THESIS

J

l
1'

MI ICHIG GAN STATEU

! ll’lllzll llllllJill”llllllllllllll

93 01555 9333

ll

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

MISSED MESSAGES: HUN PKDSPECI‘IVE TEACHEIB' RACIAL
ATI'ITUIES MEDIATE WHAT THEY LEAm FROM A COUIBE
(N DIVERSITY

presented by

M. ARIHURCAHIJN

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph.D. " degree in Educational Psychology

MMW

Major professor

Date W 0;. ”‘96

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution 0-12771

 

LIBRARY
Mlchlgan State
Unlverslty

 

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to move this checkout from your roeord.
TO AVOID FINES Mum on or baton date duo.

DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G7 ufll
MARJfimi

MSUIsAn.‘.“‘ . " ’1 ‘ w ...-.....M.

 

 

MISSED MESSAGES: HOW PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS’ RACIAL ATTITUDES
MEDIATE WHAT THEY LEARN FROM A COURSE ON DIVERSITY

By
M. Arthur Gannon

A DISSERTA'I'ION
Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
DEPARTMENT OF COUNSELING, EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY,
AND SPECIAL EDUCATION
1996

ABSTRACT

MISSED MESSAGES: HOW PROSPECTIVE TEACHERS’ RACIAL ATTITUDES
MEDIATE WHAT THEY IEARN FROM A COURSE ON DIVERSITY

BY
M. ARTHUR GARMON

This study investigated the impact of a multicultural education course on the racial
attitudes and beliefs of a group of approximately 200 prospective teachers. One primary
objective was to identify students' entering attitudes and beliefs relative to racial/ethnic
minority groups and then to determine whether these attitudes and beliefs changed during
the course of the semester. A second objective was to determine whether students who
expreswd initially favorable racial attitudes differed substantially from those who expressed
initially unfavorable attitudes. Data sources for the study were pre and post administrations
of a racial attitude survey and a teaching/learning questionnaire. In addition, a subset of the
participants were interviewed at two-week intervals throughout the semester.

The major finding of the study was that students’ entering racial attitudes and
beliefs appeared to mediate what they learned from the course. More specifically, on
several diversity issues addressed in the course the beliefs of high students (those who
began the course with more favorable racial attitudes) were significantly more likely to
change in the desired direction than were the beliefs of low students (those who began the
course with less favorable racial attitudes); most of the low students seemed to miss the key
messages that the course intended to convey. Also, the researcher found that 1) high
students were significantly more likely to report more and higher quality interracial
friendships than low students, 2) high students showed greater awareness of racial
prejudice and discrimination than did low students, and 3) there were no differences
between the two groups of students in terms of their attendance, their performance on

course exams, their final course grades, or their overall satisfaction with the course.

Copyfight by
M. ARTHUR GARMON
1996

This dissertation is dedicated to my parents, Rev. Moses and Ada M. Gannon,
in loving appreciation of their unfailing love, support, and encouragement

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

In the writing of a dissertation, the old adage “No man [person] is an island”
certainly holds true. I know that it would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible,
for me to have finished this dissertation without the help and support of a lot of wonderful
people.

First, I would like to thank Jim Gavelek, my advisor, for guiding me through my
doctoral program and into my dissertation. I’m sure that I was not an easy person to be an
advisor for, and I appreciate his time, his patience, and his good advice. For a long time I
was unsure about what I wanted to do when I finished my program, and my conversations
with Jim really helped me think about my options and the pros and cons of each.

Thanks to Carol Sue Englert for being a great mentor and friend to me throughout
my years at Michigan State University. I deeply appreciate her advice, encouragement, and
general support of my efforts; the interest and caring that she demonstrated in me and my
endeavors even though she was not on either of my committees meant a lot to me. In
addition, the research skills that I learned from working with her on the Early Literacy
Project were extremely valuable to me during my dissertation process. I am also
appreciative of the opportunities that she provided me (and all of her research assistants) to
get publications and presentations.

Thanks to Stan Trent for serving on my dissertation committee and for being
another mentor and friend for the past few years. I appreciate his continuous
encouragement and support of my efforts to complete my dissertation. I appreciate, too,
the opportunities that he tried to make available to me for getting my work published in

journals or presented at conferences. I also learned a lot from working and talking with
him about CEP 240 and about the data I collected.

Thanks to Lynn Paine and Lauren Young for serving on my program committee
and on my dissertation committee. I appreciate not only their input into the planning of my
program and the completing of my dissertation, but also their general support and
willingness to be of help. I owe Lauren an extra debt of gratitude for inviting me to
become involved with Team 3. This involvement provided me with valuable experiences
which helped me recognize some of my talents and begin to clarify my professional goals.
Also, I greatly appreciate her belief in me and in my abilities.

A special thanks to my dissertation advisor, Linda Anderson, who was really great
to work with. She held high expectations for me but also continually demonstrated her
belief that I could rise to meet those expectations. She was very generous with her time,
meeting with me regularly for a year and a half to discuss my progress (or lack thereol).
Our many conversations were invaluable in helping me design, implement, and then write
up my research. Linda offered many helpful suggestions all along the way, and she also
was critical when she needed to be, but always in a very gentle way. Furthermore, it
seemed that whenever I was feeling discouraged and/or overwhelmed, she always had
something supportive, encouraging, and reassuring to say. Linda was everything (and
more!) that anyone could ever hope to have for a dissertation chair, and I can’t thank her
enough!

Thanks to Gene Pemell for allowing me to serve as a teaching assistant for CEP
240 and for giving me the freedom to pursue my research agenda. I would also like to
thank him for the support he has given me and for the great confidence he has always
shown in my abilities.

Thanks to Susan Melnick for helping me decide on the focus for my dissertation

and to Len Bianchi for helping me with my statistical analyses.

iii

Thanks to all of my fellow graduate students who worked, played, and
commiserated with me throughout my program. I don’t know what I would have done
without their friendship and support. Specifically, thanks to Troy Mariage for our many
debates/discussions and for modeling excellence in research and teaching. Thanks to Kathi
Tarrant for being such a good friend from the beginning and for always believing in me.
Thanks to Nancy Knapp for all of our stimulating discussions. Thanks to Jeff Sonnega for
making me relax by taking me to parties and sporting events, especially basketball games.
Thanks to Fenice Boyd, Marcia Fetters, and Teresa Scurto for their friendship and for the
various ways that they supported me during my program. Thanks to Tanja Bisesi, Fenice
Boyd, Cindy Brock, Ginny Goatley, Mary Rozendal, and Joyce Urba for participating in
dissertation study groups with me; these were helpful. Thanks to Cindy Brock, Ginny
Goatley, Mary Rozendal, and Steve Sheldon for the fun and laughter of our Saturday night
card games that gave all of us a break from the pressures of our doctoral program. Finally,
I want to offer an additional word of thanks to Mary Rozendal, who absolutely has a heart
of gold. I appreciate immensely not only all the different ways in which she has helped me
but also all that she continually does for others.

For their continuing encouragement, support, and understanding, thanks to all the
members of my family and to many of my old friends. In particular I want to thank three
of my former students--Cari Filbrandt, Nikkole McNally, and Kathryn Overton--who also
attended MSU and whose friendship did much to sustain me during my years here.

Thanks also to my former colleagues at Indiana University South Bend for encouraging
and supporting my efforts to complete my dissertation, especially Marie Doyle, who has
been a truly wonderful and supportive friend.

Finally, thanks to all the other professors, staff, friends, and fellow students who
contributed in various ways to my completing this dissertation and who helped in making

my years at Michigan State so enjoyable.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................ vii
LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................. viii
CHAPTER ONE - STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM .................................... 1
CHAPTER TWO - REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH ................................ 7
Definitions ................................................................................. 7

The Learning of Preservice Teachers .................................................. 10
Impact of Teacher Education on Students' Beliefs and Attitudes .......... 11

Influence of Students' Attitudes and Beliefs on Their Learning ........... l4

Racial Attitudes and Beliefs ............................................................. 20

Influence on Perception of New Information . 3. ............................. 20

The Persistence of Negative Racial Attitudes ................................ 22

Influence on Behavior toward Racial Minorities ............................ 26

Multicultural Teacher Education ........................................................ 28

Why Are the Changing Demographic Trends Problematic? ................ 29

Cultural Mismatches ................................................... 30

Different Learning Styles .............................................. 33

Negative Racial Attitudes and Beliefs ................................ 36

Conclusions ............................................................. 38

What Does It Mean to Prepare Teachers for Diversity? ..................... 39

Biography (Self -Awareness) ......................................... 39

Cultural Knowledge ................................................... 4O

Instructional Strategies ................................................ 42

Field Experiences ...................................................... 43

Attitude Change ........................................................ 44

Conclusions ...................................................................... 47

CHAPTER THREE - METHODS ............................................................. 48

Purpose .................................................................................... 48

Research Design and Rationale ......................................................... 50
Course ..................................................................................... 51

Participants ................................................................................ 55

Data Sources .............................................................................. 56

Teaching/Learning Questionnaire .............................................. 56

Attitude Survey .................................................................. 57

Structured Interview ............................................................ 58

Unstructured Interviews ........................................................ 59

Data Analysis ............................................................................. 60

Quantitative Data ................................................................ 60

Attitude Surveys ........................................................ 60

Teaching/Learning Questionnaires ................................... 61

Course Records ........................................................ 62

Qualitative Data ........................................................................... 63

Structured Interviews ........................................................... 63

Unstructured Interviews ........................................................ 66

CHAPTER FOUR - RESULTS AND DISCUSSION ...................................... 68

Quantitative Data ......................................................................... 68

The Quick Discrimination Index ............................................... 69

All Students ............................................................. 69

Volunteer Students ..................................................... 7S

ABCD Questionnaire ........................................................... 79

Course Records ................................................................. 87

Qualitative Data ........................................................................... 88

Target Students .................................................................. 89

Background Experiences .............................................. 89

Beliefs about the Education of Minorities ........................... 95

Impact of Course ....................................................... 104

A Close-up Look at Three Students ........................................... 121

Student Profiles ........................................................ 122

How Students Reacted to Course Content .......................... 127

The Influence of Personal Qualities .................................. 141

CHAPTER FIVE - SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND IMPLICATIONS ........... 160

Summary of Major Findings ............................................................ 160

Quantitative Data ................................................................ 160

Qualitative Data .................................................................. 162

Discussion ................................................................................ 164

Beliefs and Attitudes as Mediating Factors ................................... 164

Processing of New Information ...................................... 165

Consistency Theories .................................................. 168

Belief /Attitude Strength ................................................ 170

Missed Messages ................................................................ 171

Other Learnings ................................................................. 173

Conclusions ............................................................................... 178

Limitations of the Study ................................................................. 183

Implications ............................................................................... 184

Future Research .......................................................................... 189
APPENDICES

Appendix A - CEP 240 Syllabus, Reading List, and Sample Activities ........... 191

Appendix B - ABCD Questionnaire .................................................... 200

Appendix C - Attitude Surveys ......................................................... 211

Appendix D - Structured Interviews ................................................... 214

REFERENCES .................................................................................... 217

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3.1 - Participants in the Study ............................................................ 55
Table 3.2 - Data Sources for Participants in Study ............................................ 56
Table 4.7 - Student Responses to QDI Items .................................................. 72
Table 4.2 - Volunteer Students’ Pre and Post Scores on the QDI ........................... 76
Table 4.3 - Comparison of Volunteers and Nonvolunteers on Selected Variables ........ 77
Table 4.4a - Student Responses to ABCD items #1-14 ....................................... 80
Table 4.4b - Student Responses to ABCD items #15-22 ................................... 81-82
Table 4.4c - Student Responses to ABCD items #23-25 ..................................... 83
Table 4.5 - Change Scores for High and Lows on Selected ABCD Items ................. 87
Table 4.6 - Mean Scores for Attendance, Midterm Exam, Final Exam,

and Final Grade ................................................................ 88
Table 4.7 - Target Students ...................................................................... 89
Table 4.8 - Explanations of Lower Minority School Achievement .......................... 100
Table 4.9 - Most Important Learnings .......................................................... 107
Table 4.10 - Most/Least Valuable Class Sessions ............................................. 110
Table 4.11 - Students’ Feelings about the Course ............................................. 111

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 4.1 - Distribution of scores on Quick Discrimination Index (QDI) ................ 7O

viii

CHAPTER ONE
STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Repeatedly in the current teacher education literature, one reads that during the
next 25 years the rapidly changing demographic composition of our country is going to
result in an increasingly diverse student population (Pallas, Natriello, and McDill, 1989),
and yet the projections are that the teaching force will wntinue to be primarily White,
monolingual, and female (Grant & Secada, 1990; Zeichner, 1993). In response to these
two trends, many educators (e.g., see Dilworth, 1993; Grant, 1992) are arguing that
teacher education programs must do more to better prepare teacher candidates for
teaching a diverse student population. In its 1972 publication, No One Model American,
the American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education set forth four multicultural
goals for teacher education programs and asserted that ”The commitment to cultural
pluralism must permeate all areas of the educational experience provided for prospective
teachers " (cited in Gollnick, 1992, p. 225). In 1979 the National Council for the
Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) added multicultural criteria to its standards
for all institutions seeking national accreditation. In Tomorrow's Schools the Holmes
Group (1990) also stressed the importance of teachers learning to teach ”everybody's
children.” Clearly, teacher educators are aware of and attempting to respond to the
challenge.

Nevertheless, attempts to increase the multicultural emphasis in teacher education
programs, however well-intentioned, are fraught with difficulties. First, a fundamental
requisite for effective problem-solving is to clearly define the problem; however, it is not

at all apparent that teacher educators have a clear sense of the problem they are

attempting to address. The most frequently cited argument in support of the need to
prepare teachers for diversity is the growing disparity between a mostly White and female
teaching force and an increasingly diverse student population. It has not been made clear,
however, whether the problem is the cultural mismatch between teachers and students,
the prospective teachers' lack of knowledge and skills in teaching groups different from
themselves, their attitudes toward and beliefs about other racial/ethnic groups, or some
combination of these and other factors. A second difficulty is that teacher educators seem
to have given insufficient attention to defining and then justifying what it is they seek to
develop in prospective teachers-awareness, sensitivity, knowledge, skills, beliefs,
attitudes, etc. These terms abound in the literature as characteristics that preservice
teachers need to develop; however, seldom are they defined adequately, nor is it always
explained why the development of these characteristics is an appropriate response to the
problem. Third, as a consequence of the different conceptions of the problem and the
different conceptions of what prospective teachers need to develop, there seems to be
little consensus on how to go about providing multicultural teacher education (In
refening to the process of preparing prospective teachers to work with diverse learners, I
will use multicultural teacher education as synonymous with preparing teachers for
diversity.) In his review of the literature in this area, Zeichner (1993) identified five
different approaches to multicultural teacher education, approaches that, while they might
well be considered complementary, clearly reflect the differing perspectives on the
problem and on what prospective teachers need to develop. Thus, while there is strong
agreement that multicultural teacher education is needed and that teacher education
programs must provide it, there appears to be less agreement on how to go about doing
so. Finally, some educators question whether teaching for diversity is something that
can be taught to prospective teachers and whether most efforts to do so are truly effective
or appropriate responses to the continuing problems of poor and minority school children.
Haberman (1991), for instance, argues that teacher education programs are not powerful

enough to change students' deep-seated beliefs and values, while Gay (1983) contends
that including issues of class, gender, and religion diverts attention away from ethnicity,
which she regards as the major issue. Others (e. g., Gibson, 1984; Hilliard, 1974) have
argued that multicultural education is paternalistic and that culturally different children
require no special pedagogy. Each of these fundamental issues will have to be addressed
if teacher education programs are to do a more effective job of preparing teachers to work
with diverse learners.

Needed is more research to shed additional light on the aforementioned
difficulties. In their review of the literature on preparing teachers for diversity, Grant and
Secada (1990) observed:

The downside of the research reviewed here, like so much research in education,

is that it does not offer enough detail or conclusive enough evidence to argue that

these are effective ways of offering multicultural preservice education. . . . we
still need more information about the scope of effective educational practice and

the combinations of practice that will result in optimal outcomes” (p. 413)

To learn more about the effectiveness of multicultural teacher education, I decided to
examine a single course and attempt to determine its apparent impact on students. In
looking at one course which seemed to have goals consistent with many multicultural
teacher education courses, I focused on whether and how students' racial attitudes and
beliefs mediated their experience of the course and their learning from the course. While
the present study does not directly address any of the difficulties identified in the
previous paragraph, it still contributes to the field in some worthwhile ways. First, it
provides a close look at the structure and content of one multicultural education course, at
how a selected group of students experience the course, and at what they learn from it.
Second, this study examines the role of racial attitudes and beliefs in the learning of
prospective teachers. Third, it offers data to speak to the question of whether or not a
multicultural teacher education course affects the racial attitudes and beliefs that
prospective teachers bring to the course. Finally, some of the data collected for this study

may suggest ways to increase the effectiveness of multicultural teacher education courses.

In addition to the literature on preparing teachers for diversity, this study was also
informed by research on leaming to teach and by research on racial attitudes. Several
reviewers of the learning to teach literature (Borko & Putnam, in press; Kagan, 1992; and
Richardson, 1996) have concluded that what prospective teachers learn from their teacher
education courses is strongly influenced by the beliefs and attitudes which they bring to
those courses. Recognizing their immense importance, Pajares (1992) has argued that
”investigating the educational beliefs of teachers and teacher candidates should become a
focus of current educational research” (p. 322). This study contributes to the literature by
examining prospective teachers' beliefs about the education of racial minority students.

