


National origin


Age




A - 84



Hetero LGBTQ



Somewhat agree 548 43.0% 98 38.6%

Strongly agree 469 36.8% 77 30.4%



Somewhat agree 608 48.0% 98 39.9%

Strongly agree 399 31.5% 102 41.3%



Somewhat agree 562 44.1% 125 49.5%

Strongly agree 424 33.3% 78 31.1%



Somewhat agree 559 43.9% 123 48.6%

Strongly agree 238 18.7% 55 21.9%

Total 1272 253









Total 1275 251

Sexual orientation


Religion




Classmates


A - 85



Hetero LGBTQ

















Total 1264 252

Never 369 29.3% 48 19.1%

Sometimes 637 50.6% 113 45.0%

Often 163 12.9% 65 25.6%

Very Often 90 7.2% 26 10.3%

Total 1258 252Never 860 68.6% 198 79.1%

Sometimes 293 23.4% 40 16.1%

Often 59 4.7% 9 3.7%

Very Often 42 3.4% 3 1.1%

Total 1254 251Never 444 35.3% 83 32.9%

Sometimes 649 51.6% 125 49.9%

Often 128 10.2% 39 15.5%

Very Often 38 3.0% 4 1.8%

Total 1259 252Never 375 29.8% 76 30.5%

Sometimes 577 46.0% 122 48.4%

Often 207 16.5% 38 15.1%

Very Often 96 7.7% 15 6.0%

Total 1255 251

Staff

Administration






Instructors/Faculty



A - 86



Hetero LGBTQ

Never 707 56.1% 126 50.0%

Sometimes 404 32.1% 94 37.2%

Often 90 7.1% 10 3.8%

Very Often 59 4.7% 23 9.0%

Total 1260 252Never 580 85.2% 103 90.5%

Sometimes 63 9.2% 9 7.8%

Often 16 2.3% 1 0.5%

Very Often 22 3.3% 1 1.1%

Total 681 114

Not at all 839 66.2% 113 45.9%

Slightly 249 19.6% 65 26.4%

Somewhat 137 10.8% 44 17.8%

Greatly 43 3.4% 24 9.8%

Total 1269 247Not at all 975 77.0% 193 78.2%

Slightly 188 14.8% 35 14.1%

Somewhat 76 6.0% 18 7.2%

Greatly 28 2.2% 1 0.5%

Total 1266 247Not at all 864 68.2% 160 65.2%

Slightly 240 19.0% 35 14.1%

Somewhat 122 9.6% 36 14.7%

Greatly 41 3.2% 15 5.9%

Total 1267 246Not at all 1132 90.2% 185 79.2%

Slightly 68 5.5% 17 7.4%

Somewhat 34 2.7% 19 8.1%

Greatly 19 1.6% 13 5.3%

Total 1254 234Not at all 1041 82.4% 214 87.9%

Slightly 157 12.4% 19 7.7%

Somewhat 50 3.9% 8 3.2%

Greatly 15 1.2% 3 1.2%

Total 1263 243










A - 87



Hetero LGBTQ

Not at all 1050 83.2% 199 82.2%

Slightly 132 10.5% 26 10.7%

Somewhat 62 4.9% 13 5.5%

Greatly 18 1.4% 4 1.6%

Total 1263 242Not at all 800 63.1% 137 56.0%

Slightly 228 18.0% 68 27.9%

Somewhat 167 13.2% 34 13.9%

Greatly 73 5.7% 5 2.2%

Total 1268 245Not at all 938 74.2% 186 76.4%

Slightly 201 15.9% 34 14.0%

Somewhat 98 7.8% 16 6.6%

Greatly 26 2.0% 7 3.0%

Total 1264 243Not at all 1166 92.2% 126 51.1%

Slightly 57 4.5% 45 18.4%

Somewhat 31 2.5% 51 20.8%

Greatly 10 0.8% 24 9.7%

Total 1264 246Not at all 1165 92.1% 188 76.3%

Slightly 49 3.8% 18 7.3%

Somewhat 37 2.9% 20 8.1%

Greatly 14 1.1% 20 8.2%

Total 1265 246Not at all 716 94.6% 106 90.8%

Slightly 14 1.9% 2 1.7%

Somewhat 12 1.6% 4 3.3%

Greatly 14 1.9% 5 4.2%

Total 757 117








A - 88



Hetero LGBTQ

Never 421 33.2% 66 26.6%

Sometimes 607 47.9% 101 41.0%

Often 168 13.2% 43 17.3%

Very Often 71 5.6% 37 15.1%

Total 1268 247Never 609 48.3% 142 57.7%

Sometimes 499 39.6% 83 33.9%

Often 106 8.4% 10 4.3%

Very Often 46 3.7% 10 4.2%

Total 1261 246Never 851 67.5% 161 65.2%

Sometimes 346 27.4% 59 24.2%

Often 47 3.7% 17 7.1%

Very Often 17 1.3% 9 3.5%

Total 1260 246Never 838 66.4% 170 68.9%

Sometimes 345 27.3% 58 23.5%

Often 59 4.7% 11 4.3%

Very Often 20 1.6% 8 3.2%

Total 1263 246Never 547 43.3% 102 41.6%

Sometimes 555 43.9% 95 38.8%

Often 123 9.7% 30 12.1%

Very Often 39 3.1% 18 7.4%

Total 1263 245Never 876 69.8% 146 60.5%

Sometimes 304 24.2% 61 25.2%

Often 49 3.9% 27 11.2%

Very Often 27 2.2% 8 3.2%

Total 1256 241Never 499 39.5% 93 38.0%

Sometimes 464 36.8% 72 29.3%

Often 198 15.7% 45 18.4%


Sometimes 430 34.2% 81 33.1%

Often 68 5.4% 19 7.6%

Very Often 23 1.8% 7 2.9%

