Download LGBTQA Climate Survey, Fall 2014

LGBTQA Climate
Survey, Fall 2014
INTRODUCTION
This survey focused on the campus climate related to gender identity and sexual orientation. Included in the survey
were questions concerning students’ awareness of and attitudes about people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual,
transgender, queer, and allies (LGBTQA). This survey, conducted by Student Affairs Research and Assessment, was
administered online. It was created in collaboration with the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer and Ally
Student Resource Centeri at Penn State. A similar survey was conducted in 2011, and comparison data from that
year are presented where appropriate.
A simple random sample of 5,000 full-time, degree-seeking, University Park students (the general population) was
invited to participate in the survey. 740 students responded, yielding an overall response rate of 14.8%. 76% were
White (compared to 68% in the population, excluding international students and students of unknown race), and
62.1% were women (compared to 46% of the population). 16.2% of participants self-identified as lesbian, gay,
bisexual, transgender, queer, or questioning (LGBTQ, population unknown). The confidence interval for the total
sample is ±3.33%. For additional information on the Pulse methodology, please visit
http://studentaffairs.psu.edu/assessment/pulse/.
In addition to the random sample, the same survey was sent to members of the LGBTQA community on available
listservs and club and organization membership lists through snowball sampling in which participants were
encouraged to forward the survey to peers, resulting in an additional 111 responses. While the snowball sample
data do not allow us to generalize back to the population, they do help ensure that the resulting data will include
sufficient numbers of students who are LGBTQA to provide feedback on their experiences at Penn State.
Overall Satisfaction with Penn State
Satisfaction with Penn State was high among the random and snowball sample
respondents. Three individual measures of satisfaction are reported here along with
group comparisons based on the aggregate OVERALL SATISFACTIONii factor composed
of these individual measures.




35% of randomly
selected students
said that their
attitudes toward
the LGBTQA
community had
become more
accepting since
coming to Penn
State.
90% of students in the random sample were satisfied (somewhat agree or
strongly agree) with their experience at Penn State, and (82%) among the
snowball sample felt the same.
84.3% of the random sample reported that they felt as if they belonged in the
Penn State community, compared to 65.7% in the snowball sample (Figure 1).
91.9% of the random sample would recommend Penn State to friends,
compared to 77.2% of the snowball sample.
LGBTQ students’ average OVERALL SATISFACTION score was significantly lower than that of non-LGBT students in
the random sample (4.17 and 4.54, respectively, on a 5-pt. scale)
Penn State Pulse is a project of Student Affairs Research and Assessment.
For further information, please visit www.studentaffairs.psu.edu/assessment or contact
[email protected], 120 Boucke, University Park, PA 16802, (814) 863-1809.
U.Ed. STA 15-56
This publication is available in alternative media on request. Penn State is an equal opportunity, affirmative action employer, and is committed to providing employment
opportunities to minorities, women, veterans, individuals with disabilities, and other protected groups. Nondiscrimination: http://guru.psu.edu/policies/AD85.html
Figure 1. Feeling of Belonging
90
84.3
80
Random
70
65.7
Snowball
Percentage
60
50
40
30
20.7
20
8.6
10
13.5
7.2
0
Strongly/Somewhat
Agree
Neutral
Strongly/Somewhat
Disagree
LGBTQ Students and Allies on Campusiii
Students were asked to identify their sexual orientation and gender identity and to categorize their level of
openness with others about these aspects of their identity.
 In the random sample, 16.0% of respondents identified as lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer, or
questioning (LGBTQ). This is almost double the proportion that identified similarly in 2011 (8.5%) and
more than triple those that did so when asked a similar question in 2005 (4.5%).
 Among heterosexual students in the random sample, 53.4% identified themselves as allies, people who
support and advocate for the LGBTQ community compared to 56.2% in 2011.
 Among LGBTQ students in the random sample, 51.2% were open about their sexuality and/or gender
orientation with many, most, or all people; 86% were so in the snowball sample.
Figure 2. LGBT Representation of Random Respondents
Heterosexual
(not
Transgender)
84%
Heterosexual
(Transgender)
0.3%
Lesbian
1%
Gay
3%
Bisexual
7%
Queer
0.4%
Asexual
1%
Questioning
2%
Other
2%
LGBTQ
16%
2
Inclusive Community
Two questions focused on the extent to which students perceive Penn State to be an inclusive community.
 81.5% of students in the random sample agreed (somewhat or strongly) that Penn State promotes
understanding of differences such as those based on race, religion, and sexual orientation, as did 61.1%
of the snowball respondents.