Meanwhile, researchers on racial attitudes (Duckitt, 1992; Maluso, 1995;
Oskamp, 1991, Ponterotto & Pedersen, 1993) have reported that many Whites still seem
to possess negative attitudes toward racial minorities and that these attitudes influence not
only how they interpret information about racial minorities, but also how they might
behave toward them. Given the apparent importance of entering beliefs and attitudes,
coupled with the fact that most prospective teachers are White while an increasing
proportion of our nation's public school students are racial minorities, I believe that any
efforts to prepare teachers for diversity must take into account their racial beliefs and
attitudes, because it seems likely that these beliefs and attitudes will influence what they
learn. Therefore, I decided to make prospective teachers' racial attitudes the major focus
in my dissertation research.

Three major questions guided this study:

1. How are students who express favorable attitudes toward minority groups

similar to and different from students who express unfavorable attitudes?

2. To what extent do students' attitudes toward minority groups change during the

course?

3. Are there important differences between students with initially favorable racial

attitudes and those with initially unfavorable ones in terms of their perceptions

of the course or their learning from the course?
First, I wanted to determine whether preservice teachers who express initially favorable
attitudes toward minority groups differ substantially from those who express initially
unfavorable attitudes and also whether there appear to be important differences in what
they learn from the course. In her study of preservice teachers in a multicultural
education course, McGeehan (1982) found that students who began the course with
positive feelings toward other ethnic groups were the ones who gained the most
multicultural knowledge during the course. Similarly, Ross and Smith (1992) reported
that preservice teachers' learning outcomes seemed to be related to the strength of their
entering perspectives. Additionally, they found that students who reported more pre-
college experiences with minorities seemed to display more openness to the course
content. The findings of these researchers are consistent with the finding frequently
reported in the learning-to—teach literature, that prospective teachers' entering beliefs
influence what they learn from their teacher education classes. The findings further
suggest that the prior interracial experiences may also be an important variable.
Therefore, in my dissertation study I attempted to determine whether, with this sample of
students, particular background characteristics distinguished those with favorable
attitudes from those with unfavorable attitudes. Second, I sought to identify prospective
teachers' entering attitudes toward racial/ethnic minority groups, and then to determine
how and to what extent their attitudes and their knowledge/beliefs did or did not change
during the course of the semester. Noordhoff and Kleinfeld (1993) reported that a
missing piece in their research was an examination of their preservice teachers' entering
views about diverse students and their beliefs about teaching them. They argued that
such an examination is important because teacher learning is not an additive process, but
rather a process of conceptual change. Only by knowing where a person started will we
be able to determine how he/she has changed. Third, I wanted to document several

participants' perceptions of their experience in the course, as well as their perceptions of

what they learned from the course. Grant and Secada (1990) asserted that "A basic tenet
of education is that instruction should follow development. Yet we have no maps of how
teacher cognitions, beliefs, and skills with respect to the teaching of diverse student
populations actually develop” (p. 419). Hopefully, this study will assist us in beginning
to develop such maps.

I will conclude this chapter by presenting a brief overview of the remaining chapters
in this report. In Chapter 2, I review three relevant bodies of literature: the learning-to-
teach literature, focusing on the important role that entering attitudes and beliefs have in
preservice teachers' learning; the literature on racial attitudes, focusing on the continued
existence of unfavorable attitudes by many White Americans toward racial minorities;
and the literature on multicultural teacher education, focusing on the various strategies
currently being employed to prepare preservice teachers for diversity.

In Chapter 3, I describe the methods used in the study. I begin by explaining the
design of the study and my rationale for it. Then I describe the course that is being
studied, the participants in the study, and the various instruments that were used. Finally,
I explain how I analyzed the data that were collected, first the quantitative data and then
the qualitative data.

In Chapter 4, I report the results of this investigation. I first present the results of
the quantitative data collected from all the students in the class and then that collected
from a smaller group of volunteers. Next, I discuss the results of my analysis of the
qualitative data for a group of target students selected from among the volunteers.
Finally, I discuss additional qualitative data on three focus students selected from among
the target students.

In Chapter 5, I summarize the major findings of this research. After some
discussion, I then draw a number of conclusions based on my major findings and suggest
implications that they would seem to have for teacher educators. Finally, I discuss

limitations of the study and my recommendations for future research.

CHAPTER TWO
REVIEW OF RELATED RESEARCH

Prior research in three broad areas seems to bear on the present research. I will
review the research on the leaming of preservice teachers, racial attitudes and beliefs, and
multicultural teacher education . I will begin by defining some of the key terms that I
will be using. Then, in the second section of the review, I will discuss how, during the
past two decades, research on learning to teach has indicated that the perspectives with
which prospective teachers begin their preparation strongly influence what and how much
they leam during their programs. In the third section I will discuss how the racial
attitudes and beliefs that people hold have been shown to influence not only their
receptiveness to new information but also their behavior toward certain groups of people.
In addition, I will present research which indicates that racial prejudice and
discrimination are still problems in American society. In the final section I will discuss
different explanations of the need for multicultural teacher education and different
approaches that are being advocated. I will argue that the biggest emphasis in current
approaches to multicultural teacher education seems to be on providing prospective
teachers with information about diversity, and I will make the case that we need to pay
more attention to their racial attitudes and beliefs and to how they might mediate what is
(or is not) learned from courses on diversity.

Definitions

Because this study deals with attitudes and beliefs and how they may influence
the learning of prospective teachers, I need to lay some groundwork for the literature
review by first defining these key terms. I have found that terms like attitudes and beliefs

abound in the literature on learning to teach, but seldom is either of these terms clearly
defined. 1 am sure that part of the reason for this is that these are difficult terms to define
precisely. For example, Fishbein and Azjen (cited in McGuire, 1986) reviewed 200
research studies in social psychology and found 500 different operational definitions of
attitude. McGuire has detailed the many difficulties involved in attempting to define this
term with precision, but for the purposes of this present discussion, social psychological
precision seems less important than simplicity and clarity. Therefore, I will define
attitude simply as an ”evaluative reaction toward something or someone" (Myers, 1990,
p. 34). Some social psychologists (e.g., Myers, 1990; Sampson, 1991; Triandis, 1971)
have conceived of an attitude as being composed of three interrelated components: a
cognitive component, consisting of the person's beliefs about the attitude object; an
affective component, consisting of the person's feelings toward the attitude object; and a
behavioral component, consisting of the person's behavior toward the attitude object.
Other social psychologists (e.g., Duckitt, 1992; Lott, 1995; Oskamp, 1991; Petty &
Cacioppo, 1981) choose to regard these three components as separate entities, and they
use the term attitude to refer only to the person's feelings toward someone or something.
According to Duckitt (1992), the tri-componential view of attitude was once widely-
accepted; however, during the past two decades this view seems to have fallen out of
favor among most social psychologists. One reason for the alleged shift in perspective
was that “the interrelationship among the three components and how they influenced
behavior were never definitively clarified” (p. 12). Lott (1995) identified several other
problems with the tri-componential view, including the ”difficulty of assessing an attitude
independently of its presumed components” (p. 21). Similarly, Maluso (1995) argued
that the research evidence suggests that the three components might most appropriately
be regarded as independent (though interrelated) constructs. Therefore, in this paper I
will adopt social psychologists' prevailing view of attitude as being an affective construct

distinct from beliefs and behaviors.

Belief, like attitude, is a difficult construct to define precisely. In his review of
the literature on teachers' beliefs, Pajares (1992) discussed the difficulty of defining this
term and the additional difficulties in distinguishing beliefs from knowledge; however, in
his article he never provided a clear definition of belief, other than at one point saying
that it is ”an individual's judgment of the truth or falsity of a proposition” (p. 316). I find
that I am uncomfortable with his use of the word judgment in this definition because it
could imply that beliefs are necessarily evaluative, but I do not believe this to be the case.
Bern (1970), for example, distinguishes between beliefs and evaluative beliefs. He
explains that while many beliefs are evaluative in nature (e. g., Spinach has a terrible
taste), not all of them are (e.g., Cancer can cause death). Additionally, Pajares' (1992)
use of the term judgment also seems to imply that the acquisition of beliefs is a far more
rational process than it actually is. Bem (1970) has suggested that many belief --
particularly those developed as a result of direct experience or through the influence of
some hi ghly-valued external authority--are often accepted without question. In other
words, the individual does not engage in making judgments about the truth or falsity of
the information presented; he/she simply accepts it as truth. Bern used the term primitive
beliefs to refer to "beliefs which demand no independent formal or empirical
confirmation and which require no justification beyond a brief citation of direct
experience” (p. 6). These seem to be two serious shortcomings of Pajares' (1992)
definition of belief. Petty and Cacioppo (1981) defined belief as “the information that a
person has about other people, objects, and issues" (p. 7). Bar-Tal (1990), after
discussing a number of different definitions proposed by various social psychologists,
chose to define a belief as "a proposition to which a person attributes at least a minimal
degree of confidence'I (p. 14). The definition which I prefer because it is simple but clear
was offered by Scheibe (1970); he defined a belief as what a person ”considers to be true
or likely” (p. l).

10

Finally, the terms racial attitudes and racial beliefs are defined in the same way
as attitudes and beliefs, except that they relate specifically to issues of race. I have
explained how I am defining the key terms appearing in this paper, but the reader needs
to understand that other researchers whose work I will be citing in the following pages
may be defining these terms differently, or they may use other terms in place of these.

The Learning of Preservice Teachers

One of the assumptions underlying efforts to prepare teachers for diversity is that
”teaching for diversity” is something that can be taught. In the literature the implicit
belief of those researching and writing about this issue is exceedingly clear, because the
question of whether or not "teaching for diversity” can be taught is almost never raised.
This is unfortunate, and rather surprising, considering Zeichner's (1993) observation:

Very little evidence exists in the literature that the changes documented by teacher

educators are long lasting or that they influence the way in which prospective

teachers actually teach. Generally, we know very little about the development of
teacher education students' cognitions, beliefs, and skills with respect to the

teaching of diverse learners, including how particular teacher education strategies
influence teacher learning” (pp. 20-21)

 

Some of the research conducted during the past two decades suggests that there are limits
to what can be accomplished through teacher education; a clear awareness and
understanding of what and where those limits might be could enable us to make our
instructional efforts even more effective by allowing us to concentrate most of our efforts
in the areas where they can have the most powerful, far-reaching, and enduring effects.
Haberman (1991) has argued that cultural awareness is not something that can be
taught by teacher education programs because it involves changing a person's values. He
contended that the evidence on whether colleges and universities can change students'
values is I'spotty and inconclusive.” Haberman defined beliefs as ”what we think,
"attitudes as "what we feel,‘ and values as “the beliefs and attitudes we hold strongly
enough to act upon" (p. 25). He elaborated by saying that ”values represent our very
essence as people reflecting what we are, what we expect, and how we explain the world

around us" (p. 25). The research on the impact that colleges and universities have on

11

their students' values has been ignored by teacher educators, Haberman claimed. People's
values are acquired over time from significant others during childhood and adolescence.
These values, once acquired, ”serve as lifelong guides to behavior" and are not easily
changed. Haberman's contention is supported by Grant and Secada's (1990) report on a
study by Grant and Grant which assessed the attitudes of participants in a multicultural
institute. These researchers found that ”people's attitudes and behaviors about
multicultural education are not easily changed and that extended training is necessary”
(p. 417). Haberman (1991) also asserted,

Apparently, teacher educators must be assuming 1) that their preservice students'

values are unimportant or irrelevant to the type of teachers they will become; or 2)

that their students all enter the university with the values they will need to become

effective teachers in a multicultural society, or 3) that the teacher education

program will be sufficiently powerful to change all their students in ways that will

enable them to act on the ”right” values" (p. 27).
There is considerable research that seems to support Haberman's position, suggesting not
only that teacher education courses have little impact on students' attitudes and beliefs,
but also that their entering attitudes and beliefs actually influence what and how much
they learn in their courses.

Immct of Teacher Education on Students' Beliefs and Attitudes

Some research reports that teacher education courses appear to have little
influence on prospective teachers. In his classic “Five Towns" study, Lortie (1975) asked
teachers ”What experiences do you think have been most influential in teaching you how
to teach?" Only 15 percent of the respondents mentioned teacher education courses.
Lortie concluded that ”formal pedagogical instruction had no greater valence than
experiences in recreational work or motherhood" (p. T7). More recently, Smylie (1989)
reported similar results from a national survey of approximately 1750 teachers. Of the
fourteen items included on the survey, undergraduate education courses were rated
thirteenth and regarded as one of the least effective sources of teachers' learning to teach;
in fact, only district inservice training sessions were rated less effective. Like Lortie

(1975), Smylie (1989) reported that beginning teachers felt as though their education

12

courses had not adequately prepared them for the classroom, and they criticized these
courses as having been too theoretical and insufficiently practical. Numerous other
researchers (e.g., Kagan, 1992; Koehler, 1985; Sarason, Davidson, & Blatt, 1986; Stone,
1987) have noted teachers' dissatisfaction with their education courses. Katz, Raths,
Mohanty, Karachi, and Irving (cited in Stone, 1987) labeled beginning teachers'
complaints about their preservice preparation as the ”feed-forward problem.” They
argued that education courses often provide knowledge that the preservice teachers are
not yet ready for and answers to questions that they have not yet asked, and then later in
their actual teaching when they realize that they need this knowledge, the teachers
complain that it was never presented. I would say, though, that whether or not teacher
education programs are actually presenting prospective teachers with knowledge that is
potentially useful, the fact remains that large numbers of teachers apparently feel as
though they have gained little from their teacher education courses. But teachers
themselves are not the only ones saying that education courses often have little impact on
prospective teachers. The National Center for Research on Teacher Education (1991), in
its final report on the Teacher Education and Learning to Teach (T ELT) study,
commented that

Compared with other influences on learning to teach, teacher education is

generally regarded as a weak intervention. At the preservice level, this often

means that programs do not challenge the "apprenticeship—of-obsei'vation' «the

years of teacher-watching that shape prospective teachers' views of teaching. As
a result, teachers often leave preservice preparation with their initial views intact.

(p 67)
Drawing from data collected in the TELT study, Paine (1989) examined the

orientation towards diversity of 233 preservice teachers. She identified four different
orientations to diversity: individual difference, where differences are viewed in terms of
individuals' differing from each other in any number of respects (e.g., height, personality,
intelligence); categorical difference, where differences are viewed as ”repeating patterns
of variation across individuals' ( p. 3), including categories like social class, race, and

gender; contextual difference, where "differences among individuals occur in patterns,

13

yet these patterns are seen as connected to a social situation or embedded in a larger,
dynamic context” (p. 3); and pedagogical difference, where differences ”are understood
as having pedagogical implications--consequences for both teaching and learning" (p. 3).
Paine reported that most of the teacher candidates appeared to have an individual
difference orientation to diversity; it was this orientation, as well as the categorical
difference orientation, that they typically mentioned. She noted that the participants in
this study reported having had little prior experience with diversity, having come from
backgrounds that were quite homogeneous. Paine also observed that the prospective
teachers seemed to place a great deal of importance on the ideas of equity and fairness;
yet, at the same time, they expressed a lot of confusion and uncertainty about how they
could achieve these conditions in their teaching. She concluded that ”these teachers
bring approaches to diversity that have the potential for reproducing inequality and reflect
larger social and historical dilemmas" (p. 20). However, it should be noted that the
interviews in Paine’s study were conducted early in the students’ teacher education
program and do not tell us anything about where these students may have ended up (L.
Paine, personal communication, February 2, 1996).

Although additional data about prospective teachers' views about diversity were
collected in the TELT study, the researchers (National Center for Research on Teacher
Education, 1991) explained that the instruments used to collect these data may have been
flawed, and they cautioned, "we have reservations about the validity and reliability of
these data” (p. 52). They went on to suggest, however, that in order to understand
teachers' beliefs about teaching diverse learners, more attention would need to be given to
the background experiences of the teachers. In one set of data the researchers observed
that in an induction program the prospective teachers' beliefs about the sources of school
failure seemed to move in the desired direction moreso than the beliefs of prospective
teachers in other settings. The researchers hypothesized that

The induction program, which seems most successful in influencing teachers'
thinking about issues around teaching diverse learners, may have been influential

14

precisely because teachers were predisposed at the outset to think in the direction

the program seemed to be directing them. (p. 60)

However, since only very limited data were presented in the text of the report, it is not
clear to me what in the data led the researchers to posit this particular hypothesis.

Kagan (1992) reviewed 40 research studies on leaming-to-teach that were
published between 1987 and 1991. She found that ”all but one study indicated that
personal beliefs remained stable” (p. 156). Although Kagan uses terms like beliefs,
attitudes, and images, she does not define any of them; however, her use of beliefs and
attitudes in context seems consistent with the definitions I provided earlier. In one of the
studies reviewed by Kagan, Weinstein (1990) assessed the impact of an introductory
education course and field experience on prospective teachers' preconceptions about
teaching. At the end of the semester she found virtually no change in their
preconceptions. Weinstein argued that, though her study was only one semester in
length, it was not unrealistic to expect that their preconceptions would have been affected
by the course.