Total 1256 244










A - 89



Hetero LGBTQ

Never 602 47.6% 121 49.3%

Sometimes 489 38.7% 83 34.0%

Often 129 10.2% 28 11.4%

Very Often 43 3.4% 13 5.2%

Total 1264 245Never 317 25.2% 57 23.3%

Sometimes 483 38.3% 100 40.8%

Often 283 22.4% 56 22.7%

Very Often 178 14.1% 32 13.2%

Total 1261 246Never 696 55.2% 130 52.9%

Sometimes 403 32.0% 87 35.4%

Often 112 8.9% 15 6.0%

Very Often 49 3.9% 14 5.7%

Total 1261 246Never 738 58.5% 100 40.9%

Sometimes 420 33.3% 98 40.1%

Often 78 6.2% 18 7.3%

Very Often 26 2.1% 28 11.7%

Total 1262 244Never 730 58.0% 96 39.2%

Sometimes 413 32.8% 83 33.8%

Often 84 6.7% 29 11.8%

Very Often 31 2.5% 37 15.3%

Total 1258 245Never 630 94.4% 93 91.0%

Sometimes 27 4.1% 5 4.5%

Often 2 0.4% 2 1.9%

Very Often 8 1.2% 3 2.6%

Total 667 103








A - 90







On your own






268 40.5% 26 35.7%

280 42.3% 34 46.4%

77 11.6% 6 8.5%

37 5.5% 7 9.4%

662 7273 11.1% 9 12.4%

191 28.9% 21 29.1%

192 28.9% 13 18.1%

206 31.1% 30 40.5%

662 7388 13.3% 10 13.1%

186 28.1% 21 29.2%

179 27.0% 9 12.7%

209 31.5% 33 45.0%

663 7383 12.6% 8 10.6%

177 26.7% 17 23.3%

177 26.7% 13 17.1%

225 34.0% 36 49.0%

661 7310 1.5% 0 0.2%

110 16.6% 7 9.5%

161 24.4% 26 35.9%

380 57.5% 40 54.4%

661 73

22 3.3% 8 11.8%

59 9.0% 11 15.2%

323 49.4% 27 37.5%

250 38.2% 26 35.5%

654 7229 4.6% 7 10.4%

99 15.3% 12 17.7%

309 47.8% 25 35.3%

209 32.3% 26 36.5%

646 71

Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

A - 91











Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

45 7.0% 8 10.6%

62 9.5% 10 13.7%

280 43.0% 27 38.1%

263 40.5% 27 37.6%

650 72182 27.9% 16 22.5%

215 33.0% 18 25.0%

189 29.0% 26 35.4%

66 10.1% 12 17.1%

652 72164 25.0% 15 20.2%

238 36.5% 28 39.3%

191 29.3% 19 25.7%

60 9.2% 11 14.8%

653 7213 2.1% 9 13.2%

42 6.4% 12 16.7%

230 35.2% 22 30.1%

369 56.3% 29 40.0%

654 7219 2.9% 10 13.8%

53 8.1% 14 19.1%

266 40.8% 22 30.6%

314 48.1% 26 36.6%

653 72483 74.3% 41 57.5%

98 15.1% 13 18.0%

49 7.5% 9 13.2%

20 3.1% 8 11.3%

650 7220 3.1% 6 8.5%

43 6.6% 6 9.0%

234 35.7% 27 38.5%

357 54.6% 31 44.0%

654 71

A - 92











Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

26 4.0% 3 4.8%

35 5.4% 5 6.8%

233 35.6% 15 21.2%

360 55.0% 48 67.3%

655 7210 1.6% 11 14.6%

50 7.7% 11 14.6%

271 41.5% 29 40.0%

321 49.3% 22 30.7%

652 7211 1.7% 6 8.7%

60 9.2% 16 22.2%

228 35.0% 23 32.8%

352 54.1% 26 36.3%

650 7126 3.9% 8 11.5%

65 10.1% 15 20.8%

297 45.8% 30 42.9%

261 40.2% 18 24.9%

649 7135 5.5% 13 19.0%

87 13.7% 13 18.6%

318 49.9% 27 38.0%

197 30.9% 17 24.3%

636 7017 2.6% 5 7.1%

69 10.6% 11 15.4%

295 45.5% 28 38.7%

268 41.3% 28 38.8%

649 7218 2.7% 9 12.1%

55 8.5% 14 19.5%

304 46.8% 23 32.4%

272 42.0% 26 36.0%

649 71

A - 93




Race or ethnicity


National origin


Age




Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

52 7.9% 7 9.2%

84 12.8% 10 13.2%

255 38.8% 33 44.9%

266 40.5% 24 32.6%

657 7364 9.9% 12 15.8%

80 12.3% 18 24.4%

238 36.5% 20 27.1%

269 41.3% 24 32.7%

652 7339 6.1% 5 6.8%

47 7.4% 4 6.1%

255 40.3% 24 34.1%

292 46.2% 37 53.0%

632 7133 5.2% 7 9.9%

67 10.8% 6 8.6%

297 47.8% 30 42.8%

225 36.2% 27 38.7%

622 7045 6.9% 9 13.1%

87 13.4% 10 14.4%

275 42.4% 30 41.6%

241 37.2% 22 30.9%

648 7256 8.6% 11 14.9%

75 11.7% 9 12.9%

238 37.0% 26 37.0%

274 42.7% 25 35.2%

643 7153 8.2% 8 11.4%

82 12.7% 12 17.5%

259 39.8% 30 42.5%

255 39.3% 20 28.6%

649 7269 10.8% 10 13.6%

101 15.9% 17 24.4%

245 38.4% 28 39.2%

223 35.0% 16 22.8%

639 71

A - 94


Strongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotalStrongly disagreeSomewhat disagreeSomewhat agreeStrongly agreeTotal