 81.1% of students in the random sample agreed that the University Park climate is supportive of
students who are LGBTQA, as did 66.6% of the snowball respondents.
Knowledge of LGBTQ Issues
Students were also asked about their knowledge of LGBTQ issues.
 29.5% of students in the random sample considered themselves very familiar with issues related to
being LGBTQ, and 61% considered themselves somewhat familiar.
 Not surprisingly, a substantially larger proportion of snowball sample respondents (80.5%) considered
themselves very familiar with such issues.
Comfort Levels with LGBTQ People and Issues
Students were also asked about their comfort level with people who are LGBTQ.
 Respondents’ comfort level varied between LGBTQ groups, with the largest proportion reporting being
comfortable (somewhat or very) with men who are gay (81.5% in the random sample and 98.2% in the
snowball) and the smallest a transgender roommate (45.5% in the random sample, and 85.3% in the
snowball; Table 1).
 Reported comfort level with all LGBTQ groups was higher in 2014 than 2011 within the random sample
(Table 1).
 Women and LGBTQ students reported a significantly higher COMFORT LEVEL WITH LGBTQ PEOPLE than did
men and non-LGBTQ students (data not shown).
Table 1. Comfort Level with People who are LGBT
Percent who were somewhat or
very comfortable with:
Women who are lesbian
Men who are gay
People who are bisexual
People who are transgender
A roommate who is of a different sexual orientation
A roommate who is transgender
A faculty member/instructor/TA who is LGBT
A faculty member/instructor/TA who is transgender
Mean Factor Score: COMFORT LEVEL WITH LGBT PEOPLE
(Scale: 1 = Very Uncomfortable, 5 = Very Comfortable)
Random Sample
Respondents
2011
2014
71.9%
80.8%
75.4%
81.5%
69.4%
76.5%
51.6%
59.4%
56.3%
61.8%
39.2%
45.5%
75.4%
78.7%
62.0%
67.2%
3.77
3.93
Snowball Sample
Respondents
2011
2014
93.4%
97.3%
94.6%
98.2%
93.3%
97.3%
85.3%
92.7%
94.0%
91.0%
82.5%
85.3%
94.0%
98.2%
89.0%
94.6%
4.59
4.74
Students were asked about their comfort level taking part in classroom discussions on sexual orientation or
gender identity. In the random sample 73.1% of respondents were comfortable (somewhat or very) with
such discussions. Figure 3 illustrates that general population students (random sample) were only slightly
more comfortable with these discussions in 2011 than they were in 2014.
3
Figure 3. Comfort Level with Class Discussions on Sexual
Orientation/ Gender Identity
60
50 52.1
Random 2011
50
Random 2014
Percentage
40
30
25.8
21.0
20
15.8 16.1
10
3.0
4.3
5.3 6.5
0
Very
Somewhat
Uncomfortable Uncomfortable
Neutral
Somewhat
Comfortable
Very
Comfortable
Changing Attitudes
The survey also addressed how students’ attitudes related to the LGBTQA community have changed since
coming to Penn State.
 35.1% of random respondents indicated that they had become more accepting (somewhat or much
more) of the LGBTQA community since coming to Penn State, and 49.5% of the snowball respondents
indicated the same.
 Over half of the respondents in both samples indicated that their attitudes had not changed (62.7% in
the random sample and 50.5% in the snowball sample).
 Among random sample students who indicated that their attitude had become more positive, 30.6%
attributed this change primarily to their LGBTQA friends, 36.4% to interactions with LGBTQA people,
and 17.8% to classes taken (Figure 4).
Figure 4. Cause of Improvement in Attitude Toward
LGBTQ Community
Other: 11.2
Class(es) I took :
17.8
Interactions
with LGBTQA
people: 36.4
LGBTQA friends:
30.6
Non-LGBTQA
friends: 1.7
4
Workshop(s) I
attended: 2.5
Likelihood of Supporting LGBTQA People
In another series of questions, students were asked about the likelihood that they would support LGBTQA
people in a variety of ways.
 Only 36.6% of students in the random sample were aware (somewhat or strongly agree) of the Report
Hate website for reporting discrimination/harassment based on sexual orientation or gender identity
and expression and other acts of intolerance and only 32% of the snowball sample were aware of the
website.
 52.7% of students in the random sample indicated that they were likely (somewhat or very) to report an
LGBTQA-related hate/bias incident that they witnessed.
 28.5% indicated that they were likely to attend educational programs related to sexual orientation or
gender identity (Table 2).
 Among students in the LGBTQA community (snowball sample), 63.6% indicated that they were likely
(somewhat or very) to visit or contact the LGBTQA Student Resource Center, a decrease from 79.1% in
2011.