It is not unreasonable to anticipate that students' expectations about their future

teaching performance and their beliefs about good teaching would change as a

result of an initial field experience and a course that stressed the complexity of

classrooms and the many roles of teachers. (p. 285)

In sum, the available research suggests that teacher education programs do not
have a very powerful impact on prospective teachers’ beliefs and attitudes

Influence of Students' Attitudes and Beliefs on Their Learning

Not only are the entering perspectives of preservice teachers resistant to change,
but also there now seems to be a general consensus among researchers that preservice
teachers' entering beliefs and attitudes are major determinants of what they do and do not
learn in their preparation programs. As Lortie (1975) explained, "one's personal
dispositions are not only relevant but, in fact, stand at the core of becoming a teacher" (p.
79). Lortie does not define his use of "personal dispositions,” but it seems to be

consistent with my definition of attitudes. Feiman-Nemser and Buchmann (1985)

15

conducted case studies of two prospective teachers during the first year of their
preparation program and concluded that ”in becoming a teacher, very little normatively
correct learning can be trusted to come about without instruction that takes the
preconceptions of future teachers into account" (p. 29). Goodman (1988), who conducted
an ethnographic study of students in an elementary education program, contended that
preservice teachers' entering perspectives serve as "intuitive screens” through which they
interpreted the content and experiences of their preparation program. He defined the term
perspective as including ”an individual's actions rather than just his/her disposition to act"
(p. 121). In other words, the term seems to represent a combination of attitude and
behavior, but whether or not it is also intended to include beliefs is unclear, though I
would assume so. Goodman found that the students tended to reject ideas and
experiences that directly contradicted their "intuitive screens." From his study Goodman
concluded,
. . . it would appear that getting to know students' "intuitive screens” is extremely
important, if educators are interested in having a significant impact upon their
students. . . . Once the intuitive screen of a given student is understood by faculty
members, then different strategies can be developed to best educate that
individual. For some students, the faculty will want to offer experiences that will
reinforce a given student‘s intuitive screen while in another instance, they will
want to find ways to help a student alter his or her initial perspective. (p. 134)
In her study of 14 teacher education students, Hollingsworth (1989) posited a notion
similar to Goodman's intuitive screens when she said that 'preprogram beliefs served as
filters for processing program content and making sense of classroom contexts” (p. 168).
Feiman-Nemser and Buchmann (1989) followed six students through two years of their
undergraduate teacher education program. Reinforcing the conclusion that they had
reached in their earlier study, these researchers stressed the necessity of attending to the
incoming beliefs and attitudes of prospective teachers. Feiman-Nemser and Buchmann
went on to say,
Teacher candidates are not blank slates; what they learn during teacher

preparation is a function of what they bring to their professional studies as well
as what they encounter in courses and field experiences. (pp. 375-376)

16

Numerous other researchers (e. g., Anderson & Holt-Reynolds, 1995; Ball, 1989;
Bullough, 1991: Holt-Reynolds, 1991a; McDiarmid & Price, 1990; Pajares, 1992;
Weinstein, 1990) have also concluded that if teacher educators are to be effective in
helping prospective teachers reach desired knowledge and understandings, then the
perspectives which they bring to their preparation program must be taken into account.
Researchers at the National Center for Research on Teacher Education (1991) offered the
following observation:

There is now agreement that new knowledge is influenced by old knowledge, that

existing conceptions and expectations significantly shape learning. It follows that

how teachers think about leaming to teach will influence their openness and

receptivity to different kinds of knowledge and sources of learning. (p. 69)
Furthermore, several reviewers of the learning-to-teach literature have all reached
essentially the same conclusion, lending it even further weight. Kagan (1992), for
example, reviewed the literature on teacher growth, and one of her conclusions was

The personal beliefs and images that preservice candidates bring to programs of

teacher education usually remain inflexible. Candidates tend to use the

information provided in course work to confirm rather than to confront and
correct their preexisting beliefs. Thus, a candidate's personal beliefs and images
determine how much knowledge the candidate acquires from a preservice

program and how it is interpreted. (p. 154)

Similarly, reviewing the literature on teachers' attitudes and beliefs, Richardson (1996)
concluded,

Teacher attitudes and beliefs, therefore, are important considerations in

understanding classroom practices and conducting teacher education designed to

help prospective and inservice teachers develop their thinking and practices. In
such change programs, beliefs and attitudes of incoming preservice students and
inservice teachers strongly affect what and how they learn and are also targets of

change within the process. (p. 1)

Richardson discussed some of the various meanings that have been attributed to attitudes,
but she never specified which definition she would be using in her chapter. The last
definition that she mentioned was by Fishbein, who described attitudes as "learned
predispositions to respond to an object or class of objects in a favorable or unfavorable

way” (p. 3). This definition is consistent with how I have defined the term. Richardson

17

defines belief as "a proposition that is accepted as true by the individual holding the
belief” (pp. 5-6). This definition is also consistent with mine. In their review of the
literature on learning to teach, Borko and Putnam (in press) made an observation that was
almost identical to Richardson's: ”research on learning to teach shows that teachers‘
existing knowledge and beliefs are critical in shaping what and how they learn from
teacher education experiences” (p. 5). Unfortunately, these reviewers did not define what
they meant by beliefs, but their use of the term does seem consistent with my earlier
definition. Later in their chapter, referring to research conducted by Ross, Johnson and
Smith at the University of Florida, Borko and Putnam go on to say,

. . . learning to teach is influenced by a complex array of factors, one of the most

significant of which is the entering perspective of the student. Entering

perspective serves as a filter that determines how experiences within the teacher

education program are interpreted. (p. 15)

Some of the research on multicultural teacher education courses has also
commented on the importance of prospective teachers' beliefs. Studying a group of
teacher candidates in a course on diversity, McGeehan (1982) found that "participants
displaying the greatest gains in knowledge of multicultural education tended to express
more accepting initial attitudes and feelings toward other ethnic groups” (p. 166). In
other words, students who began the course with more positive attitudes toward other
ethnic groups appeared to learn more from the course. McDiarmid and Price (1990)
examined the effects of a multicultural training program on a group of prospective
teachers, and they found that there was little change in the teachers' belief at the end of
the training. The researchers speculated that in order for desired changes to occur, some
of the incoming beliefs of prospective teachers may need to be directly challenged.

One reason that prospective teachers' entering beliefs are so powerful is due to
what Lortie (1975) has termed the "apprenticeship of observation.” Prospective teachers
have all spent thousands of hours in classrooms and enter their teacher education

programs with many solidly-entrenched beliefs about teaching and learning. Holt-
Reynolds (1991b) explained that teacher candidates tend to use their "personal

18

history-based beliefs" as a measuring stick against which they test the validity and utility
of the new information that they are presented with in their teacher education courses.

Or, put another way, new information is filtered through the beliefs that they have already
formed through their personal experiences, and these prior beliefs serve both to help and
hinder the individual's learning from their program. Holt-Reynolds illustrated this
process by describing how nine preservice teachers' entering perspective of teaching as
being teacher-centered led them to reject one of the central messages of a content-area
reading course in which the instructor had stressed the importance of student-centered
instruction. Instead of questioning their entering perspective, these students instead
questioned the instructor's message, evaluating it on the basis of their personal history-
based beliefs about the teachers' role. Consequently, what these students learned from the
course was different than what the instructor had intended. Holt-Reynolds (1991a) has
argued that, to be more effective in our task of educating prospective teachers, "it is
incumbent upon us to enter the dialogues of our students of teaching and work with their
assumptions, acknowledging them before we try to reshape them'I (p. 20). Richardson
(1996) seemed to reach a similar conclusion:

Studies of the origins of teachers' beliefs indicate that many different life

experiences contribute to the formation of strong and enduring beliefs about

teaching and learning. Within a constructivist learning and teaching framework,
these beliefs should be surfaced and acknowledged during the teacher education
program if the program is to make a difference in the deep structure of knowledge

and beliefs held by the students. (p. 11)

To say that prospective teachers' entering attitudes and beliefs influence what they
learn from their preparation programs is not necessarily to say that they always learn little
or that their beliefs and attitudes are never changed. Some researchers have reported
success in changing their students' incoming beliefs. Noordhoff and Kleinfeld (1993), for
example, investigated the impact of the Teachers for Alaska (TFA) program and
reported ”substantial growth in our prospective teachers' orientations toward teaching
culturally diverse students” (p. 35). The researchers attribute the success of the program

to its strong field-experience components and the emphasis on students' being reflective

19

and developing understandings of the particular contexts in which they were teaching.
However, Noordhof f and Kleinfeld also acknowledged that the success may be partially
attributable to the selectivity of the program, in that only students with certain
characteristics may have chosen that sort of program. Bondy, Schmitz, and Johnson
(1993) investigated the influence of a combination of course work and field experience
on prospective teachers' beliefs about teaching minority students. They found that field
experience, in combination with course work which allowed them to process and make
sense of those experiences, led to positive changes in prospective teachers' beliefs about
teaching poor and minority students. In contrast, field experience by itself actually
seemed to be counterproductive. Anderson and Holt-Reynolds (1995) studied how a
content-area reading instructor (i.e., Holt-Reynolds) attempted to take into consideration
in her instruction the incoming beliefs of her students. The instructor first hypothesized
about which of her prospective teachers' incoming beliefs might influence their learning
from the course, and then during the course she employed a number of pedagogical
moves intended to challenge those beliefs. The researchers found that by the end of the
course, two of the three case study students had transformed their beliefs in the desired
direction. The beliefs of the third student did not change, however, presumably because
his incoming beliefs were somewhat different than what the instructor had anticipated and
were not directly challenged by her pedagogical moves. Despite the very small sample,
the results of this study suggest that when prospective teachers' incoming beliefs are
appropriately surfaced and challenged, then changing those beliefs may be more likely
and more of the desired learning is likely to occur.

In summary, the fact that prospective teachers' attitudes and beliefs influence what
and how much they learn from their preparation program appears to be well-documented
in the learning-to-teach literature. Some of the research discussed in this section also
suggests that prospective teachers are likely to accept new information which is

consistent with their existing beliefs, but they tend to be resistant to information which

20

conflicts with their beliefs. In other words, prospective teachers' entering beliefs about
teaching appear to strongly influence how they respond to information about teaching
that is presented to them in their education courses. For me, these findings raise the
question of whether or not students' existing racial attitudes and beliefs might, in a similar
manner, mediate what they learn about racial minority groups from courses on diversity.
Just as prospective teachers' entering beliefs about teaching serve as filters through which
they perceive the information about teaching that is presented in their preparation
program, their racial attitudes and beliefs might serve to filter their perceptions of
information about racial minorities. To explore this possibility further, it makes sense to
turn to the research on racial attitudes and beliefs.
Racial Attitudes and Beliefs

In this section I will discuss how people's attitudes and beliefs influence their
perception of new information, how negative racial attitudes are still a widespread
problem in this country, and how racial attitudes influence people's behavior toward
racial minorities.

I uence on rce tion 0 New Information

There is a considerable body of research indicating that both beliefs and attitudes
are important influences on how people interpret information and situations that they are
presented with (Bar-Ta], 1990; Bern, 1970; Oskamp, 1991; Petty & Cacioppo, 1981;
Scheibe, 1970; Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991). Bar-Ta] (1990) explained that knowledge
formation is always dependent on previously-acquired beliefs, which determine how new
information will be perceived, interpreted, and evaluated. According to Zimbardo and
Leippe (1991), this filtering process is not always logical nor objective.

Human minds select and interpret information to make it fit with established

beliefs and attitudes. . . . People are "cognitive conservatives” in that they resist

changing their thoughts and evaluations of the objects of their world. . . . Despite

good intentions to be objective, people tend to gather information in such a way

as to stack the deck in favor of confirming their beliefs or "working hypotheses”
about an object. (pp. 204205)

21

Zimbardo and Leippe further noted that beliefs, once formed, are quite resistant to
change. People will often cling to a belief even in the face of substantial disconfirrnatory
evidence. In his review of the literature on teachers' beliefs, Pajares (1992) reported
similar conclusions. Because teachers' beliefs serve as filters through which new
information is interpreted, Pajares suggested that "the investigation of teachers' beliefs is
a necessary and valuable avenue of educational inquiry” (p. 326).

Some research indicates that attitudes also influence the acquisition and
interpretation of new knowledge. Consistency theorists (see Oskamp, 1991; Petty &
Cacioppo, 1981; Triandis, 1971) claim that people attempt to maintain consistency
between their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors. When they are confronted with new
information which is inconsistent with their current perspectives, then attitude change is
possible as they endeavor to maintain consistency. However, much as is the case with
their beliefs, people tend to interpret new information in a way that is consistent with
their existing attitudes. Consistency theorists believe that people's desire for consistency
leads them to ”such 'illogical' ways of maintaining consistency as denial of the truth of
the new information which conflicts with a person's present viewpoints, or searching for
supportive data to bolster present attitudes when they have been challenged by new
information” (Oskamp, 1991, p. 231). People are more likely to perceive as logical and
valid arguments that are in agreement with their existing attitudes (Bethlehem, 1985).
Zimbardo and Leippe (1991) have pointed out that people's attitudes can color their
perception of new information even in areas about which they possess little prior
knowledge.

We can have an attitude about something--liking or disliking itneven when the

rest of the mental representation is practically devoid of beliefs and actual

knowledge. This is true of many of our prejudices-the negative attitudes that we

may develop about groups of people that we actually know little about. . . .

attitudes which have little or no basis in knowledge may subsequently affect the

acquisition of knowledge and the formation of beliefs that may eventually 'fill"

the formerly empty mental representation. Our overall evaluation of something
affects how we interpret what we read and hear about the object. (pp. 34-35)

22

Thus, there seems to be clear evidence that people's existing attitudes and beliefs have a
definite influence on how they interpret new information. In the previous section of this
chapter I discussed research indicating that preservice teachers' entering perspectives on
teaching appear to mediate what they learn from their teacher education courses. It
seems reasonable to assume that, in a similar fashion, preservice teachers' entering
attitudes toward and beliefs about racial minorities are likely to mediate what they learn
from courses on diversity. This circumstance, if true, is a cause for concern because
there is substantial empirical evidence suggesting that many White Americans still
harbor negative racial attitudes and beliefs.
The Persistence of Negative Racial Attitudes
From its earliest beginnings, American society has been and continues to be
plagued by the specter of racism (Bennett, 1987; Schwartz & Disch, 1970). In 1968 the
National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, assigned to identify the causes
underlying the recurring racial disorders in American cities, reported:
the causes of the recent racial disorders are embedded in a massive tangle of
issues and circumstances-social, economic, political, and psychological--which
arise out of the historical pattern of Negro-white relations in America. These
factors are both complex and interacting. . . . Despite these complexities,
certain fundamental matters are clear. Of these, the most fundamental is the racial
attitude and behavior of white Americans toward black Americans. Race
prejudice has shaped our history decisively in the past; it now threatens to do so
again. White racism is essentially responsible for the explosive mixture which
has been accumulating in our cities since the end of World War II. (p. 203)
Twenty years later, a comprehensive study of the status of Black Americans (Jaynes &
Williams, 1989) revealed that, despite definite progress in many areas, the problem of
racism persisted.
Foremost among the reasons for the present state of black-white relations are two
continuing consequences of the nation's long and recent history of racial
inequality. One is the negative attitudes held toward blacks and the other is the
actual disadvantaged conditions under which many black Americans live. These
two consequences reinforce each other. Thus, a legacy of discrimination and
segregation continues to affect black-white relations." (p. 5)
During the past six years, racial disorders in cities like Los Angeles, Miami, New York,

and Boston, along with a resurgence of racial incidents on college campuses, amply attest

23

to the continuing existence of the problem. Negative racial attitudes and stereotypes
continue to be widespread in today's society. According to Ponterotto and Pedersen
(1993), ”The view of many social scientists is that you cannot be socialized into a society
stratified along racial lines and not be influenced by racist ideology” (pp. 18-19). Racial
prejudices are learned, starting as early as age 3 or 4, from parents, family, peers, and
other larger community influences (Barndt, 1991; Jones, 1972; Ponterotto & Pedersen,
1993). Moore (1984) argued that the media, which is characterized by "a profound white
bias that distorts our perspectives and our children's” (p. 40), is a significant contributor
to the racist socialization and acculturation process.

Although it is abundantly clear that racism still persists in our society, a series of
national polls also indicate that since 1942 White attitudes toward African Americans
have become increasingly more positive (Dovido & Gaertner, 1991; Myers, 1990). This
contradictory trend is misleading, however, for at least three reasons. First, overt
expressions of racism are no longer considered socially desirable in most contexts, and
some evidence (Duckitt, 1992; Kleg, 1993) indicates that questionnaire respondents often
report being more racially tolerant than they actually are. As Maluso (1995) explained,
"Contemporary theorists almost unanimously adhere to the position that the salience of
the cultural norm of egalitarianism will inhibit expressions of racism” (p. 54). In other
words, individuals are less likely to display prejudiced attitudes or behaviors in situations
where such attitudes and behaviors would be disapproved. For example, Frey and
Gaertner (cited in Maluso, 1995) found that "130 White female university students only
refused to help Black recipients when the failure to help would not be perceived by others
as socially inappropriate” (p. 55). Also, according to Maluso, expressions of racism by
White respondents seem to be inhibited in the presence of Black researchers and in
situations where their responses to questionnaire items were not anonymous. Dovido and
Gaertrrer (1991), suggesting that White racial attitudes may actually have changed little
since 1964, note that ”feelings toward blacks, as measured by the cold-warm loo-point

24

thermometer scale of the Institute for Social Research (ISR), has remained remarkably
stable” (p. 126).