Very uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotal

Sexual orientation


Religion




Classmates


Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

69 10.8% 9 12.2%

76 11.9% 12 16.4%

255 40.2% 28 39.2%

236 37.1% 23 32.3%

636 7253 8.5% 5 7.5%

73 11.8% 9 13.3%

297 48.2% 26 37.9%

194 31.5% 29 41.3%

617 6969 10.8% 6 8.3%

77 12.1% 10 13.9%

266 41.6% 32 45.4%

226 35.5% 23 32.4%

638 7169 10.9% 9 13.2%

120 19.0% 15 20.8%

273 43.1% 31 43.4%

171 27.1% 16 22.6%

633 71

10 1.5% 4 5.8%

33 5.0% 2 3.1%

155 24.0% 28 39.2%

450 69.5% 38 51.8%

648 7237 5.7% 12 16.4%

119 18.3% 12 16.8%

318 48.9% 31 42.7%

176 27.1% 18 24.0%

649 73

A - 95


Very uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotalVery uncomfortableSomewhat uncomfortableSomewhat comfortableVery comfortableTotal


Staff

Administration






Instructors/Faculty



Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

55 11.0% 11 19.5%

87 17.1% 10 17.9%

242 48.0% 29 50.1%

121 23.9% 7 12.5%

505 5867 10.4% 20 27.3%

164 25.6% 15 21.0%

284 44.2% 22 29.4%

126 19.7% 16 22.4%

641 7365 10.2% 15 21.5%

163 25.6% 11 15.1%

279 43.9% 28 38.8%

129 20.3% 18 24.7%

636 7278 12.3% 16 23.0%

155 24.5% 13 17.9%

267 42.2% 25 35.7%

133 21.0% 16 23.4%

634 70

169 26.2% 22 30.4%

363 56.3% 31 43.9%

79 12.3% 10 13.7%

34 5.2% 9 12.0%

644 71448 69.8% 45 62.6%

165 25.7% 19 27.1%

21 3.2% 4 5.6%

8 1.3% 3 4.7%

642 71175 27.1% 20 28.3%

350 54.4% 31 43.5%

101 15.6% 13 17.5%

18 2.9% 8 10.7%

644 71113 17.6% 11 15.1%

240 37.3% 29 39.8%

199 30.9% 19 26.4%

92 14.3% 13 18.7%

643 72

A - 96



Not at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotal










Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

282 43.9% 31 45.2%

268 41.7% 22 31.5%

64 10.0% 14 20.2%

29 4.5% 2 3.2%

643 69260 79.7% 28 84.1%

43 13.2% 2 7.3%

15 4.5% 2 4.7%

8 2.5% 1 3.9%

326 33

516 81.4% 40 55.0%

66 10.4% 17 23.4%

41 6.4% 10 14.2%

12 1.9% 5 7.4%

635 73521 81.7% 49 66.4%

82 12.8% 12 16.1%

30 4.7% 9 12.1%

5 0.8% 4 5.3%

638 73436 68.6% 39 54.3%

133 20.9% 13 18.2%

58 9.2% 16 21.9%

9 1.3% 4 5.6%

636 72565 92.6% 56 81.2%

21 3.5% 5 7.2%

18 3.0% 4 5.5%

6 1.0% 4 6.2%

611 69465 73.2% 51 70.5%

109 17.2% 7 9.1%

51 8.0% 10 14.5%

10 1.6% 4 5.8%

635 72

A - 97


Not at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotalNot at allSlightlySomewhatGreatlyTotal








Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

433 68.1% 37 52.8%

123 19.4% 19 27.6%

62 9.8% 9 13.3%

17 2.7% 5 6.4%

636 71494 78.5% 49 69.2%

83 13.2% 6 9.1%

38 6.0% 10 14.0%

15 2.4% 5 7.7%

630 71543 86.2% 59 83.4%

55 8.7% 5 7.5%

23 3.6% 5 7.4%

9 1.4% 1 1.7%

630 71595 94.6% 50 70.8%

21 3.3% 10 13.4%

10 1.5% 6 9.0%

4 0.6% 5 6.7%

629 71592 93.9% 53 73.9%

21 3.3% 11 15.5%

13 2.1% 4 6.3%

4 0.7% 3 4.4%

631 71366 96.0% 35 90.7%

6 1.5% 1 1.7%

6 1.6% 1 2.9%

3 0.9% 2 4.8%

381 38

A - 98












Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

414 66.1% 41 56.1%

170 27.1% 22 29.8%

32 5.2% 7 9.5%

10 1.6% 3 4.6%

627 72483 77.4% 57 78.2%

119 19.0% 13 18.3%

14 2.2% 2 2.1%

9 1.5% 1 1.4%

625 72499 80.5% 55 75.8%

101 16.2% 16 21.7%

17 2.8% 0.0%

3 0.5% 2 2.5%

620 72484 77.9% 52 72.0%

116 18.7% 19 26.5%

17 2.8% 1 1.0%

4 0.6% 0 0.5%

621 72394 63.4% 40 55.8%

194 31.2% 26 35.7%

23 3.6% 4 5.2%

11 1.7% 2 3.3%

622 72569 91.8% 57 78.6%

40 6.5% 12 16.6%

9 1.5% 1 1.2%

1 0.2% 3 3.6%

620 72436 70.0% 41 57.9%

132 21.1% 18 25.7%

42 6.8% 4 6.2%

14 7623 72453 72.7% 45 62.7%

136 21.8% 19 26.2%

19 3.1% 6 7.8%

15 2.3% 2 3.3%

623 72

A - 99










Graduate


Hetero LGBTQ

391 63.1% 41 56.1%

187 30.2% 23 31.4%

24 3.8% 6 7.6%

17 2.8% 4 4.9%

620 72359 57.7% 32 45.5%

171 27.4% 29 40.9%

66 10.7% 5 6.4%

26 4.2% 5 7.3%

623 71470 76.3% 51 72.4%

111 18.1% 16 22.2%

23 3.8% 3 3.8%

12 1.9% 1 1.7%

616 71541 87.1% 48 66.8%

65 10.5% 14 19.0%

12 1.9% 7 9.6%

3 0.5% 3 4.6%

621 72536 86.5% 45 63.1%

65 10.5% 15 20.3%

12 1.9% 8 10.6%

7 1.1% 4 6.0%

620 72350 96.4% 26 94.0%

7 2.0% 1 2.3%

5 1.4% 1 3.7%

1 0.2% 0 0.0%

363 28

A - 100

N Mean Std. Dev. N Mean Std.

Dev.Mean

Difft p d N Mean Std.

Dev. N Mean Std. Dev.

Mean Diff

t p d


In groups with students of different majors 2259 2.23 0.97 1563 2.32 0.97 0.08 2.64 0.008 0.051 1031 1.77 0.899 745 1.83 0.850 0.06 1.52 0.128

In groups with students of different races or ethnicities 2261 2.76 0.95 1564 2.85 0.95 0.09 2.76 0.006 0.044 1037 2.74 1.030 746 2.81 1.011 0.07 1.37 0.171

In groups with U.S. and international students 2256 2.31 0.97 1564 2.26 0.96 -0.04 -1.39 0.163 1035 2.65 1.049 747 2.78 1.046 0.13 2.54 0.011 0.065

In groups comprised of men and women 2255 2.72 0.99 1562 2.79 0.99 0.07 2.22 0.026 0.037 1033 2.56 1.067 746 2.84 1.049 0.28 5.55 0.000 0.140

On your own 2253 3.51 0.70 1564 3.53 0.69 0.02 0.71 0.475 1033 3.38 0.832 745 3.38 0.800 0.01 0.14 0.885


My classroom experiences have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 2262 2.75 0.94 1539 2.86 0.77 0.11 3.95 0.000 0.056 1040 2.89 1.083 736 3.19 0.777 0.30 6.79 0.000 0.135

Campus social opportunities have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 2265 3.12 1.20 1532 3.33 0.83 0.21 6.43 0.000 0.092 1038 2.25 1.492 725 3.07 0.830 0.81 14.62 0.000 0.357

The campus reputation of my academic major has affected my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 2258 2.95 1.13 1530 3.06 0.85 0.11 3.54 0.000 0.053 1033 2.81 1.310 731 3.15 0.882 0.34 6.48 0.000 0.150


2254 2.35 1.09 1537 2.19 0.90 -0.16 -4.88 0.000 0.097 1035 2.23 1.079 734 2.24 0.973 0.00 0.08 0.939


2257 2.16 1.08 1536 2.13 0.94 -0.03 -0.86 0.390 1038 2.12 1.063 736 2.24 0.931 0.12 2.57 0.010 0.074

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 2256 3.10 0.87 1535 3.22 0.81 0.12 4.25 0.000 0.055 1034 3.17 0.952 735 3.40 0.768 0.23 5.57 0.000 0.099

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 2251 2.91 1.04 1522 3.06 0.85 0.16 5.03 0.000 0.074 1038 3.02 1.034 733 3.29 0.806 0.27 6.18 0.000 0.120

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 2255 1.37 0.95 1534 1.58 0.89 0.20 6.70 0.000 0.164 1036 1.22 0.832 731 1.44 0.803 0.21 5.45 0.000 0.191

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 2263 3.20 0.91 1539 3.28 0.81 0.08 2.93 0.003 0.037 1037 3.27 0.872 734 3.38 0.781 0.11 2.83 0.005 0.049

Means: 2013 - 2018 t -test2013 2018Undergraduate Graduate

t -test2013 2018

A - 101


Dev.Mean



Mean Diff

t p d


t -test2013 2018

Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:Diversity is integral to Georgia Tech’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission 2263 2.94 1.17 1534 3.30 0.85 0.36 10.98 0.000 0.158 1038 3.03 1.200 737 3.42 0.776 0.40 8.45 0.000 0.166

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech 2254 3.20 0.97 1532 3.20 0.79 -0.01 -0.19 0.847 1035 3.08 1.106 735 3.33 0.751 0.25 5.56 0.000 0.106

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 2246 3.18 1.09 1521 3.21 0.80 0.02 0.72 0.473 1034 3.03 1.205 731 3.36 0.768 0.33 7.06 0.000 0.141

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needs 2255 2.95 1.11 1525 3.19 0.81 0.24 7.76 0.000 0.110 1034 2.55 1.311 730 3.17 0.808 0.63 12.42 0.000 0.276

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 2257 1.93 1.39 1521 2.52 0.93 0.58 15.47 0.000 0.304 1036 1.73 1.549 716 3.02 0.852 1.29 22.32 0.000 0.568