Table 2. Likelihood of Supporting LGBTQA People
Percent who were somewhat or very likely to:
Report an LGBTA-related hate/bias incident
Attend social activities hosted by people who are LGBTA
Take a class that focuses on sexual orientation
Attend educational programs on topics related to sexual
orientation or gender identity
Visit or contact the LGBTA Student Resource Center
Random Sample
Respondents
2011
2014
51.7%
52.7%
45.9%
44.7%
34.1%
37.6%
Snowball Sample
Respondents
2011
2014
81.3%
75.2%
88.6%
81.1%
73.8%
67.3%
26.3%
28.5%
78.5%
73.8%
15.9%
14.4%
79.1%
63.6%
Climate Indicators
Areas that measure aspects of climate for LGBTQA students were also included in the survey.
 Overwhelmingly, respondents in both the random and snowball samples were more likely to report
hearing students, as compared to faculty and staff, make disparaging comments about or to others
because of their sexual orientation (Table 3).
 Incidences of hearing such remarks have decreased in almost every category since 2011, except for an
increase in faculty remarks as indicated by the snowball sample (Table 3).
 There is an increase in the percent of LGBTQA students in the snowball sample that had at least
sometimes concealed their sexual orientation or gender identity to avoid harassment (48% in 2011 and
59.4% in 2014).
 24.7% of the random sample students indicated at least sometimes having felt that the climate for
LGBTA students at Penn State was less welcoming and supportive than they thought it would be,
compared to 51% of the snowball population.
 58.5% of the random sample and 54.9% of the snowball sample felt that University administrators were
at least moderately interested in their thoughts and concerns about the climate for LGBTA students.
Table 3. Frequency of Disparaging Remarks
Percent who sometimes, often, or very often heard the
following people make insensitive/disparaging remarks
about or to others because of their sexual orientation
Students
Faculty member, instructor, or TA
Staff member
Random Sample
Respondents
2011
2014
57.4%
45.6%
5.9%
3.7%
5.3%
3.6%
5
Snowball Sample
Respondents
2011
2014
77.3%
65.7%
11.4%
13.9%
14.5%
11.2%
Importance of LGBTQA Student Resource Center Services
Students were also asked to rate the importance of several functions and services of the LGBTQA Student
Resource Center.
 More than half of the general student population found each of the services important (somewhat or
very; Table 4).
 Students in the general population most often indicated fostering a sense of community as an
important service (81.3%), students in the snowball sample similarly indicated fostering community, but
indicated highlighting LGBTQA activities as equally important (98.2%; Table 4).
Table 4. Importance of LGBTQA Student Resource Center Services
Random Sample
Percent who felt the following were somewhat or
Respondents
very important:
2011
2014
Foster a sense of community for students who are
82.4%
81.3%
LGBTA
Raise awareness of LGBTA issues & concerns among
77.2%
73.8%
heterosexual students, staff, and faculty
Provide ways to highlight LGBTA activities, etc.
71.5%
66.4%
Provide a library/research materials on sexual
66.9%
61.2%
orientation and gender identity
Snowball Sample
Respondents
2011
2014
97.9%
98.2%
97.3%
98.2%
98.0%
92.7%
95.3%
87.1%
Bystander Behavior
In the most recent administration, students were asked a number of questions regarding their willingness
and motivation to intervene when someone is behaving in an offensive or hostile way toward others
because of their sexual orientation or identity.
 A majority of students in both the random (86.9%) and snowball (96.3%) either somewhat or strongly agreed
that it is important for all students to create a welcoming and inclusive environment for all students regardless
of sexual orientation or identity.
 Table 5 shows the top three barriers that prevent students from intervening.
Table 5. Barriers to Intervening in Offensive or Hostile Behavior
Random Sample
Percent selecting the following barriers (chose 3 of 10)
Respondents
2014
Didn’t know how to intervene
56.2%
Concerned for own safety
42.7%
Thought it would make the situation worse
44.1%
Snowball Sample
Respondents
2014
59.5%
63.1%
49.5%
i
In 2015 the LGBTQA Student Resource Center added Queer to its title, changing its name from the Lesbian, Gay,
Bisexual, Transgender, and Ally Student Resource Center to the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer, and Ally
Student Resource Center.
ii
Factors are a data reduction tool that combines multiple questions into a larger concept based on logic and statistical analysis. In this
report, they are identified using SMALL CAPS.
iii
Although the survey asks questions about Queer identity, the question titles used LGBT for short and did not include
the “Q”.
6