Second, the apparent improvement in Whites' attitudes toward Blacks is further
called into question by a recent study of Blacks in American society. The researchers
(Jaynes & Williams, 1989) reported, "The foremost conclusion is that race still matters
greatly in the United States. Much of the evidence reviewed in this report indicates
widespread attitudes of racism" (p. 155) If polls show that Whites' racial attitudes are
improving, how can racism still be widespread? Ponterotto and Pedersen (1993) have
offered one explanation for why this racism doesn't show up in recent self -reports of
racial attitudes:

One major theme pervading the newer conceptions of prejudice is that racist

attitudes and beliefs are outside conscious awareness. Given that racist views

contradict most people's stated value system, one's view of self would be
impacted negatively if a racist ideology were acknowledged. Therefore, holding

racist beliefs out of conscious awareness keeps the self concept intact. (p. 18)
Additionally, as Maluso (1995) observed, ”participants tend to underreport adherence to
racial stereotypes in order to appear socially acceptable” (p. 56). The fact that people
tend to give socially desirable responses and underreport their racial biases is important
because it suggests that negative racial attitudes may be more prevalent than is generally
assumed. Another explanation for this seeming contradiction is that the nature of racism
in this country has changed. Some researchers (see Duckitt, I992; Maluso, 1995;
Oskamp, 1991; Ponterotto & Pedersen, 1993) contend that old-style, overt racism has
declined, but a new form of racism, sometimes called modern racism or symbolic racism,
is thriving and may actually be increasing. Kinder and Sears (cited in Duckitt, 1992)
describe symbolic racism as " a form of resistance to change in the racial status quo based
on moral feelings that blacks violate such traditional American values as individualism
and self ~reliance, the work ethic, obedience, and discipline” (pp. 19-20). Negative racial
feelings that were once expressed overtly by Whites are now being expressed covertly

25

through their opposition to various issues often associated with minorities, such as
affirmative action, welfare, and busing. Oskarnp (1991) explained that

whites generally do not perceive their attitudes on these new issues as racist, and

they tend to justify their opinions on nonracial grounds. Examples of such new

issues include beliefs as to whether there is continuing racial discrimination in

US. society, attitudes toward busing of school children, and support for various

government programs to aid the poor. (p. 383)

It should be noted, however, that not all scholars agree with the concept of
symbolic racism nor with the idea that it is a new form of racism. Sniderrnan and Tetlock
(1986), for example, while not disputing that expressions of racism might change over
time, have questioned whether it is reasonable to assume that people who take political
positions in opposition to certain issues are necessarily racists. In addition, Sniderman
and Tetlock have argued that research on symbolic racism suggests that, despite the
claims of its major proponents, it is not truly a new form of racism; rather, it is traditional
racism expressed in different ways. Investigating the question of whether symbolic
racism was fundamentally different from traditional racism, Snidennan and Tetlock (cited
in Duckitt, 1992) determined that, "it appears that every major cause of symbolic racism
is, simultaneously, a major cause of old-fashioned racism; and every major cause of old-
fashioned racism is a major cause of symbolic [racism]" (p.22). Duckitt also reported
that researchers have found consistent strong correlations between scales used to
measure traditional racism and those used to measure symbolic racism. He concluded
that symbolic racism appears to be ”simply a more subtle, more socially acceptable, more
sophisticated, and more covert expression of racial prejudice" (p. 22). Despite the
controversy surrounding the concept of symbolic racism, having an awareness that racism
today tends to be expressed more subtly is important because individuals--including
teacher educators--who are not aware of this modern form of racism and who see few
overt expressions of prejudice-might mistakenly conclude that racial prejudice is no

longer a problem when, in fact, it actually is.

26

A final reason polls showing improved attitudes are misleading is that they assess
the attitudes only of individuals, not of institutions. Like individual racism, institutional
racism in today's society is less overt than in the past, but it is, nonetheless, still deeply
woven into the fabric of American life (Bamdt, 1991). Jones (1972) defined institutional
racism as

. . .those established laws, customs, and practices which systematically reflect and

produce racial inequities in American society. If racist consequences accrue to

institutional laws, customs, or practices, the institution is racist whether or not the

individuals maintaining those practices have racist intentions. (p. 131, emphasis

in original)
In other words, even though individuals may not consider themselves to be racist, their
actions (or inaction) serve to perpetuate racist practices in society's institutions, including
schools, where standardized tests, tracking, special education referrals, discipline policies,
and other insidiously biased practices militate against the success of minority children
(Moore, 1984). Bamdt (1991) has argued that it is easy for the vast majority of Whites to
accept society's institutions and practices as they are because they benefit from
institutional racism. Oskarnp (1991) observed that institutional racism and individual
racism reinforce each other“. "It is doubtful that institutional racism could develop or
survive without support from many individual racists, nor is it likely that individual
racism would thrive without strong social support" (p. 374). This suggests that one way
to combat institutional racism may be to raise individuals' awareness of it and of their
own racial attitudes.

Influence on Behavior toward Racial Minorities

lndividuals' racial attitudes and beliefs influence not only how they interpret new
information, but also how they behave toward racial minorities. Although research
(Maluso, 1995; Myers, 1990; Oskamp, 1991; Sampson, 1991) indicates that people's
attitudes are not reliable predictors of their behavior, an attitude is more than just a
harmless feeling. Jackrnan (cited in Lynch, 1987) has suggested that negative beliefs or

stereotypes about a group predisposes people to act in certain ways toward them. Duckitt

27

(1992), reviewing research on the relationship between attitudes and behavior, asserted
that the relationship between the two may be stronger than has generally been assumed.
Maluso (1995), referring to a literature review by Crosby, Bromley, and Saxe, observed
that ”unobtrusive studies of interpersonal racism show that anti-Black behaviors continue
to occur even though self -reports indicate that interpersonal racist attitudes have
decreased” (p. 56). She also cited several research studies which illustrated that White
subjects treated Black individuals differently than they did White individuals in the same
situation. For example, when a Black person and a White person each demonstrated
pushing or shoving behavior, the Black person was typically judged to be more
aggressive or more hostile than the White person. Bond, DiCandia, and MacKinnon
(cited in Maluso, 1995) found that among adolescent patients in a psychiatric hospital,
"although there was no difference in the number of violent acts performed by White and
Black patients, Blacks were four times more likely to be physically restrained than
Whites' (p. 54). Among other studies cited by Maluso, one documented that White
customers avoided a Black salesclerk, another revealed that White interviewers sat farther
away from Black interviewees than from White interviewees, and a third found that
White women, given a choice of seats, tended to sit farther away from Blacks than from
Whites. Additionally, Maluso identified research which had found that Black students
. were suspended from school more frequently than White students, Black prison inmates
received longer sentences than did White inmates for the same crimes, and at community
health centers Black patients were more likely than White patients to be treated by
paraprofessionals. This research evidence strongly suggests that negative racial attitudes
and stereotypes are still manifesting themselves in differential treatment for racial
minorities.

In summary, research indicates that people's beliefs and attitudes strongly
influence how new information is interpreted. Beliefs and attitudes are typically quite

resistant to change because of people's tendency to interpret new information in ways that

28

are consistent with their existing conceptions and feelings, even if doing so means having
to distort or even deny the information. The research further indicates that while White
Americans generally report greater acceptance of racial minorities, negative racial
attitudes and beliefs are still a problem in American society and still influence how White
Americans treat racial minorities in both educational and non-educational settings, albeit
in more subtle ways than in the past. These research findings are important because it has
been projected that during the next 25 years, the teaching force in this country will remain
predominantly White, while the student population will become more racially diverse
(Pallas, Natriello, and McDill, 1989). In light of these changing demographic trends, the
racial attitudes and beliefs of these White teachers become very important, because if
they are negative, then the research cited in this section suggests that these teachers, like
White Americans in the general population, are likely to respond to racial minority
students differently than they respond to majority students. Given that prospective
teachers' beginning beliefs act as filters and given that their racial beliefs in particular
may lead to differential treatment for many minority students, I would contend that these
beliefs need to be addressed in multicultural teacher education. While many teacher
educators are presently calling for greater emphasis on multicultural teacher education,
some of their underlying assumptions, as I will explain in the next section, need to be
reexamined, and more attention needs to be given to the potential influence of negative
racial attitudes.
Multicultural Teacher Education

In this section I will discuss some of the different conceptions about the need for
multicultural teacher education and about the strategies for providing it. Thus far, there
appears to have been much more rhetoric than research offered in support of the current
push for teacher education for diversity. In their review of the literature on preparing
teachers for diversity, Grant and Secada (1990) reported finding few empirical studies of
the subject. They concluded that this paucity of research ”suggests the marginal status

29

and low importance that has been given to research on the preparation of teachers to work
with diverse student populations" (p. 404). Zeichner (1993) also noted that this topic has
received ”relatively very little attention" in the literature, and he agreed with Grant and
Secada that the issue of how to prepare teachers to work with diverse learners apparently
has low status in the agenda for teacher education reform. The literature on multicultural
teacher education is not only lacking in empirical evidence, but is also plagued with
numerous unexamined assumptions and unanswered questions, including: Why are the
changing demographic trends problematic? What does it mean to prepare teachers for
diversity? These two questions will serve to frame my review of the literature on
preparing teachers for working with diverse learners. I will argue that the changing
demographics are problematic not because of prospective teachers' lack of knowledge
about minorities, as seems to be generally assumed, but because of the probability that
many of these teachers are likely to bring with them negative racial attitudes and beliefs
which will negatively impact their learning from courses on diversity as well as their
ability to work effectively with minority children.

Why Are the Changing Demographic Trends Problematic?

The disturbing demographic trends in this country are mentioned frequently in the
literature, and most writers have asserted, explicitly or implicitly, that having a
predominantly White and female teaching force working with an increasingly diverse
student population is undesirable, if not problematic. However, few writers have offered
much in the way of evidence to substantiate their contention. Although I agree with their
assumption, like Grant and Secada (1990) I also believe that "agreement should not
preclude empirical inquiry about that assumption" (p. 406). What makes this situation so
bad? While advocates very rarely address this important question directly, the solutions
that they are proposing offer clues to their conceptions of why the changing demographic
trends may be considered problematic. Most of the proposals for multicultural teacher

education seem to suggest explanations that fall into one of three broad categories:

30

potential cultural mismatches, different learning styles, and negative teacher attitudes
toward culturally/ethnically different students. Central to each of these explanations is a
particular conception of what prospective teachers need to develop or how they need to
change in order to be prepared to work with diverse learners. In the first two
explanations additional knowledge is considered to be the primary need, while the third
explanation specifies the need to develop positive racial attitudes. In the following pages
I will describe these three perspectives and identify their major weaknesses. In so doing,
I will argue that the high probability of negative teacher attitudes toward minority
students is an important and understudied feature of the changing demographic trends.
Cultural Mismatches

That the cultural mismatch between teachers and their students will result in lower
achievement for some students is one of the most commonly offered explanations of the
need for teacher education for diversity. As Au and Kawakarni (1994) explained, "The
overall hypothesis in research on cultural congruence is that students of diverse
backgrounds often do poorly in school because of a mismatch between the culture of the
school and the culture of the home” (pp. 5-6). Because the demographic projections
indicate that more and more students will come from cultural backgrounds different from
those of their teachers, the problem of cultural incongruence is likely to increase unless
prospective teachers are made aware of and prepared to deal with the incongruities.
Numerous researchers (e.g., Burstein & Cabello, 1989; Davidman, 1990; Irvine, 1992;
Larke, 1990) have illustrated how cultural mismatches can result in frustration for
students and teachers alike and also have suggested that educators who demonstrate
higher levels of cultural sensitivity and knowledge are more effective with minority
learners than are educators who demonstrate lower levels. Specifically, the work of Au
(1980) with tum-taking among Hawaiian children during reading instruction, Heath
(1982) with the questioning strategies of Black children in Trackton, and Michaels (cited
in Villegas, 1988) with the narrative styles of Black children in a first grade classroom are

31

sometimes cited by proponents of the cultural congruence explanation as examples of
how recognizing the differences between the culture of the home and the culture of the
school and then responding appropriately to them can lead to more success for minority
children.

While the aforementioned research has focused on cultural mismatches between
the school and the home, other research which I would also classify in this category has
been concerned primarily with differences in the cultural or racial backgrounds of
individual teachers and students. Noordhof f and Kleinfeld (1993) argued that when
teachers' cultural backgrounds differ from those of their students, it appears to be more
difficult for teachers to accurately interpret student behavior and classroom situations and
also to make appropriate teaching decisions. The authors concluded that "when teachers
and students have little or no shared background, students' opportunities to learn
worthwhile knowledge are at risk" (p. 28); therefore, they contended that prospective
teachers need to learn about the particular students whom they will be teaching.

Some educators have expressed some grave doubts about the utility of the cultural
congruence hypothesis. Though not speaking specifically about teacher education,
Gibson (1984) criticized this approach because "it accepts without question that cultural
differences are the cause of minority groups' failure in mainstream schools, and it
assumes that multicultural education is a viable solution to the problem of past failure” (p.
97). She argued that despite its avowed emphasis on cultural differences (as opposed to
deficits), in practice it would still represent a means of accommodating (compensating
for) the special needs (deficits) of special groups of children because it is unlikely that the
norms of minority cultural groups would ever achieve parity with the norms of the
majority culture. In other words, it is likely that the culture of the school (i.e., the
majority culture) will continue to be the yardstick by which the culture of the home (i.e.,
minority culture) is measured. Gibson chose to label this approach as “benevolent

multiculturalism,“ regarding it as paternalistic and patronizing. She quotes Paulo Freire,

32

who wrote, "Pedagogy, which begins with the egoistic interests of the oppressors (an
egoism cloaked in the false generosity of paternalism) and makes of the oppressed the
objects of its humanitarianism, itself maintains and embodies oppression” (p. 98).

McDiarmid (1992) has also questioned the efficacy of the cultural difference
approach to teacher education. He has pointed out that ”little agreement exists on which
differences matter, how they matter, and how teachers should address or accommodate
these in the classroom” (p. 84). After analyzing data from a four-year longitudinal study
of a multicultural training program which presented beginning teachers with information
on diverse learners, McDiarmid noticed no apparent improvement in the academic
performance of minority students. It is possible, of course, that the observed lack of
improvement in minority achievement was attributable to inadequacies in the delivery of
the multicultural instruction rather than to any inadequacy in the cultural difference
hypothesis; however, McDiarmid also reasoned that '

If the problem were principally a matter of teachers' knowledge of culturally

different students' backgrounds, we should expect that minority students would do

significantly and consistently better in the classrooms of teachers who share their

backgrounds. Yet, evidence does not support such a conclusion. (p. 89)

This statement suggests that this hypothesis may offer an inadequate explanation of the
problem.

Finally, numerous writers (e.g., Cazden & Mehan, 1989; Florio-Ruane, 1994;
Garibaldi, 1993; Noordhoff & Kleinfeld, 1993; Zimper & Ashbum, 1993) have warned
that teacher educators must be cautious about teaching students generalizations about
various racial/cultural groups. McDiarmid and Price (1990) found that "the presentation
of information on ethnic and religious groups may actually encourage prospective
teachers to generalize and, eventually, to prejudge pupils in their classrooms" (p. 15).
McDiarmid and Price (1990) and Noordhoff and Kleinfeld (1993) have suggested that
prospective teachers be given opportunities to learn about specific children and their
farme background and experiences. Such an approach might lessen their tendencies to

develop stereotypes about entire groups. According to Gibson (1984), another danger of

33

teaching generalizations is that it may lead prospective teachers to think of racial/cultural
groups as each being a uniform whole, possessing clearly discernible traits, whereas in
reality tremendous variations exist within any such group. Gibson has also questioned
the common tendency of equating cultural groups with ethnic groups. She explained,
Traditionally, anthropologists--and hence educators-have associated culture only
with relatively self -suf ficient social groups, rather than with sets of people who
”repeatedly participate with one another in one or more activities.” But just as
individuals have varying degrees of competence in varying numbers of dialects or
languages, and varying understandings of the situations in which each rs
appropriate, so, too, individuals have varying degrees of competence in varying
numbers of cultures. (p. 112)
In other words, each person is a member of and is influenced by multiple cultural groups,
many of which cut across racial/ethnic lines, and it would be inaccurate and misleading to
suggest that students' racial/ethnic group membership is always the strongest or most
consistent determinant of their behavior. China and Plata (1987/88) observed that
”ethnicity is only one of many significant, interdependent variables which contribute to
the development of students' behavioral patterns" (p. 9), and Grant and Sleeter (1986)
have also expressed concern about researchers' tendency to regard racial groups as though
they were homogeneous. While their discussion focused on the interaction of race, class,
and gender, Grant and Sleeter argued that all people are members of multiple groups and
that ”these simultaneous memberships influence perceptions and actions“ (p. 196). They
cautioned that "A failure to consider the integration of race, social class, and gender leads
at times to an oversimplification or inaccurate understanding of what occurs in schools,
and therefore to inappropriate or simplistic prescriptions for educational equity" (p. 197).
It would seem, therefore, that even though the cultural congruence hypothesis has shown
promise in some research, some researchers seriously question its utility as an approach
to multicultural teacher education.
' erent ' les

The second explanation as to why the changing demographic trends are

problematic is closely related to the first explanation: students of different cultural

34

groups may have different learning styles than majority students and, therefore, may
respond better to different teaching styles (see Saracho & Gerstl, 1991; Shade, 1989c).
According to proponents of this explanation, the teaching styles that prospective teachers
learn in teacher preparation programs are best suited for majority students and do not
match the learning styles of minority students, and the result is lower minority
achievement. This explanation seems to presuppose that prospective teachers need to
possess pedagogical knowledge and skills that are somehow different from those
necessary for teaching majority students. Essentially, learning style refers to a person's
preferred way of learning, the manner in which he/she most characteristically receives,
processes, and remembers information (Holland, 1989). (Although More [1989] pointed
out that learning style refers to a more general set of processes than does cognitive style. ,
the two terms are commonly used almost interchangeably in the literature and will be
used in like manner in this discussion.) Various types of learning styles have been
identified (Shade, 1989a), though the most researched and best known are the field
dependent (relational) and the field independent (analytical) styles (see Table 2.1). Some
research (e.g., Hale, 1982; Saracho & Gerstl, 1991; Shade, 1989b) suggests that cultural
differences in child-rearing and socialization practices result in the development of
different learning styles among children of minority groups. For example, there is
evidence that African American children develop more of a relational learning style,
whereas middle-class, White children tend to develop an analytical learning style. A
problem arises because the educational system in this country seems best suited for
children with analytical learning styles, and it fails to accommodate those who learn
differently, as Irvine (1992) explains,

Differences in cognitive style do not imply a superiority or inferiority relationship

between analytical and relational style. Nor does it argue that all black children

possess a relational style. However, when teachers use only analytical teaching

methodologies and ignore relational methods of instruction, they fail to capitalize
on the respective strengths of children's different learning modalities. (p. 86)

35

Table 2.1 Characteristics of Field Dependence and Field Independence

 

 

 

Field-demndent Individuals Field-indemndent Individuals
rely on the surrounding perceptual field perceive objects as separate from the field

experience their environment in a relatively global can abstract an item from the surrounding field
fashion by conforming to the effects of the

prevailing field or context solve problems that are presented and reorganized
in different contexts
are dependent on authority
experience an independence from authority which

searchforfacialcuesinthosearoundthemasa leadsthemtodependontheirownstandardsand

source of information values
are strongly interested in people are oriented toward active striving
getclosertothepersonwithwhomtheyare appeartobecoldanddistant

interacting

are socially detached but have analytic skills
have a sensitivity to others which helps them to

acquire social skills prefer occupations that allow them to work by
themselves

 

 

prefer occupations which require involvement with
others

 

--taken from Saracho and Gerstl, 1991»-

More research has been done on African Americans than on other minority groups, but
investigators (e.g., More, 1989; Pepper & Henry, 1989; Saracho, 1989; Saracho &
Gerstl, 1991) have reported on "culturally induced" cognitive styles for Hispanics, Native
Americans, and Asian Americans, although studies of the latter group have been very
limited.