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 2259 3.05 1.01 1531 3.23 0.76 0.19 6.43 0.000 0.085 1034 2.95 1.127 731 3.23 0.770 0.29 6.37 0.000 0.128

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 2255 2.86 1.13 1530 3.04 0.82 0.19 5.98 0.000 0.089 1035 2.62 1.376 731 3.24 0.774 0.62 11.95 0.000 0.263

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following:

Based on my experiences, students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to age 2262 3.20 0.99 1544 3.25 0.79 0.04 1.52 0.129 1036 3.14 1.158 739 3.11 0.912 -0.03 -0.61 0.540

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identity 2259 3.09 1.01 1544 3.06 0.88 -0.03 -0.98 0.325 1032 3.16 1.140 734 3.06 0.977 -0.10 -2.04 0.041 0.048

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to veteran status or military involvement 2259 2.63 1.67 1511 3.27 0.82 0.64 15.61 0.000 0.262 1032 2.35 1.767 711 3.27 0.846 0.92 14.54 0.000 0.371

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athlete 2252 2.56 1.32 1521 3.11 0.84 0.55 15.70 0.000 0.248 1030 1.96 1.742 699 3.15 0.824 1.19 18.96 0.000 0.492

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 2261 3.10 1.03 1536 3.15 0.81 0.06 1.92 0.055 1034 3.02 1.156 730 3.07 0.892 0.05 1.03 0.304

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilities 2261 2.85 1.34 1530 3.07 0.86 0.22 6.11 0.000 0.099 1035 2.54 1.641 724 3.12 0.947 0.58 9.33 0.000 0.245

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicity 2261 3.18 0.99 1536 3.17 0.85 -0.01 -0.45 0.653 1034 3.13 1.113 730 3.08 0.920 -0.05 -1.04 0.298

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic status 2257 3.07 1.16 1528 3.00 0.91 -0.08 -2.36 0.019 0.038 1027 2.81 1.451 719 2.94 0.971 0.13 2.31 0.021 0.061

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientation 2255 2.61 1.45 1535 3.07 0.89 0.45 11.95 0.000 0.202 1034 2.17 1.712 716 3.02 0.962 0.86 13.32 0.000 0.366

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation 2248 2.49 1.22 1522 3.08 0.82 0.59 17.90 0.000 0.273 1031 1.78 1.695 695 3.03 0.883 1.26 20.11 0.000 0.540

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to religion 2257 2.96 1.17 1536 3.04 0.87 0.08 2.51 0.012 0.039 1034 2.65 1.543 717 3.02 0.946 0.36 6.11 0.000 0.161

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to political affiliation/opinions 2253 2.81 1.26 1534 2.71 0.91 -0.10 -2.82 0.005 0.050 1032 2.40 1.618 713 2.84 0.941 0.44 7.21 0.000 0.201

A - 102


Dev.Mean



Mean Diff

t p d


t -test2013 2018


Personal friends at Georgia Tech 2258 3.77 0.52 1538 3.72 0.57 -0.04 -2.28 0.023 0.017 1032 3.67 0.594 729 3.59 0.679 -0.08 -2.58 0.010 0.034

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Classmates 2251 3.09 0.78 1535 2.75 0.83 -0.34 -12.61 0.000 0.182 1029 3.12 0.797 731 2.95 0.845 -0.17 -4.36 0.000 0.087

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Members of my fraternity/sorority 2037 3.12 0.96 1245 2.86 1.01 -0.25 -7.14 0.000 0.133 864 2.92 0.958 569 2.81 0.920 -0.11 -2.17 0.030 0.057

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Instructors/Faculty 2248 2.77 0.91 1534 2.53 0.91 -0.24 -8.01 0.000 0.138 1026 2.81 0.931 722 2.70 0.921 -0.11 -2.35 0.019 0.056

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Staff 2246 2.73 0.92 1529 2.48 0.93 -0.25 -8.27 0.000 0.146 1018 2.74 0.926 715 2.73 0.913 -0.01 -0.20 0.845Comfortable discussing diversity with: Administration 2244 2.71 0.95 1525 2.41 0.96 -0.31 -9.68 0.000 0.181 1021 2.74 0.948 712 2.71 0.947 -0.03 -0.67 0.501

In your time at Georgia Tech, how often do you participate in the following types of activities outside of your own culture:Arts and entertainment 2258 2.14 0.91 1519 2.03 0.86 -0.12 -4.02 0.000 0.080 1032 1.95 0.788 726 1.97 0.791 0.02 0.58 0.562

Religious and/or spiritual activities 2256 1.58 0.87 1515 1.40 0.71 -0.17 -6.72 0.000 0.156 1028 1.46 0.769 722 1.38 0.635 -0.08 -2.41 0.016 0.076

Cultural celebrations and holidays 2249 1.99 0.86 1520 1.82 0.73 -0.17 -6.63 0.000 0.130 1026 1.91 0.788 725 1.96 0.761 0.05 1.40 0.162

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 2256 2.14 0.92 1516 2.01 0.87 -0.13 -4.41 0.000 0.089 1029 2.41 0.943 725 2.42 0.943 0.01 0.29 0.775

Student focused cultural organizations 2261 1.66 0.89 1521 1.62 0.83 -0.03 -1.11 0.267 1032 1.66 0.816 722 1.76 0.818 0.10 2.53 0.012 0.078

Other (specify below) 1718 1.33 0.80 799 1.22 0.62 -0.11 -3.67 0.000 0.113 735 1.26 0.684 362 1.30 0.677 0.04 0.84 0.403