The criticisms of the learning styles explanation are very much like those
presented for the cultural mismatch explanation. One criticism of the cultural difference
explanation was that there was a lack of evidence that adopting this approach produced
higher student achievement. Similarly, in reference to the different learning styles
explanation, Ladson-Billings (1993) noted,

there is little evidence to suggest that distinguishing students according to their

learning styles makes any significant differences in their academic performance.

Each of these areas requires further exploration before we can accept or reject the

saliency of learning styles as a way of addressing the educational needs of
students. (p. 108)

36

Secondly, Gibson's (1984) criticism of the cultural difference theory applies here as well:
despite proponents' claims that no one learning style should be viewed as superior or
preferable to another, this approach might still be viewed as compensatory, as a means of
accommodating children with special needs. A third weakness of the learning styles
explanation was set forth by Holland (1989):
While matching learning styles to teaching styles appears to be desirable, it may
be rather idealistic. Such a matching process assumes a neat correlation between
the teachers' instructional abilities and the learners' needs. Further, learning styles
are not consistent and may change with the demands of the specific instructional
activity. (p. 179)
Finally, the learning styles explanation, because it, too, deals with making generalizations
about minority groups, has the same danger of reinforcing prospective teachers'
stereotypes or encouraging new ones.
Negative Racial Attitudes and Beliefs
There is a third explanation of the need for multicultural teacher education which, in
the perception of this researcher, is much more compelling than the previous two. As
explained in the previous section of this chapter, negative racial attitudes and beliefs are
still a problem in American society, and they still influence how some White Americans
behave toward people of color. At a large midwestem university, Law and Lane (1987)
assessed the attitudes of 87 White, middle-class preservice teachers toward minority
groups and found that “teachers ready to enter the classroom are no more accepting of
various ethnic groups than the national samples spanning six decades. In fact, of practical
significance is that the current study reflects a trend of less acceptance” (p. 5).
In other words, preservice teachers appear to be no more accepting-and may be even less
accepting-moi minority groups today than they were sixty years ago, a time when racial
prejudice was both more overtly expressed and, supposedly, more widespread. Shoop
and Eads (cited in Law & Lane, 1987) reported that when teachers hold negative attitudes
toward particular groups, students from those groups may be treated differently in the

classroom. Herein might lie the central problem of the contrasting demographic trends:

37

that a largely White and female teaching force may bring negative, unaccepting attitudes
toward the growing numbers of students of color in their classrooms; these attitudes,
coupled with the attendant lower expectations, are major contributing factors to the
widespread academic failure among minority students. Law and Lane concluded that
their study indicates the necessity of providing preservice teachers with multicultural
education as a means of combating their tendencies to have negative, unaccepting
attitudes toward minority groups.

In the previous section of this chapter, I summarized research which indicated that
people's racial attitudes and beliefs influence both how they interpret new information
about racial groups and how they are inclined to behave toward members of those groups.
Additionally, I cited evidence indicating that negative racial attitudes and beliefs are still
a problem in American society and that in many situations Blacks are treated differently
than Whites. Given that racist attitudes and discriminatory actions are still so pervasive
in American society as a whole, it is unreasonable to assume that White college students
entering the teaching profession will be any less likely than other Whites to manifest
these attitudes. When Bymes and Kiger (1988) administered two questionnaires to 301
non-Black college students, they found that the racial attitudes of teacher education
students did not differ significantly from those of non-education students. Clearly, we are
as likely to encounter negative racial attitudes among prospective teachers as among other
college students, and teacher educators need to acknowledge the existence of these
attitudes and attempt to address them.

One criticism of the negative attitudes explanation is that focusing only on racial
attitudes ignores the problems resulting from negative gender and social class attitudes.
However, positing negative racial attitudes as the central problem does not mean that
issues of class and gender must necessarily be ignored. Attention certainly could be
accorded to each of these issues and to ways in which they interact with race. Another

criticism is that individual teachers' attitudes are not the major impediment to the

38

achievement of minority students. Far bigger impediments are the long-established
institutional and societal inequities. While this is true, unless prospective teachers are
made aware of their own racial attitudes and also educated about the institutional and
societal causes of lower minority achievement, they are not likely to have the awareness
or the knowledge to challenge the status quo.

Conclusions

The three preceding explanations have two important similarities. The first is that
each of them assumes that the appropriate response to the changing demographic trends
in this country involves changing something in the minds or hearts of prospective
teachers. Others have conceptualized the appropriate response differently (e. g., see
Gillette & Grant, 1991; Trent, 1990), as calling for a broader societal response. Thus,
the three explanations presented here are all vulnerable to the criticism which Villegas
((1988) directed at the cultural difference hypothesis:

However appealing these culturally sensitive proposals may seem, they are

seriously flawed in that they leave unexamined the social inequality underlying

the problem... By ignoring the political nature of schooling and its relation to
the dominant society, we help to perpetuate a system of inequality, thus reducing

our chances of effecting the change we claim to seek. (p. 258)

While acknowledging the central role that sociopolitical power and privilege have in the
persistent academic difficulties of poor and minority children, I also believe that change
efforts will need to be mounted at many different levels, and it seems only reasonable that
teacher educators direct their efforts at changing prospective teachers.

The second similarity is that each explanation suggests a particular conception of
what it is that prospective teachers need in order to work effectively with diverse learners.
Both the cultural difference explanation and the different learning styles explanation have
as their major emphasis the prospective teachers' acquisition of knowledge-either
knowledge of other cultural groups or knowledge of different learning styles. In

contrast, the major emphasis in the negative attitudes explanation is on developing

positive attitudes toward different cultural groups. These different emphases would

39

seem to dictate the use of different instructional strategies, which I will discuss in the
final section of this chapter
What Does It Mean to Prepare Teariers for Diverw

While there seems to be general agreement among most teacher educators about
the need to prepare teachers for diversity (see Chapter 1), conceptions of what it means
for a preservice teacher to be prepared for diversity seem to vary considerably. In his
review of the literature on preparing teachers for diversity, Zeichner (1993) identified five
major strategies that, in his view, "capture the essence of 'teacher education for diversity'
as it is portrayed in the literature” (p. 19). The five approaches he identified were
Biography, Cultural Knowledge, Instructional Strategies, Field Experiences, and Attitude
Change. This typology provides a useful framework for examining the various
approaches to multicultural teacher education. However, based on my own reading of the
literature, I choose to add subcategories to two of Zeichner's' categories because I believe
that doing so more clearly reflects the different schools of thought on how to go about
preparing teachers for diversity. Though I will discuss each strategy separately, 1 don't
think that these five strategies are necessarily mutually exclusive. The ways in which
they have been written about suggests that there is definitely some overlap between them;
in fact, some writers (Banks, 1994; Zeichner, 1993) have advocated the use of some
combination of these approaches. Perhaps an ideal program would incorporate elements
of all five approaches.

io h lf-Awareness

The strategy which Zeichner has labeled as Biography, I would prefer to call Self -
Awareness because it focuses on the students' acquiring knowledge and understanding of
their own cultural identities. Zeichner explains that the goal of this particular strategy is
”helping teacher education students to understand better their own cultural experience and
to develop more clarified ethnic and cultural identities“ (p. 15). Proponents of this

strategy seem to believe that in order for prospective teachers to work effectively with

40

culturally different students, they first need to develop an awareness and understanding of
their own cultural identities. Helping prospective teachers develop awareness of their
cultural identities certainly seems to be an excellent starting point for preparing them for
diversity, but in my mind, it is only a starting point. I don't believe-nor is it likely that
proponents believe-that this awareness alone would prepare teachers to work with
diverse learners. This strategy would probably always be used in conjunction with one or
more of the other four strategies.
Cultural Knowledge

According to Zeichner, the focus of this strategy is "to try to overcome the lack of
knowledge by teacher education students about the histories of different ethnic groups
and their participation in and contributions to life in the United States" (p. 17). My
reading of the literature suggests that this category might more appropriately be divided
into two subcategories: knowledge of other cultures and knowledge of societal inequities.

Knowledge of other cultures. There are some (e. g., Hadaway & Florez, 1987/88;
Larke, 1990) who believe that prospective teachers, in order to be prepared for diversity,
need to learn about other cultural groups. Thus, these researchers advocate that
information about the background and characteristics of various cultural groups be
provided to prospective teachers so that they will become more knowledgeable about and
sensitive to the needs of these groups. The primary justification for this strategy is the
cultural congruence hypothesis discussed earlier in this chapter. Davidman (1990) and
Burstein and Cabello (1989), for example, pointed out how research has shown that
culturally compatible instruction leads to higher achievement for minority children, while
instruction that is culturally insensitive leads to academic failure for these children.

While I think it is important for prospective teachers to learn about cultures other
than their own, I also have some grave reservations about placing too much emphasis on
their acquisition of knowledge about other cultures. The empirical evidence strongly

suggests that merely providing prospective teachers with generalizations about various

41

cultural groups is ineffective, if not counterproductive. Not only does this seem to
encourage prospective teachers to stereotype students (McDiarmid, 1990), but there is
also evidence that they do not utilize the information in their teaching (Grant & Koskela,
1986). A viable conception of preparing teachers for diversity would seem to have to
avoid these two dilemmas. Mahan (cited in Grant & Secada, 1990) reported positive
attitude outcomes for 291 student teachers who lived and worked in a Native American
community for 17 weeks. Noordhoff and Kleinfeld (1993) also reported positive growth
for two groups of teacher candidates placed in rural Alaskan communities for a year.
The program was designed to replace " generic, decontextualized learning about diverse
students” with learning about diverse students in a particular context. Cochran-Smith and
Lytle (1992) have also argued that rather than attempting to give prospective teachers
"monolithic solutions” to complex problems, they should be taught how to conduct
research on their students in a particular context. Thus, effectively preparing teachers for
diversity may mean providing them with context-specific rather than generalized
information and also teaching them how to learn about their particular students.
Knowledge of societal inequities. There are other writers (e. g., see Gillette &
Grant, 1991; Trent, 1990) who argue that it is important for prospective teachers to learn
about the nature, causes, and consequences of the societal inequities historically and
. presently faced by many minority groups in this country. I regard this as a separate
subcategory of Cultural Knowledge because the focus seems to be not so much on
learning about the cultural groups per se, but more on learning about their historical
experiences with racism and discrimination in American society. From this perspective,
preparing teachers for diversity means making them aware of societal inequities and why
they persist. Ladson-Billings (1991) argues that
. . . student teachers need specific factual knowledge of multicultural issues. As
teachers, they must be knowledgeable about societal inequity and the competing
explanations of its persistence in order to make informed choices among the

various pedagogical positions, educational goals, classroom practices, and social
visions multicultural education encompasses. (p. 155)

42

Ladson-Billings acknowledges, however, that acquiring such knowledge "does little to
predict how students will apply this information in their daily lives and chosen
professions” (p. 154).
Instructional Strategies

For this category, Zeichner (1993) explains that ”prospective teachers are often
taught various instructional strategies which are sensitive to cultural and linguistic
differences and which enable them to build upon the knowledge and experiences (the
cultural resources) that students bring with them to school" (p.19). Once again my
reading of the literature suggests that this category might more appropriately be divided
into two subcategories because there seem to be at least two distinct ways in which
researchers have thought about the need for culturally-sensitive instructional strategies.
Some have focused on instructional adaptations to accommodate differences between the
culture of the home and the culture of the school, as well as between the culture of the
teacher and that of his/her students. Others have focused on adapting instruction to
accommodate cultural differences in learning styles. Since both of these schools of
thought were discussed in some detail earlier, their treatment here will be rather brief.

Cultural drflerences. Some researchers (e. g., Au & Kawakarni, 1994; Burstein &
Cabello, 1989; Davidman, 1990; Irvine, 1992; Larke, 1990) have argued that school
culture is most compatible with the home culture of majority students, and this
compatibility supports their academic performance, whereas for most minority children,
incongruities between the home culture and the school culture often result in poor
academic performance. Proponents of the cultural difference explanation believe that
intercultural knowledge is essential for effective teaching in multicultural learning
situations, and they believe that the logical response to the expanding cultural mismatch
between teachers and students, as well as between school and home, is to provide
multicultural teacher education experiences which inform prospective teachers about

various cultures and which encourage them to value cultural differences and not to regard

43

them as deficits. Theoretically, when cultural incongruities have been identified, the
teachers will be able to take them into account in designing their instruction. While there
seems to be some overlap between this category and the Cultural Knowledge category,
the focus here is on leaming about specific features of minority cultures that may be
incongruent with features of school culture. In their brief review of literature, Au and
Kawakanri (1994) identified five general areas of research on cultural congruence:
speakers of dialects, classroom participation structures, narrative and questioning styles,
English-as-a-Second-Language students, and the influence of peer groups. Instruction
which seeks to address the mismatch between the culture of the home and the culture of
the school has been variously referred to as "culturally compatible," "culturally
responsive,” ”culturally congruent,” ”culturally appropriate," and "culturally relevant"
(see Ladson-Billings, 1994;1995). Distinguishing the differences between these various
approaches is beyond the scope of this paper.

Learning styles. While learning styles are actually just another type of cultural
difference, the quantity of research conducted in this area seems to justify treating them
as a separate subcategory of instructional strategies. The basic premise seems to be that
children from different cultural groups evince different styles of learning than do majority
children and, hence, they require different pedagogy. Proponents of the different
learning styles explanation (e.g., Hale, 1982; Pepper & Henry, 1989; Saracho & Gerstl,
1991; Shade, 1989c) believe that poor minority student achievement is due largely to the
fact that minority students learn differently, and they further believe that the logical
response to the widening cultural disparity between teachers and students is to educate
prospective teachers in the learning styles of different cultural groups and in alternative
teaching styles that would increase students' likelihood of school success.

Fiel riences
The field experiences strategy intends to provide opportunities for prospective

teachers to have direct contact with children and/or adults from different cultural

44

backgrounds than their own. To proponents of this approach (e. g., Boyle-Baise & Grant,
1991; Noordhoff & Kleinfeld, 1993), preparing teachers for diversity means involving
prospective teachers in a diverse learning community and providing multiple, mediated
opportunities for them to work and interact with diverse learners. Numerous researchers
have remarked about the importance of direct contact with members of other
racial/cultural groups. Wayson (cited in Grant & Secada, 1990) assessed the attitudes of
a group of student teachers and found that

Effective preparation seemed to require, at a minimum, direct contact with

students from cultures other than the prospective teacher's combined with

translation and interpretation gained from discussion with a knowledgeable and

sensitive supervisor, professor, critic teacher or other tutor. . . . (p.412)
McGeehan (1982) found that the prospective teachers who demonstrated the most
positive attitudes toward a multicultural education course and who Ieamed the most from
the course were those who had had ”frequent, high quality previous interethnic
experience” (p. 246). Ross and Smith (1992) reported a similar finding. Boyle-Baise and
Grant (1991) point out that many teacher candidates have had little or no previous contact
with members of different racial/cultural groups and, thus, "they have not had much
opportunity to confront and grapple with their knowledge, feelings, and attitudes about
people different than themselves” (p. 188). The authors contend that every teacher
candidate should have some experience in a diverse setting during his/her preparation
program. Some research suggests that it is very important that prospective teachers' field
experiences be mediated in order for them to be maximally effective. Bondy, Schmitz,
and Johnson (1993), for example, found that teacher candidates who had engaged in
volunteer tutoring while enrolled in a multicultural education course all reported positive
experiences, whereas, in contrast, ”it appeared that tutoring was a counterproductive
experience for tutors who did not take the course" (p. 62).
W

The goal of developing more positive racial attitudes among prospective teachers

is often mentioned in conjunction with one of the preceding strategies, but in my opinion,

45

it doesn't appear to be considered a primary goal by teacher educators-~or maybe the
assumption is that positive racial attitudes will be an automatic outcome of students'
acquiring more intercultural knowledge. Given the important role that attitudes and
beliefs play in shaping what students learn from their education courses (see first two
sections of this chapter), this lack of primary attention to promoting attitude change is
surprising to me. Most of the proposed strategies for multicultural teacher education
seem to take a knowledge-acquisition perspective. Knowledge, however, is not enough
because, as Sarap (1991) has pointed out, "people can be well informed and still be
racist” (p. 41). Additionally, aside from the unintended consequence of possibly
encouraging the development of stereotypes about minority groups, this perspective
seems to assume that once prospective teachers have this knowledge, they will be better
teachers of minority students. Research by McDiarmid (1992), however, calls this
assumption into question. McDiarmid found that when teachers were presented with
information about cultural groups, not only did their attitudes not seem to change, but
neither did there appear to be any improvement in student achievement (which would be
an indicator of improved teaching). Moreland (cited in Pate, 1988) made a critically
important point when he wrote,
We need to realize that, although sound knowledge is necessary to combat false
information, it is not sufficient to change attitude. Facts do not speak for
themselves; rather they are interpreted through the experience and biases of those
hearing them. (p. 288)
A learner's attitudes, as well as what he/she already knows about something, serve as the
basis for the interpretation and acquisition of new information (Noordhoff & Kleinfeld,
1993; Shuell, 1986). As McDiarmid and Price (1990) explained, "Prospective teachers,
like other learners, reconstruct the information and ideas they encounter to fit into their
existing framework" (p. 20). And if the existing attitudes are negative, information on
cultural groups may be interpreted negatively (e. g., reinforcing a negative stereotype) or
it may even be rejected if it doesn’t fit in with existing beliefs. Some researchers (i.e.,

Bennett, Niggle, & Stage, 1990; McGeehan, 1982; Ross & Smith, 1992) have found that

46

learners who entered a course with less than positive attitudes toward minority groups
tended to learn less from the course than students who entered with more positive
attitudes. Maluso (1995) observed that "Some social scientists have suggested that
educational approaches addressing prejudice (i.e., those emphasizing attitudes and values)
are more effective in reducing racism than those primarily addressing beliefs" (p. 60).
The knowledge acquisition approach seems to assume that negative racial attitudes and
beliefs can be eradicated by providing the individuals with enough correct information.
However, Sarap (1991) explained that the problem with this approach is that

. . .it assumes that racism is a false belief system and that it can be dealt with by

the application of a superior logic. But, as many social scientists have pointed

out, racism does not work in this way, it is not a form of logic but a way of

"making sense.” . . . . In other words, reasoned argument based on facts and

logic is not enough. This kind of rationalist pedagogy is inadequate because

many forms of racism are impervious to reason. (p.41)

Hence, it appears that an approach to preparing teachers for diversity that focuses on
imparting knowledge and gives scant attention to prospective teachers' entering attitudes
and beliefs is unlikely to be very successful. I believe that fostering positive attitude
change should be a major focus of any multicultural teacher education effort. James
Banks (1994), a leading authority on multicultural education, has also stressed the
necessity of making attitude an express focus of attempts to change teachers' attitudes, as
he explained, “An extensive review of the research suggests that changing the racial
attitudes of adults is a difficult task. To maximize the chances for successful intervention
programs, experiences must be designed specifically to change attitudes” (p. 252).

To summarize, I have identified five different strategies for multicultural teacher
education. Two of these strategies-Cultural Knowledge and Instructional Strategies-
place primary emphasis on providing prospective teachers with information about
minorities so that they will be able to work more effectively with these students. While
the arguments for these approaches are reasonable, they assume that preservice teachers'

lack of knowledge is the cause of the problem and that providing information will solve
it. Based on the literature that I have reviewed, I would argue that preparing teachers for

47

diversity may be more a matter of developing certain attitudes and propensities than it is
acquiring any particular body of knowledge.
Conclusions

In this chapter I have presented evidence suggesting that just as preservice
teachers begin their teacher education programs with set attitudes and beliefs about
teaching, so too do they begin with many well-established attitudes toward and beliefs
about minority groups. Like their beliefs about teaching, these racial attitudes and beliefs
have been Ieamed over a period of many years, and they are not easily susceptible to
change. Since we now know that preservice teachers' entering attitudes and beliefs about
teaching constrain what they learn about teaching from their education courses, it seems
reasonable to assume that their entering attitudes and beliefs about racial groups might
also constrain what they learn from courses on diversity. Unfortunately, however, up
until now, little research has addressed the impact that prospective teachers' racial
attitudes and beliefs might have on their leaming from courses on diversity. The present
study is intended to shed more light on how prospective teachers' racial attitudes and

belief might influence what they learn from a course on diversity.

CHAPTER THREE
METHODS

In this chapter] will reiterate the purpose of this study and explain how it differs
from previous research in this area Then I will describe the research design, the course,
the participants, the data sources, and my data analysis procedures.

Purpose

The purposes of this study were embedded in the three guiding research questions.
One purpose was to identify prospective teachers' attitudes and beliefs relative to
racial/ethnic minority groups and then to determine whether the preservice teachers who
expressed favorable attitudes toward racial minority groups differed substantially from
those who expressed unfavorable attitudes. Another purpose was to determine how and
to what extent students' racial attitudes and beliefs changed during the course of the
semester. A final purpose was to determine whether there appeared to be important
differences between students with initially favorable racial attitudes and those with
. initially unfavorable ones in terms of their perceptions of the course or their learning from
the course.

This study differs from comparable eariier research on the impact of multicultural
teacher education courses in four major ways. First, unlike comparable earlier studies
(Bennett, Niggle, & Stage, 1990; Bondy, Schmitz, & Johnson 1993; Larke, 1990;
McGeehan, 1982; Reed, 1993; Ross & Smith, 1992; Tran, Young, & Di Lella, 1994)
where attitude change generally seemed to be regarded as an outcome of knowledge
growth, this study takes the perspective that knowledge growth may be instead, to a great

extent, an outcome of the students' attitudes. In all but one (Ross & Smith) of these

49

studies, the researchers administered a pretest of students' attitudes and/or beliefs at the
beginning of a multicultural course and then a posttest afterwards. They then discussed
whether or not the multicultural course appeared to have had any impact on the students'
attitudes and/or beliefs. The implicit assumption in each case seemed to be that
knowledge gained from the course may be expected to affect the students' attitudes and/or
beliefs. Among this group of researchers, only McGeehan (1982) suggested that there
might be a relationship between the students' entering attitudes and beliefs and their
knowledge growth from the course. This is the perspective taken in the present study.

Second, this study utilized more than one measure of student attitudes. Most of
the studies cited earlier in this paragraph relied on a single measure of students' attitudes
and beliefs; the exceptions were McGeehan (1982), Reed (1993), and Ross and Smith
(1992). In this dissertation study, students' attitudes and beliefs were assessed through
two different instruments, as well as through multiple interviews. The use of the
interviews provided a richer data set and a means of corroborating students' responses on
the pencil-and-paper instruments.

Third, this study provides statistical data suggesting that the students who were
interviewed were, in fact, representative of the students in the class as a whole. The
researchers who employed interviews to assess students' attitudes and beliefs relied
primarily (McGeehan, 1982) or exclusively (Ross & Smith, 1992) on volunteer
participants, and they had to assume that these volunteers were representative of students
in the course as a whole.

Fourth, the target students in the present study were interviewed more frequently
than were the students in the studies by McGeehan (1982), where some students were
interviewed three times, and Ross and Smith (1992), where students were interviewed
twice. In contrast, the target students in this study were interviewed a total of six times
each over the course of the semester, thus providing me with a more detailed picture of

each students' experience of the class.

50

This study also builds on and extends previous research (McGeehan, 1982; Ross
& Smith, 1992) which has suggested that the students who seem to gain the most from
multicultural education experiences are those who enter the course with the most
accepting attitudes toward minorities. This study contributes to the field by investigating
whether and how students with more accepting racial attitudes gain more from
multicultural courses than students with less accepting attitudes.

Research Design and Rationale

This study combines elements of quantitative and qualitative research
methodology. My decision to employ both quantitative and qualitative techniques was
rooted in my belief that the combination of techniques would enable me to paint a more
complete picture of the impact that the CEP 240 course (Diverse Learners in
Multicultural Perspective) seemed to have on different students than I would have been
able to do with either methodology by itself. The quantitative data gave me broad
information about the students as a whole and about the course's impact on them. Then,
by conducting statistical analyses of the quantitative data, I could determine whether or
not observed differences between groups were statistically significant. In addition, with
the results of these statistical analyses I have more basis for generalizing beyond my
particular sample than I would have if I were relying on qualitative data alone. On the
other hand, the qualitative data gave me more detailed information on how a smaller,
volunteer sample of students experienced the course. It also provided additional
background on the students and highlighted other ways in which those with more
favorable racial attitudes were similar to and different from those with less favorable
attitudes. Finally, the qualitative data gave me a close-up look at how several individuals
responded to specific components of the course and the meanings that they seemed to

attach to their experiences in the course.

51

Course

I chose to study the CEP 240 course because it explicitly and exclusively focuses
on diversity issues and also because it is a course taken by many prospective teachers.
As a prerequisite for admission into the teacher education program, prospective teachers
must enroll in either CEP 240 or TB 250 (Human Diversity, Power and Opportunity in
Social Institutions). Consequently, most students who enroll in this course do so because
it is required for the teacher education program. During the semester of this study, for
example, 201 students were enrolled, and out of the 196 students who completed a
questionnaire, 174 (or 89%) indicated that they planned to go into some area of
education. Typically, about three quarters of the students enrolled in CEP 240 are
females, and about the same percentage are freshmen or sophomores. Additionally, over
90% of the students usually fall within the 18-23 age group. While all racial groups
were represented in the course, generally about 80-90% of the students are White
Americans and 6-10% are African Americans. Students from other racial backgrounds,
including some international students, typically comprise another 48% of the course
enrollment.

While this research study focused only on the racial attitudes and beliefs of
prospective teachers, it should be noted that the course itself had a much broader focus.
The course is intended to explore a wide range of diversity, including racial/ethnic,
cultural, linguistic, gender, and cognitive differences. According to the course syllabus,
two primary objectives of the course are to "examine the nature of diversity itself‘ and to
”foster sensitivity and respect for diverse learners." The course content is organized into
three main strands. One strand looks at the nature of diverse Iearners--who they are and
what their major characteristics are. A second strand examines the nature and impact of
various sociocultural contexts. The third strand focuses on the implications of diversity
for schooling and on practical school and classroom applications. A detailed outline of

the course is included in Appendix A along, with the reading list and sample activities.

52

Students enrolled in the course met together for two hours for lecture each
Thursday for fifteen weeks. They also met in groups of approximately 25 students for
two hours each Tuesday in eight different lab (discussion) sections. During the semester
of the study, the course was team-taught by two African American male professors, who
conducted the Thursday lecture sessions. The eight lab sections were taught by five
different graduate assistants: three White females, an African female, and myself (an
African American male). After each Thursday lecture session, the two professors met
with the five lab instructors to discuss the activities to be included in the lab session for
the following Tuesday. Consequently, there was considerable consistency in content and
activities across all of the lab sessions, although there was often some variation in the
particular techniques the lab instructors used to cover the planned content or to do the
activities. The weekly meetings of instructors were also used regularly for problem-
solving, idea generation, and on-going evaluation of the course.

During the weekly lecture sessions, the two professors typically reiterated and/or
extended some of the major points from the assigned readings, but they also presented
new material that was not in the readings. The professors regularly attempted to actively
involve students in the lecture sessions through various brief activities (e.g., having them
do short writing exercises, asking some students to share relevant experiences, having
particular students seek out certain information and then report back to the whole class,
showing and discussing brief videotape segments) and by encouraging them to ask
questions during the lectures. In addition, the professors occasionally engaged in
roleplaying, where they would argue the opposing sides of the issue currently under
discussion. Approximately half of the lecture sessions featured guest speakers, including
a blind student, a bilingual Latina professor, a physically disabled professor, two deaf
graduate students, a panel of representatives from local community service organizations,

and a panel of representatives from the campus gay/lesbian organization.

53

The weekly lab sessions promoted student involvement with the course material
through a variety of activities. Students viewed and discussed several videotapes,
including a video on racial discrimination, one on blindness, one on learning disabilities,
and two on inclusion. They also discussed several readings from the course packet (see
Appendix A). In addition, several times during the semester students participated in
roleplaying activities which focused on such issues as racial discrimination, school
desegregation, immigration, abortion, gay/lesbian rights, and sex discrimination.
Students also participated in a number of cooperative learning activities, including
reading and collectively responding to several short scenarios describing problem pupils
or classroom situations. Other activities included a blind walk to enable students to
experience blindness and a series of exercises to help students experience having a
learning disability. Finally, the lab sessions provided students with opportunities to
discuss their reactions to or raise questions about the lecture presentations by the course
professors or by guest speakers.

Of the five multicultural teacher education strategies described in the previous
chapter, only the field experience strategy was not included as part of this course. The
biography strategy was in evidence in perhaps two sessions early in the semester when
students were asked to identify their own cultural and ethnic backgrounds. The
instructional strategies approach was very much in evidence in the course, as a lot of
information about cultural differences and about different learning styles was presented.
One course session focused on the use of cooperative learning and another presented
strategies for working with learning disabled students, but beyond those two sessions,
specific instructional strategies were rarely presented. On the other hand, students were
presented with a great deal of information about a wide variety of differences between
people, not just cultural differences. Students were taught about the various ways in
which mismatches between the culture of the home and the culture of the school might

occur. Learning style differences were also presented and discussed, but not nearly to the

54

extent that cultural differences were. In addition to highlighting differences between
various racial/ethnic and cultural groups, a considerable portion of the course was
devoted to study of special needs individuals, including the deaf, the blind, the mentally
retarded, and the learning disabled. Another strategy that was used frequently in the
course was the cultural knowledge strategy. While there was some attention given to the
subcategory of knowledge about cultural groups (especially deaf culture and gay/lesbian
culture), I would say that the great majority of what students Ieamed about various
cultural groups was directly related to the education of these groups. In other words,
most of the information presented dealt with various factors (language, child-rearing
practices, learning styles, cultural norms, etc.) that need to be considered in teaching
culturally different students. The subcategory of knowledge of societal inequities
received considerably more attention. With nearly every minority group discussed in the
course, there was some discussion of how the group has historically been (and/or
presently is being) discriminated against. For example, students were exposed to a
number of landmark legislation and legal decisions that have affected the education of
minority groups (including individuals with special needs). Usually included was some
explanation of the background for and the impact (both positive and negative) of the
legislation or court decision for the targeted groups. Finally, the attitude change strategy
was also in evidence to a limited extent. While attitude change was one of the goals of
the course, in my opinion, as one of the instructors of the course, students' attitudes
toward and beliefs about racial minorities or about the other types of diversity focused on
in the course received little direct attention. There was some discussion of race as a
system for classifying people and also some discussion of what constitutes a minority
group. Students were exposed to a great deal of information about different types of
minority groups, and they were also exposed to representatives of various minorities who
appeared as guest speakers in the lecture sessions at different points during the course.

Apparently, the intention was that this extensive exposure would lead to the formation of

55

more favorable racial attitudes and beliefs. In my perception, there were few occasions
in the course when students racial attitudes and beliefs were dealt with directly, when
they were made explicit and then confronted and challenged, as McDiarmid and Price
(1990) suggested that they need to be. One activity that did seem to directly address
student attitudes was the role-playing that occurred during several of the lab sessions.
Some research has shown (Maluso, 1995) that role-playing can be an effective tool for
changing people's attitudes; however, role-playing was only a small portion of CEP 240.
Participants

Virtually all of the 201 students enrolled in CEP 240 were participants in this
study at some level. All students completed a pre- and post-questionnaire, and the
attendance, exams, and course grades were analyzed for all students. Additionally,
during the second week of the course, 31 students volunteered to complete an attitude
survey and to participate in a pre- and post-interview. Students enrolled in my lab
section were not allowed to volunteer for this portion of the research. Frnally, on the
basis of their age and their responses to the attitude survey, I selected 14 target students
from the 31 volunteers and interviewed them at 2-3 week intervals throughout the
semester. I chose to limit this group to students in the 18—22 age range because this is
the most typical age range for prospective teachers. The three levels of student

participation in this study and the composition of each group are illustrated in Table 3-1.

Table 3.1 Participants in the Study

 

Teacher
Students 11 Gender Race Age Group Candidates

 

149 Females = 76% 167 White = 85% 18-20 = 76% 174 = 89%

All 196 47 Males = 24% 16 Black = 8% 21-23 = 17%
13 other = 7% 24-28 = 6%
29-50 = 1%

 

 

26 Females = 84% 28 White = 90% 18-20 = 65% 30 = 97%
Voltnlru 31 5 Males = 16% 3 Black = 10% 21-23 = 13%
24—28 = 16%
29-50 = 6%

 

 

Target 14 11 Females = 79% 14 White = 100% 1&20 = 8‘6_% 13 = 93%
3 Males = 21% 21-23 = 14%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

56

Data Sources
In addition to using course records of attendance, exam scores, and final grades as
data sources, I relied on four different instruments to gather data about students: a
teaching/learning questionnaire, a racial attitude survey, a two-part structured interview,
and a series of unstructured interviews. Table 3.2 outlines the data sources that were

available for the various participants in the study.