Women 2248 2.11 0.94 1524 1.96 0.86 -0.15 -4.95 0.000 0.102 1030 1.50 0.729 708 1.44 0.688 -0.06 -1.75 0.080

Men 2242 1.62 0.77 1517 1.66 0.78 0.04 1.40 0.160 1023 1.26 0.551 707 1.28 0.575 0.02 0.77 0.441

Older People 2245 1.46 0.70 1516 1.41 0.66 -0.05 -2.29 0.022 0.049 1025 1.28 0.535 702 1.24 0.523 -0.04 -1.61 0.107

Younger People 2241 1.43 0.70 1518 1.42 0.67 -0.02 -0.72 0.469 1026 1.28 0.564 703 1.27 0.530 -0.02 -0.58 0.559

People’s race or ethnicity 2248 2.02 0.88 1518 1.75 0.79 -0.28 -10.08 0.000 0.213 1027 1.52 0.725 704 1.45 0.659 -0.07 -2.23 0.026 0.069

People with disabilities 2243 1.37 0.66 1506 1.41 0.70 0.04 1.81 0.071 1028 1.15 0.462 702 1.12 0.409 -0.03 -1.59 0.113

People with less education 2246 2.05 1.02 1516 1.95 0.95 -0.11 -3.31 0.001 0.074 1027 1.56 0.820 703 1.44 0.749 -0.12 -3.11 0.002 0.106

Immigrants 2240 1.71 0.83 1509 1.52 0.70 -0.19 -7.66 0.000 0.166 1027 1.44 0.671 704 1.37 0.670 -0.07 -2.16 0.031 0.070

People with language differences/accents 2250 2.20 0.93 1518 1.70 0.80 -0.50 -17.73 0.000 0.389 1023 1.76 0.804 702 1.47 0.716 -0.29 -7.79 0.000 0.255

People with specific political views 2248 2.00 0.91 1516 2.26 0.98 0.26 8.15 0.000 0.162 1027 1.59 0.797 702 1.63 0.841 0.04 0.92 0.358

People with particular religious affiliations 2248 1.76 0.86 1516 1.62 0.81 -0.14 -5.12 0.000 0.115 1024 1.39 0.650 696 1.32 0.636 -0.08 -2.41 0.016 0.078

Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 2245 1.83 0.90 1516 1.58 0.77 -0.25 -9.26 0.000 0.208 1022 1.36 0.636 702 1.20 0.516 -0.17 -5.98 0.000 0.184

Transgender people 2243 1.53 0.82 1512 1.62 0.81 0.08 3.00 0.003 0.067 1023 1.25 0.568 700 1.22 0.567 -0.04 -1.33 0.183

Others (please specify below) 1619 1.08 0.40 777 1.09 0.42 0.01 0.67 0.503 736 1.05 0.263 395 1.06 0.312 0.01 0.47 0.640

A - 103

2013: Percent Somewhat (3) or Strong (4) Agree

Change2018: Percent

Somewhat (3) or Strong (4) Agree

Chi Sq SigEffect Size


In groups with students of different majors 35.3 0.4 35.8

In groups with students of different races or ethnicities 60.5 2.4 62.9

In groups with U.S. and international students 39.1 -4.6 34.5 ** 0.047

In groups comprised of men and women 56.5 2.9 59.4

On your own 89.3 0.5 89.8

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements:My classroom experiences have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 74.8 1.0 75.7

Campus social opportunities have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 89.0 -3.2 85.7 ** 0.049

The campus reputation of my academic major has affected my sense of belonging at Georgia Tech 83.0 -4.3 78.7 ** 0.054

Language differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at Georgia Tech 51.3 -13.8 37.5 *** 0.137

Cultural differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at Georgia Tech 41.3 -6.0 35.3 *** 0.061

Georgia Tech is generally a comfortable and inclusive environment for me 83.0 1.3 84.2

I feel valued and respected by the Georgia Tech community 78.7 0.4 79.0

I have considered leaving Georgia Tech because of concerns about collegiality 16.9 0.3 17.2

I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech 85.7 0.4 86.0

Undergraduate

Frequency Comparisons: 2013 - 2018

A - 104


Change2018: Percent



Undergraduate


Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:Diversity is integral to Georgia Tech’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission 82.4 3.5 85.9 ** 0.047

Commitment to diversity is demonstrated by Georgia Tech 90.4 -4.9 85.4 *** 0.076

Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgrounds 91.5 -7.8 83.7 *** 0.119

Georgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needs 82.6 2.7 85.3 * 0.036

Adequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech 57.8 -3.3 54.4

While at Georgia Tech, I have learned about different worldviews 86.1 -0.7 85.4

Georgia Tech is open to new ideas and new traditions 80.8 -1.8 79.0


Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to age 86.1 -0.8 85.3

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identity 80.7 -2.6 78.2

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to veteran status or military involvement 94.0 -7.8 86.3 *** 0.132

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athlete 67.9 11.8 79.8 *** 0.132

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national origin 84.5 -1.9 82.6

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilities 85.7 -7.7 78.0 *** 0.100

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicity 85.5 -3.9 81.6 ** 0.052

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic status 86.1 -12.2 73.9 *** 0.153

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientation 82.7 -4.7 78.0 ** 0.059

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation 60.9 18.9 79.8 *** 0.202

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to religion 84.3 -6.4 77.9 *** 0.082

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to political affiliation/opinions 81.4 -17.4 64.0 *** 0.196

A - 105


Change2018: Percent



Undergraduate



Personal friends at Georgia Tech 97.1 -1.2 95.9 * 0.033

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Classmates 80.2 -14.0 66.2 *** 0.158