Table 3.2 Data Sources for Participants in Study

 

Students Data Sources

All Quick Discrimination Index (posttest only)
Teaching/Learning Questionnaire (pre and post)
Course records

 

 

Quick Discrimination Index (pre and post)

 

Volunteer Teaching/Learning Questionnaire (pre and post)
Course records
Pre and post structured interviews
Quick Discrimination Index (pre and post)
Target Teaching/Learning Questionnaire (pre and post)

Course records
Pre and post structured interviews
Four unstructured interviews (during semester)

 

 

 

 

Teachin 'n uestionnaire

This instrument (see Appendix B) was one used by researchers in a study of the
Accepting Behaviors for Cultural Diversity for Teachers (ABCD) Project (McDiarmid &
Price, 1990); however, most of the items were drawn from a questionnaire originally
developed by the National Center for Research on Teacher Education (N CRTE), which is
located at Michigan State University. McDiarmid and Price reported no reliability
information for the ABCD questionnaire, and there was also none reported on the original
NCRTE questionnaire. The purpose of the questionnaire-and the reason it was selected
for use in this study-«was to assess students' beliefs about teaching and learning, as well
as their awareness of and attitudes toward issues of diversity. The questionnaire was

administered to all CEP 240 students in their lab sections during the first week of the

57

course and then readministered in the same manner at the end of the course. Though not
graded, the questionnaire was considered by the instructors as part of the course work,
and the students were asked to identify themselves on them.

Attitude Survey

The attitude survey (see Appendix C) was a combination and adaptation of
Ponterotto and Burkard's Quick Discrimination Index (Ponterotto & Pedersen, 1993) and
the Bogardus Social Distance Scale (Bogardus, 1925). I chose these two instruments
because they were short and there was evidence that each was a reliable measure of
people's attitudes (Law & Lane, 1987; Ponterotto & Pedersen, 1993). I reduced the
Quick Discrimination Index (QDI) from 25 items to 10 items by deleting all items
relating to gender issues and retaining only those items relating to racial issues. I then
wrote five original statements to bring the total to 15 items. The QDI items were
answered using a 7-point Likert scale with responses ranging from Strongly Agree to
Strongly Disagree. To avoid positively worded response bias, seven of the QDI items
were worded negatively. Using the split-half technique and the Spearrnan Brown
prophecy formula, I obtained a reliability of .80 for the QDI. A reliability coefficient of
.80 can be considered as useful, but coefficients of .85 and higher are preferable
(McDaniel, 1994).

I modified the Bogardus Social Distance Scale by limiting it to only five minority
groups (Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Asian Americans, and Native Americans) rather than
the 36-39 groups originally included. In addition, I rephrased several of the items. The
Social Distance Scale was also scored with a 7-point Likert scale, but on this instrument
there was no way to compensate for positively worded response bias. I administered both
parts of this attitude survey at the beginning and at the end of the course to the 31
students who volunteered to be interviewed. This survey was not part of the students'
course work and was administered to them individually or in small groups outside of

regular class time. I asked the students to identify themselves on the survey so that I

58

would able to compare their individual posttest responses with their pretest responses. I
did not compute a reliability coefficient for the Social Distance Scale because I elected to
not analyze this data because of an obvious lack of variability in students' responses to the
items. I found that, with the notable exception of the item referring to maintaining an
intimate relationship, nearly every student marked a seven (the highest possible response)
for every item. This circumstance suggested to me that students may have been giving
what they considered to be socially desirable responses.

Administering the attitude survey to the 31 volunteers had three purposes. First,
the survey provided more specific information about student attitudes toward minority
groups than the general questionnaire administered to all students. Second, students'
responses to the survey assisted me in selecting the 12 target students by giving me
another measure of the students' level of sensitivity to diversity issues. Finally, I had
additional data on the 17 students not selected for the target group, providing me with a
more complete picture of their growth over the semester. During the first two weeks of
the course and again at the end of the course, I administered the QDI and the Social
Distance Scale to the 31 volunteer students. Because my interviews with the volunteer
students convinced me that the QDI had done a good job of distinguishing between
individuals with more favorable racial attitudes and those with less favorable attitudes, I
made the decision to administer the QDI to all students at the end of the course as an
attachment to the ABCD questionnaire.

S I 'ew

I administered two structured interviews (see Appendix D) to the 31 volunteers,
one near the beginning and one near the end of the course. The first structured interview
was designed to obtain additional information about students' backgrounds, their prior
experiences with minority groups, their expectations for the course, and their beliefs and
feelings about teaching certain racial groups. The second structured interview had a

threefold purpose: 1) obtaining students' evaluations of the course and of their own

59

learning, 2) reassessing students’ attitudes toward selected racial groups, and 3) eliciting
their beliefs and feelings about teaching certain racial groups.

There were several reasons why I chose to use structured interviews as one of my
data sources. First, they would provide a systematic means of securing the same
background information about each of the participants. Second, the structured interviews
would enable me to compare students' responses in the second interview with their
responses to the same questions in the first interview, and through this comparison I
could identify possible changes in students' beliefs and/or attitudes. Furthermore,
having all students respond to the same questions would enable to me to compare
responses across students as well as across interviews.

Most of the structured interviews were conducted during the first two weeks and
the last two weeks of the course. The interviews typically lasted slightly more than one
hour each. So that I could tape record each interview, I always met with the participants
in a quiet place, and in every case I met with each of them individually and in private-no
other people were ever present during the structured interviews. The majority of the
interviews took place in a small office in the education building, but for the convenience
of some of the participants, I conducted some interviews in their dormitories or, in one
case, in a student's apartment.

Unstructured Interviews

I conducted a series of unstructured interviews with the 14 target students at two—
to three-week intervals throughout the semester. I had four unstructured interviews with
13 of the 14 target students and three with the remaining student. The purpose of the
unstructured interviews was to assess what students were learning in the course and what
their attitudes/feelings were toward what they were learning. Typically, there were two
questions which I asked in each interview: What stands out for you about the last two
weeks? During the last two weeks, have you learned anything that you consider to be

important? The remainder of the questions for these interviews were not predetermined;

60

rather, I just asked students to talk about how they felt about what was happening in the
course and about what they were learning. Typical questions during the unstructured
interviews were like the following: What do you think was the purpose of [a particular
activity]? How did you feel about this activity? The rationale for including this
instrument was that it would enable me to more effectively track the students' perceptions
of the course, their learning, and their attitudes toward various diversity issues. Having
several different instruments getting at the same information in different ways was a way
of triangulating and making sure that I had a rich data set for each target student on each
construct of interest. The unstructured interviews varied in length from about 40 minutes
to over an hour. As with the structured interviews, they were all conducted in a quiet,
private place so that they could be tape recorded. The great majority of these interviews
were conducted in a small office in the education building, and the rest were conducted in
the students' dormitories.
Data Analysis

As noted earlier, I collected both quantitative and qualitative data for this study.
First, I will explain my procedures for analyzing the quantitative data, then for the
qualitative data.

Quantitative Data

There were three types of quantitative data that I analyzed in this study: attitude
surveys, teaching/learning questionnaires, and course records.
Attitude Surveys

Students' responses to each item on the QDI were scored on a seven-point scale,
with the low score being 1 for a response that indicated an unfavorable attitude toward
racial minorities and the high score being 7 for a response that indicated a favorable
attitude. The sum of the individual scores for the 15 items on the survey yielded a total
score which I interpreted as an indication of how positively or negatively each student felt
toward racial minorities. Once all the surveys had been scored, I divided the students into

61

three groups based on the total score that they received: high scorers, middle scorers, and
low scorers. Next, I conducted a chi-square analysis to determine whether or not there
were significant differences between high scorers and low scorers on any of the 15 items
on the QDI. Finally, for the 31 volunteer students, who were the only ones to take the
QDI both at the beginning and at the end of the course, I conducted an ANOVA to
determine whether there was a difference between high, middle, and low scorers in terms
of the change in their scores from the pretest to the posttest.

Teachin in uestionnaires

There were a total of 25 items on the ABCD questionnaire, with the first 14 items
being scored on a 7-point Likert scale. For each of these 14 items I conducted a chi -
square analysis to determine whether there were significant differences in the responses
of students who had scored high on the QDI and those who had scored low. In addition,
because the ABCD questionnaire was administered pre and post to all students, I
conducted an ANOVA on each item to determine whether there were differences between
high scorers and low scorers in terms of the change in their scores from the pretest to the
posttest.

The remaining items on the ABCD questionnaire were scored somewhat
differently. The next six items, #15 through #20, each offered respondents a choice of six
answers; however, since none of the answers could truly be considered a "best" answer, a
rating scale could not be used. Also, because no choice was considered better than
another, there was no basis for determining whether changes from the pretest to the
posttest were positive, neutral, or negative. For these reasons, the results of this section
of the questionnaire were difficult to interpret. I concluded that the most logical way to
report the data from this section was to list the choices that were most frequently selected
and indicate the percentages of highs and lows selecting each of these choices.

However, these six items contributed nothing to my understanding of the students in this

study. Items #21 through 23 each included between four and seven answer choices. For

62

these items I devised a four-point scoring scheme in which I awarded 1 point for the
answer which indicated the least accepting attitude and 4 points for the answer which
indicated the most accepting attitude. For item #24, students had a choice of four
responses, with no one response being the "best” response. Finally, item #25 called for a
short answer from the respondents. I again used the four-point scoring scheme in which I
awarded one point for a response indicating strong disagreement with the item and four
points for a response indicating strong agreement. The scoring for items #21 through 23
and for #25 was subjective, but one of the CEP 240 course instructors and I, after some
discussion, were in 100% agreement on which responses constituted the "best” responses
for these items. As I did for the first fourteen items on the instrument, I conducted a chi -
square analysis of items #15 through #25 to determine whether there were any significant
differences in the responses of students who had scored high on the QDI and those who
had scored low. In addition, I also conducted an ANOVA of the pre and post scores to
determine whether there were differences from the pretest to the posttest.
Course Records

The course records that I analyzed at the end of the semester included attendance
records, midterm and final examination grades, and final course grades.

Attendance. I collected the attendance records that had been maintained by each
instructor of the lab sections. I converted the attendance for each student in the class into
a percentage by dividing the number of class sessions for which the student was present
by the total number of class sessions. Thus, the highest possible score for attendance
would be 100%, a score achieved by students who had attended every class session.
After individual attendance scores had been determined, I then used an analysis of
variance (ANOVA) to test whether or not there were significant differences between the
three groups being studied: those who had scored high on the QDI, those who had scored
in the middle range, and those who had scored low.

63

Midterm and final exams. I analyzed students' midterm and final examinations in
much the same way as I did their attendance records. The highest possible score on each
examination was 100% (though, actually, a few students scored a couple of percentage
points higher because of the extra credit questions). Once I had obtained from the other
instructors the examination scores for each student, I again used an ANOVA to determine
whether or not there were differences in the performance of students who had scored
high, middle, and low on the QDI.

Course grades. I obtained each student's final course grade through examining a
computer printout of student grades a couple of weeks after the conclusion of the course.
Students were graded on the following four-point scale: 1.0 = D, 2.0 = C, 3.0 = B, and
4.0 = A. Once again I used an ANOVA to test for differences between the three groups
of students

Qualitative Data

There were two types of qualitative data analyzed in this study: structured
interviews and unstructured interviews.

Structured Interviews

The first step in analyzing the structured interviews was obtaining verbatim
transcripts of each interview with the fourteen target students. I personally transcribed
almost half of the structured interviews, and the remaining half were transcribed
professionally. To ensure the complete accuracy of each interview that was
professionally transcribed, I listened to the tape of the entire interview and edited the
transcripts as necessary. Each speaker's comments in each interview were numbered for
easy reference.

The next step in the process was to begin to organize the data to facilitate its
analysis. I made a chart which outlined the background information provided by each
student about his/her family, high school, and hometown. I then pulled together in one

document each student's response to each of the remaining interview questions. Putting

64

all students' responses to a question together in one document facilitated the process of
looking for themes in the data and for similarities and differences across students.

While in the process of organizing my data, I concurrently identified eight of the
target students--four who scored high on the QDI and four who scored low--that seemed
to me to be the most interesting cases, and I beg’n to analyze their interviews. In
deciding on these eight students, I considered the extent to which their comments in the
interviews seemed to corroborate their QDI scores and provide additional bases for
understanding their racial attitudes and beliefs. I also considered how articulate the
students were in expressing their ideas, because some were much better than others at
explaining themselves cleariy and in more detail. For these eight students I began to
construct another set of charts in which I listed from each of their two structured
interviews all of their remarks that appeared relevant to the guiding research questions of
the study. In one column of the chart I wrote my own brief commentaries on their
remarks, noting important ideas, contradictions, and possible themes, and also raising
questions for future thought and analysis. As the charts for each student were completed,
I wrote a brief summary of his/her two interviews, along with a commentary stating
whether or not there appeared to have been any changes from the pre-interview to the
post-interview and whether there appeared to be any major themes or patterns in the
student's remarks. In addition, I discussed these summaries and commentaries with the
chair of my dissertation committee to check out the conclusions I was reaching and to
further prod my thinking about the data. It was this process of analysis, discussion, and
reflection that led to me select three participants--two lows and one highrfo-as students to
focus on for more detailed analysis.

As the final step in my analysis of the structured interviews, I analyzed the
responses for each question separately, looking for possible patterns or themes across the
fourteen interviews. In my analysis a pattern or theme became a category when I

developed a working definition to distinguish which responses could be included. This

65 ,

final step in the analysis process involved reading and re-reading the interview responses
because as new categories emerged from my analysis, I would revisit previously analyzed
interviews to seek additional evidence to confirm or disconfirrn the new category.
Sometimes, in so doing, my definitions of the categories had to be revised. Because these
were structured interviews, obviously most of the categories were shaped by the
questions that were asked. The questions included in the structured interview were
designed to get at the particular information that, based on my reading of the literature
and on the specific purposes of this study, I felt I would need to properly address my
research questions. Once a category had been identified, I looked for similar responses
from at least four of the seven high students or four of the seven low students. If I found
less than four similar responses among students in the same group, the category was
dropped from my analysis. If I did find four similar responses among students at one
level (i.e., high or low), I then looked for similar or different responses from at least three
of the students at the other level. If I did not find at least three corresponding or
contrasting responses among the other group of students, this category was also dropped.
Thus, the only categories included in my written report were those for which I had clear
supporting evidence (either corresponding or contrasting) for at least half of the students.
The ten categories that were included fell into four broad areas and are outlined below.
Background Experiences

1. Community characteristics

2. Friendships with racial minorities

3. Awareness of racism and discrimination

Beliefs about the Education of Minorities
l. Minorities' opportunities to learn
2. Explanation of lower minority achievement

3. Teaching minority students

Impact of the Course
1. Most important leamings
2. Feelings about the course
Reactions to Being Interviewed
1. Effect of being interviewed
2. Response to a Black interviewer
Although some additional categories of responses did emerge during my analysis, they
were all eventually dropped due to lack of sufficient supporting evidence. For example,
there was some evidence that students who scored high on the QDI f elt more empathy for
others than did students who scored low, but based on my criteria for retaining a
category, this idea did not appear in enough of the students' interviews. Similarly, there
was some evidence that students who scored low on the QDI were more likely to favor
maintaining the status quo in society and in schools than were students who scored high,
but again I did not find enough instances of supporting evidence to include this category
in my final analysis.
Unstructured Interviews
I analyzed the unstructured interviews of only three target students--two students
who scored low on the QDI and one student who scored high. I chose to analyze the
interviews of these three students because, based on my impressions from interviewing
them and on my close analysis of their pre and post structured interviews, they seemed to
represent the three different responses that students seemed to have to the course. Claire
represented students who seemed mostly unaffected by the course, Joy represented those
who were stimulated to seriously reexamine their existing racial attitudes and beliefs, and
Terri represented those for whom the course primarily served as an affirmation of their
already favorable racial attitudes and beliefs.
For each of these three students, I began by listening to the four unstructured

interviews that I had conducted at 2-3 week intervals during the semester of the study. I

67

transcribed verbatim everything in each interview that seemed related to their racial
attitudes and beliefs, and in a separate document] summarized everything else. After the
transcriptions of the students' comments about racial issues were finished, I analyzed
them for patterns and themes in much the same fashion as I had done for the structured
interviews. However, it should be noted that because these three students were selected
to be illustrative of three different responses to the course, I was most interested in
highlighting how they differed. Therefore, since this analysis focused on only three
students, I included a category only if I found contrasting responses from at least two of
the three students. In formulating my categories for these students, I also referred back
to their responses in the two structured interviews. I was able to identify four major
categories of difference between the three students: 1) background experiences,
including their previous interracial experiences, their attitudes and beliefs about racial
minorities, and their levels of awareness of racism and discrimination, 2) reactions to the
content of the course, 3) leamings gained from the course, and 4) personal characteristics,

specifically, their openness to new information and their ability to be self -refiective.

CHAPTER FOUR
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In this chapter I present the results from my analyses of the quantitative data,
which will provide a broad view of the volunteer students and CEP 240 students as a
whole, and from my analyses of the qualitative data, which will provide a more close-up
view of the target students and their experience of the course. Because my primary
interest is how to better prepare a mostly White teaching force to work with an
increasingly diverse student population, I elected to consider only White students in all of
my analyses of the data. In the quantitative section, I will begin by discussing students'
responses to the racial attitude survey which was administered to all students. Second, I
will examine some of the other quantitative data collected from the 28 volunteer students
who were White, as well as from the White nonvolunteers in the class. Next, in the
qualitative section, I will discuss my analysis of selected qualitative data on the 14 target
students. Finally, I will discuss the qualitative data on three illustrative target students.