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Members of my fraternity/sorority 79.3 -12.1 67.2 *** 0.135

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Instructors/Faculty 63.0 -9.1 53.9 *** 0.091

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Staff 60.9 -8.9 52.0 *** 0.088

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Administration 60.8 -12.6 48.2 *** 0.124


Arts and entertainment 29.2 -6.5 22.7 *** 0.073

Religious and/or spiritual activities 13.1 -5.6 7.5 *** 0.088

Cultural celebrations and holidays 23.4 -9.6 13.8 *** 0.119

Educational forums (lectures, presentations) 29.8 -6.2 23.6 *** 0.068

Student focused cultural organizations 16.2 -4.3 12.0 *** 0.059

Other (specify below) 10.4 -5.4 5.0 *** 0.089

A - 106






On your own

Please indicate your level of agreement with each of the following statements:My classroom experiences have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia TechCampus social opportunities have had a positive effect on my sense of belonging at Georgia TechThe campus reputation of my academic major has affected my sense of belonging at Georgia TechLanguage differences act as a barrier to interaction between U.S. and international students at Georgia Tech





I feel that my academic aspirations are supported at Georgia Tech

Frequency Comparisons: 2013 - 2018 2013: Percent Somewhat (3) or Strong (4) Agree

Change2018: Percent



19.0 -1.6 17.3

59.2 0.6 59.9

55.7 2.7 58.5

50.3 10.7 61.0 *** 0.106

84.0 -1.1 82.8

83.7 2.4 86.0

78.2 1.2 79.3

85.4 -2.9 82.5

47.2 -6.8 40.4 ** 0.068

40.7 -2.0 38.7

88.1 1.2 89.3

85.3 1.3 86.5

11.1 0.8 11.9

88.9 0.4 89.3

Graduate

A - 107


Please indicate your level of agreement with the following statements:Diversity is integral to Georgia Tech’s ability to successfully fulfill its mission


Georgia Tech effectively recruits students from diverse backgroundsGeorgia Tech offers an array of programs and events that meet my social and cultural needsAdequate processes are in place to address student grievances at Georgia Tech




Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to age

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to gender/gender identityStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to veteran status or military involvementStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to status as a school athleteStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to national originStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to individual disabilitiesStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to race or ethnicityStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to socioeconomic statusStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to sexual orientationStudents at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to fraternity or sorority affiliation

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to religion

Students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to political affiliation/opinions


Change2018: Percent



Graduate

87.8 2.6 90.4

91.2 -2.4 88.8

90.4 -3.4 87.0 * 0.055

79.2 4.9 84.1 * 0.063

70.4 8.4 78.8 *** 0.096

85.2 0.5 85.7

85.8 0.8 86.5

89.9 -10.7 79.2 *** 0.150

88.1 -12.2 75.9 *** 0.161

93.7 -7.1 86.5 *** 0.120

81.4 2.4 83.8

86.3 -7.5 78.8 *** 0.100

91.5 -12.6 78.9 *** 0.179

88.4 -10.0 78.4 *** 0.135

88.5 -16.4 72.1 *** 0.208

86.8 -10.1 76.7 *** 0.132

79.6 0.0 79.5

89.8 -12.5 77.3 *** 0.171

87.9 -18.6 69.3 *** 0.228

A - 108




Comfortable discussing diversity with: Classmates

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Members of my fraternity/sorority

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Instructors/Faculty

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Staff

Comfortable discussing diversity with: Administration









Change2018: Percent



Graduate

95.5 -2.3 93.2 * 0.050

81.5 -6.4 75.1 ** 0.077

73.5 -2.9 70.7

66.1 -3.4 62.7

62.4 1.7 64.1

62.3 0.5 62.8

18.1 0.3 18.4

9.4 -4.2 5.1 ** 0.080

19.0 0.6 19.6

44.0 1.2 45.1

14.2 1.1 15.3

6.6 0.5 7.1

A - 109

2013: Percent Any (2-4)

Change2018: Percent Any

(2-4)Chi Sq

SigEffect Size


Women 71.0 -3.2 67.8 * 0.034

Men 47.1 3.2 50.3

Older People 36.2 -3.1 33.1

Younger People 33.4 -0.1 33.3

People’s race or ethnicity 69.9 -13.0 57.0 *** 0.133

People with disabilities 29.2 2.6 31.8

People with less education 62.5 -1.8 60.7

Immigrants 51.1 -9.2 41.9 *** 0.091

People with language differences/accents 76.1 -24.1 52.1 *** 0.250

People with specific political views 66.7 8.5 75.2 *** 0.091

People with particular religious affiliations 53.5 -8.3 45.2 *** 0.082

Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people 56.6 -12.3 44.3 *** 0.120

Transgender people 37.1 7.9 45.0 *** 0.079

Others (please specify below) 5.0 1.2 6.2

UndergraduateFrequency Comparisons: 2013 - 2018

A - 110


Women

Men

Older People

Younger People

People’s race or ethnicity

People with disabilities

People with less education

Immigrants

People with language differences/accents

People with specific political views

People with particular religious affiliations

Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people

Transgender people

Others (please specify below)

Frequency Comparisons: 2013 - 2018 2013: Percent Any (2-4)

Change2018: Percent Any

(2-4)Chi Sq

SigEffect Size

39.2 -4.3 34.9

21.1 1.6 22.7

24.5 -4.5 20.0 * 0.053

23.2 -0.4 22.8

41.0 -3.6 37.5

12.1 -2.6 9.5

38.9 -7.6 31.4 ** 0.078

35.2 -6.8 28.4 ** 0.071

57.0 -19.7 37.3 *** 0.193

42.9 0.6 43.5

31.9 -7.6 24.3 ** 0.082

29.1 -14.1 15.0 *** 0.165

20.2 -4.3 15.9 * 0.055

3.8 -0.1 3.7

Graduate

Appendix B – Student Climate Survey

B-1

Georgia Tech Climate Survey [[student]] In 2010, Georgia Tech adopted a twenty-five year strategic vision that guides our efforts in becoming a leading technological university in the twenty-first century. Central to this vision is the creation of an inclusive campus community characterized by collaboration, appreciation of diversity, and personal integrity.

The questions in this survey are designed to allow you to share with us about your perceptions and experiences with the Georgia Tech campus community. Your responses will enable the Institute’s leadership to understand the progress we are making towards achieving our goal of an inclusive, supportive, and welcoming environment for everyone at Georgia Tech.

If you complete the survey, you will be entered into a drawing for one of forty $50 gift cards. If you choose not to complete the survey, you can still enter the drawing by sending an email request (including your name) to [email protected].

Your participation in this research study is completely voluntary. The data that is collected about you will be kept private to the extent allowed by law. The survey has an identification number so we can check your name off the list when your response is received; this list is not associated with your actual survey responses. The list of respondents (and non-respondents) will be destroyed as soon as data collection activities have been completed (no later than February 28, 2018).The survey should take approximately 15-20 minutes to complete. For more information about this study, click here: (Survey Consent Form). If you have any questions about the survey itself, please call (404-385-1292) or e-mail the Georgia Tech Office of Academic Effectiveness at [email protected].

https://www.assessment.gatech.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/Climate_Survey_Consent_Form_2017.pdf

B-2

Page 1 of 4

This semester, how often have you studied in the following groups or environments?

Never Sometimes Often Very Often In groups with students of different majors




On your own


Strongly disagree

Somewhat disagree

Somewhat agree

Strongly agree










Please use the space below if you wish to elaborate on your responses to any of the above questions.

B-3


Strongly disagree

Somewhat disagree

Somewhat agree

Strongly agree









Page 2 of 4


Based on my experiences, students at Georgia Tech are respected with regard to their:

Strongly disagree

Somewhat disagree

Somewhat agree

Strongly agree

age

gender/gender identity

veteran status or military involvement

status as a school athlete

national origin

individual disabilities

race or ethnicity

socioeconomic status

sexual orientation

fraternity or sorority affiliation

religion

political affiliation/opinions

B-4


How comfortable are you discussing issues of diversity with the following people or groups?

Very uncomfortable

Somewhat uncomfortable

Somewhat comfortable

Very comfortable


Classmates


Instructors/Faculty

Staff

Administration

In your time at Georgia Tech, how often do you participate in the following types of activities outside of your own culture?

Never Sometimes Often Very Often Arts and entertainment

Religious and/or spiritual



Student focused cultural organizations (e.g. Chinese Student Assoc., Culture Tech, India Club, etc.)


Other activities:

B-5

Page 3 of 4

Within the last three years, to what extent have you experienced instances of marginalization (a sense of exclusion or feeling left out) at Georgia Tech based on the following personal identity or characteristics?

Not at all Slightly Somewhat Greatly Gender

Age

Race/ethnicity

Disability

National origin

Language difference/accent

Political perspective

Religion

Sexual orientation

Gender identity/expression

Other

Other attribute(s):

If you are willing to elaborate on instances of the marginalization you experienced, please use the space below:

Within the past year, how often have you heard a student make an insensitive or disparaging remark about any of these groups?

Never Sometimes Often Very Often Women

Men

Older People

Younger People

People’s race or ethnicity

People with disabilities

People with less education

Immigrants

People with language differences/accents

People with specific political views

People with particular religious affiliations

B-6

Never Sometimes Often Very Often Gay, lesbian, or bisexual people

Transgender people

Others (please specify below)

Others:

If you are willing to elaborate on any of your responses above, please use the space below.

Page 4 - Demographic Questions

We are asking the following questions so that we may better understand the responses provided by the Georgia Tech community. We will use the information you provide for statistical purposes only and will hold the information in confidence to the full extent permitted by law. Your responses will not be disclosed in identifiable form.

What is your gender? • Man • Woman • Transgender • Other __________________

Ethnicity

• Hispanic or Latino/a • Not Hispanic or Latino/a

Race

• American Indian or Alaskan Native • Asian or Asian American • Black or African American • Hawaiian or Pacific Islander • Multiracial • White or European American • Other __________________________

Sexual Orientation • Heterosexual • Gay/Lesbian • Bisexual • Other

B-7

Do you have a disability?

• Yes • No

Citizenship

• U.S. citizen * • Resident citizen of another country • Non-resident citizen of another country

* Are you a Georgia resident? • Yes • No

Where do you live?

• University-owned housing • Fraternity/Sorority houses • Off campus

Student Type

• Undergraduate * • Graduate **

* Year • Freshman • Sophomore • Junior • Senior * Are you: • Part-time student (less than 12 hours per semester) • Full-time student (12 or more hours per semester)

**Are you: • Part-time graduate student (less than 9 hours per semester) • Full-time graduate student (9 or more hours per semester)

What year did you begin your studies at Georgia Tech? _______

College • Architecture • Computing • Engineering • Ivan Allen College • Scheller College of Business • Sciences

B-8

Please use the space below for any additional comments about the climate at Georgia Tech or suggestions for improving this survey:

Thank you for your participation. Your responses have been recorded.

2018 student climate assessment survey...

Documents