Quantitative Data

The three types of quantitative data that I collected for all students were 1) the
Quick Discrimination Index (QDI), which assessed students' racial attitudes, 2) the
ABCD questionnaire, which assessed students' views on teaching and learning, and
3) course records, which included attendance, exam grades, and course grades. Although
the QDI was administered only to the 28 volunteer students at the beginning of the
course, it was administered to all students at the end of the course. The ABCD

questionnaire was administered pre and post to all students. Records of students'

69

attendance, exam grades, and course grades were not examined until after the conclusion
of the course.
The Quick Discrimination Index

As I indicated above, the QDI was administered to all CEP 240 students at the
conclusion of the course. Only the 28 volunteer students completed the survey both at
the beginning and at the end of the course. In my original research design, I had not
planned to use the QDI with the entire class, only with the volunteers; however, late in
the semester] realized that administering the QDI to the whole class would facilitate my
making comparisons between the attitudes of volunteers and nonvolunteers. Therefore, I
made the decision to have all students complete the QD] at the end of the semester. First,
I will discuss the results of the end-of-semester, whole-class administration; then I will
discuss the results of the pre and post administration to the volunteer students.
All Students '

The lowest possible score on the QDI was 15, indicating highly unfavorable
attitudes toward racial minorities, and the highest possible score was 105, indicating
highly favorable attitudes. Students' actual scores ranged from 48 to 101, with the mean
score being 75.01. As Figure 4.1 illustrates, the distribution of scores on the QDI was
bimodal but still approximated a normal distribution. For the purposes of my analysis, I
defined high scorers as students who scored one-half standard deviation or more above
the mean of the class, and I defined low scorers as students who scored one-half standard
deviation or more below the mean. In other words, students who scored 81 or higher on
the QDI were considered to be high scorers, and students who scored 69 or lower were
considered to be low scorers. My rationale for selecting these particular cutoff points
was that, theoretically, approximately 34% of any given population will score between
one-half standard deviation above the mean and one-half standard deviation below the
mean, with approximately 33% of the remaining population scoring higher and 33%

scoring lower. Thus, when I compare the high scorers in my sample to the low scorers,

70

Figure 4.1 Distribution of scores on Quick Discrimination Index (QDI)

 

3O
27

:4 /‘\ /‘\
.8 / \7 \

 

 

 

Mueller
3
\
<
/

 

 

 

6
3/1 :

rrfirrrriirrr
seaseassaaa§§
l-O
semasezeaasgg
0-!

Quick Discrimination Index (QDI) Seas

I would be comparing the top third of the sample to the bottom third. However, because
the distribution of scores in my sample was not perfectly normal, there was some
variation in the size of the high, middle, and low groups. There were 49 students (33%)
who were high scorers, 55 students (37%) who were low scorers, and 45 students (30%)
who scored in the middle range.

Analysis of scores on the QDI revealed that for each of the fifteen items there was
a significant difference between the responses of students who scored high (more
favorable attitudes) and those of students who scored low (less favorable attitudes). In
fact, as Table 4.1 illustrates, for twelve of the fifteen items, the differences between the
two groups were highly significant (p < .0000). Although we know that high scorers and
low scorers, by definition, have responded differently to the items on the survey, it is
from these different responses that we may be able to infer differences in racial attitudes.

Therefore, taking a closer look at the pattern of differences in their responses is the best

71

way to understand in what particular ways the members of the two groups appeared to
differ in their racial attitudes. Rather than discussing each of the fifteen items separately,
I have grouped related items into seven broad categories: perceptions of minorities,
recognition of racism/discrimination, views on multicultural education, friendships with
minorities, views on interracial relationships, views on living/working with minorities,
and sensitivity to minority issues.

Perceptions of minorities. Items number 5, 11, and 13 provided information
about how students viewed minorities. Ninety-two percent of the high scorers (highs)
strongly or mostly disagreed with the idea that ”Some racial minorities are more of a
liability than an asset to our country," but less than half of the low scorers (lows)
disagreed. Similarly, 78% of the highs mostly or strongly disagreed with the idea that
minorities aren't willing to work hard, but only 26% of the lows disagreed. Finally, 84%
of the highs regarded themselves as unprejudiced toward any minority group, whereas
only 36% of the lows considered themselves as unprejudiced. Students' responses to
these three items indicate that one difference between the two groups is that that low
scorers' perceptions of minorities are significantly less favorable than are high scorers'
perceptions. Specifically, lows appear to have less appreciation for racial minorities, are
three times as likely as highs to regard minorities as unwilling to work hard, and are far
less likely to consider themselves as unprejudiced toward minorities.

Recognition of racism/discrimination. Students' responses to items number 7 and
12 served to indicate their awareness of the scope of the problem of racism and
discrimination. None of the high scorers believed that minorities complain too much
about racial discrimination and 67% strongly or mostly disagreed with that statement; in
contrast, 25% of the lows mostly or strongly agreed that minorities do complain too
much, and only 13% disagreed. On the question of whether or not White racism is still a
major problem in this country, 75% of the highs believed that it is, as compared to only

31% of the lows. The differences in students' responses to these two items suggest that

~I‘LI 2

A

Table 4.1

QDI Item

72

Student Responses to QDI Items

% Strongly
or Mostly
Agreeing

% Strongly
(r Mostly
Disagreeing

“has

Lows

Chi-
square
Value

P

 

Wrceptions of Minorities
S. Someracial minorities aremoreofa
liability than an asset to our country.
11. More minorities would be successful
if they were willing to work hard.
13. I am not prejudiced toward any
minority groups.

1.8%

91.9%

47.3%

37.669

 

13h: Lows
0%
0%

7.3%

77.6%

25.5%

36.167

 

83

.7%

36.3%

0%

7.3%

28.548

 

Recomition of RacimDiscrlm.
7. Overall,] think minorities complain
too much about racial discrimination.
12. White people's racism toward racial
minority groups still constitutes a
ma'or blem in America

0%

25.4%

67.4%

12.8%

39.333

 

75.5%

30.9%

4.1%

12.7%

30.724

 

Multicultural Education
9. Schools should promote traditional
American values as well as values of the
culturally diverse students in the class.
10. Schools should require all students to
learn about the contributions of

 

71.4%

52.8%

§

5.4%

13.651

.0337

 

85.7%

60.0%

§

1.8%

16.81]

 

1. My friendship network is very racially
mixed.

6. My closest friends are from my own
racial group.

various minori ups to our society.
Ffiendshifi

57.2%

16.3%

6.1%

30.9%

29.766

 

53%

88.3%

22.4%

29.110

 

‘ Interracial Reiationshig

3. I would feel O.K. about my son or
daughter dating someone from a
different race.

8. Itisbetterifpeoplemarrywithintheir

own race.

87.8%

18.2%

14.5%

56.497

 

18.2%

69.4%

18.2%

42.096

 

‘ E::Zfiorkini with Minorities

14. I would enjoy living in a
neighborhood with a racially diverse
pqiulation (i.e., Whites, Blacks,
Hispanics, Asians, etc).

15. I would enjoy teaching in a school
with a racially inverse populatim.

91.9%

34.5%

12.7%

41.551

 

l(X)%

47.2%

3.6%

55.580

 

nsitivi to Minorit Issu
2. Affirmative action programs in
business and education constitute
reverse discrimination.
4. Itbothers me thataradai minority
person has never been President of the

 

United States.

10.2%

32.7%

22.4%

3.6%

15.150

.0191

 

 

63.3%

 

7.2%

 

2%

 

23.7%

 

42.717

 

 

 

73

high scorers appear to be much more aware of and better informed about racism and
discrimination than are low scorers, and/or perhaps they are just more compassionate and
more sensitive to minority concerns than are low scorers.

Views on multicultural education. Two items on the QDI, #9 and #10, addressed
the issue of multicultural education. Although lows and highs were in closer agreement
on these two items than on any others on the survey, their responses were still
significantly different. About 71% of the high scorers, compared to 53% of the low
scorers, believed that schools should promote the values of those who are culturally
different. Also, 85% of the highs, compared to 60% of the lows, believed that all
students should learn about the contributions of minority groups. Students' responses to
these two items indicate that highs and lows appear to differ in their commitment to
multicultural education. In other words, the responses of the high scorers suggest that
they are more likely than lows to be supportive of education that recognizes the diversity
in our society.

Friendships with minorities. Items number 1 and 6 asked students about their
friendships with individuals from different racial groups. Neariy 60% of the high scorers
agreed that their friendship networks were racially mixed, as compared to only 16% of
the low scorers. Although over 50% of the highs reported that their closest friends were
White, nearly 90% of the lows reported the same thing. Furthermore, over 22% of the
highs indicated that they had close friends from a different racial background, whereas
none of the lows made such an indication. Thus, another apparent difference between the
two groups is that highs appear to be considerably more likely to report having
friendships-sometimes close friendships--with racial minorities than are lows. It seems
particulariy noteworthy that none of the lows reported having close friends from a
different racial group. Nevertheless, from these data it is impossible to determine
whether this lack of close friendships is in any way related to the low scorers' racial

attitudes.

74

Interracial relationships. Items number 3 and 8 were designed to elicit students'
attitudes toward interracial relationships. While almost 90% of the highs indicated that
they would have no problem with their son or daughter dating someone from a different
race, only about 20% of the lows made the same indication. Additionally, nearly 15% of
the lows expressed strong disapproval toward interracial dating, but none of the highs
disapproved. On the subject of interracial marriage, none of the highs agreed that it is
better for people to marry within their own race, but almost 20% of the lows agreed. On
the other hand, nearly 70% of the highs disagreed with the statement, as compared to only
about 20% of the lows. Students' responses to these two items indicate that another
difference between the groups is that highs are far more accepting of interracial dating
and marriage than are lows.

Living/Working with minorities. The last two items on the survey explored
students' attitudes toward living and working with minorities. Ninety-two percent of the
highs indicated that they would enjoy living in a racially diverse neighborhood, whereas
only about 35% of the lows expressed this opinion; in addition, 13% of the lows strongly
or mostly disagreed with this statement, whereas none of the highs disagreed. All of the
high scorers, 100% of them, indicated that they would enjoy teaching in a racially diverse
school setting, but less than half of the low scorers expressed a similar opinion. These
differing responses clearly show that another major difference between the two groups is
that high scorers are much more willing to live in a diverse community and work with a
diverse student population. In other words, highs appear to be much more accepting of
diversity than are lows.

Sensitivity to minority issues. There were two items on the survey, #2 and #4,
which provided additional information about students' sensitivity to minority issues.
Low scorers were more likely than high scorers (33% compared to 10%) to regard
affirmative action as a type of reverse discrimination. Also, high scorers were far more

likely than low scorers (63% compared to 7%) to be bothered by the fact that a racial

75

minority person has never been elected President. Thus, a final difference between highs
and lows is that highs seem to demonstrate more sensitivity to minority concerns than do
lows.

In summary, students' responses to the items on the QDI suggest important
differences in the racial attitudes, awareness, and sensitivity of high scorers and low
scorers. Highs are more likely than lows to regard themselves as unprejudiced, and they
seem to hold more positive images of racial minorities than do lows. In addition, highs
are more likely than lows to have friendships with people who are racially different than
themselves, and they are far more accepting of interracial dating and marriage. The
differing responses to the survey items further indicate that high scorers appear to be
much more aware of and more knowledgeable about the racism and discrimination that
exist in our society, and they also appear to be considerably more sensitive to minority
concerns about these problems than are low scorers. Students who scored high are
considerably more likely to support the idea of multicultural education than are students
who scored low. Finally, highs demonstrate dramatically more positive feelings toward
living in a diverse neighborhood and teaching in a diverse school. Although it is possible
that all of these differences may actually indicate that highs are better than lows at giving
the “politically correct” responses to the survey items, evidence from other quantitative
and qualitative data strongly suggest that there are real differences in the racial attitudes
of high scorers and low scorers.

Volunteer Students

One of the major questions of this study was whether or not prospective teachers'
racial attitudes are changed by exposure to a multicultural education course. While the
end-of-semester administration of the QDI to all students provided interesting
information about the differences between high scorers and low scorers, it didn't address
the question of whether or not students' racial attitudes changed during the semester.

Because the 28 students in the volunteer group were the only ones to whom I

76

administered the QD] both at the beginning of the course and again at the end of the
course, I had to answer this question by comparing volunteer students' scores on the
beginning-of-semester administration of the QDI with their scores on the end-of-semester
administration. Using an analysis of covariance with students' pretest scores on the QDI

as the covariate, I obtained the pattern of differences illustrated in Table 4.2 below.

Table 4.2 Volunteer Students' Pre and Post Scores on the QD]

 

Students who scored in the middle range on their pretest showed very little change on the
posttest. However, the posttest scores of students who initially scored high increased by
an average of five points while those of students who initially-scored low decreased by
about the same amount. In other words, the students who began the course with the more
favorable racial attitudes apparently moved toward having even more favorable attitudes;
in contrast, students who began with less favorable racial attitudes apparently moved
toward having even less favorable attitudes. Furthermore, because the average score of
the highs went up five points while that of the lows went down five points, the difference
in the mean attitude scores of high scorers and low scorers actually increased by nearly
one full standard deviation. However, since these scores are only for the 28 White
volunteers (of which only six were low scorers), they must be interpreted with
considerable caution.

The data on the volunteer students seem to suggest that there were some changes
in student attitudes from the beginning of the semester to the end. However, before this
finding can be extrapolated to the entire class, an important question that needs to be
addressed is to what extent might the 28 volunteer students be considered representative

of the class as a whole?

77

To address this question about the representativeness of my volunteer sample, I
conducted several quantitative analyses to determine whether the students who
volunteered were different in any important ways (e.g., gender, age, year in college, etc.)
from the students who did not volunteer (see Table 4.3). There were only two
background characteristics for which I found a significant difference between volunteers
and nonvolunteers: age and size of city. Volunteer students were, on average, about two
and half years older than nonvolunteers, and they also tended to come from larger cities.
The size of city difference appeared to be inconsequential because further analysis
revealed no relationship between size of city and students' QDI scores overall. However,
the age variable was significantly related to students' QDI scores, with students in the 24—
29 age range scoring about ten points higher than students in the 18-23 age range. (It
should be noted that only six students in the entire sample fell into the 24—29 age range,
and four of them were in the volunteer group.) As shown in Table 4.3, the QDI scores

of volunteers were more titan three points higher than those of nonvolunteers, though this

Table 4.3 of Volunteers and Nonvolunteers on Selected Variables

      

Variable Volunteers Nonvolunteers F value

difference was not statistically significant. To determine whether the mean score for the
volunteer group was higher because of the higher scores of the older students, I compared
the QDI scores of the 22 volunteers in the 18-23 age range to those of the 118

nonvolunteers in the same age range. In this analysis, the mean QDI scores were 77.55

78

for volunteers and 74.07 for nonvolunteers, about the same differential as obtained when
the older students were included in the analysis. Thus, it appears that, overall, the
volunteer students in my sample possessed slightly more favorable racial attitudes than
did the nonvolunteers. I do not find it at all surprising that a group of White students
who volunteer to participate in a study on diversity with a Black researcher would have
somewhat more favorable racial attitudes. While their racial attitudes were slightly more
favorable overall, the volunteer group did include a number of low-scoring students who
seemed very similar to low-scoring students in the larger class.

My analysis of the data also suggests that the volunteer students tended to perform
better academically than did the nonvolunteer students. Although there was no difference
between volunteers and nonvolunteers on the final exam, volunteers received
significantly higher scores on their midterm exam and had significantly better attendance
than nonvolunteers (see Table 4.3). In addition, the difference in the final grades of the
two groups approached significance. Although one could argue that the students in the
volunteer group were not representative of the class as a whole in terms of attendance and
academics, I see this difference as more of a plus than a minus. Because the volunteer
students had better attendance patterns and appeared to perform better academically, I
would expect that they would be more likely to reap the intended benefits of the course
than would the nonvolunteer students. In other words, I would expect the volunteer
students to give a better indication of the potential effectiveness of the course.

In conclusion, regarding the question of whether the volunteer students were
representative of students in the class as a whole, the data suggest that they were
representative in most respects. On the QDI, the posttest scores of the 28 volunteer
students fell in the same range as their pretest scores, with those who scored in the middle
range on the pretest tending to receive almost identical scores on the posttest, those who
scored high on the pretest tending to score even higher on the posttest, and those who

scored low on the pretest tending to score even lower on the posttest. Given that the

79

volunteer students appeared to be representative of the class as a whole, and given that
their posttest scores on the QDI tended to fall in the same range (high, middle, or low) as
their pretest scores, it seems reasonable to assume that the nonvolunteers who scored in a
particular range on the QD] at the end of the semester could have been expected to score
similarly at the beginning of the semester, had the QDI been administered to them at that
time. Consequently, through the rest of my analysis, I will refer to nonvolunteers who
were high scorers or low scorers on the QD] posttest as though they were high scorers or
low scorers throughout the entire semester.
ABCD Questionnaire

The ABCD questionnaire, which was intended to assess their views of teaching
and learning, was administered to all CEP 240 students at the beginning and again at the
end of the semester. I found that high scorers' and low scorers' responses to the 25 items
on the ABCD questionnaire were very similar at the beginning of the semester. In fact,
there were only two items on which there was a significant difference between the two
groups on the initial administration of the questionnaire (see Table 4.4a, 4.4b, and 4.4c).
High scorers were significantly (p < .003) more likely than low scorers to disagree with
item #8, which stated, ”The main job of the teacher is to transmit the values of the
mainstream American culture.” On the pretest, over 60% of the highs disagreed with this
statement, as compared to only 22% of the lows. The second item on which there was a
significant difference (p < .02) was #23, which dealt with the acceptability of Black
English in the classroom. The responses of the high scorers indicated that they would be
more accepting of Black English than would low scorers. Since high scorers, by
definition, appeared more accepting of diversity than low scorers, the differences
observed on these two items at the beginning of the semester are not surprising. What is
surprising, however, is that the difference I observed in students' responses to #23 on the
pretest was not present on the posttest. Apparently, over the course of the semester, high

scorers and low scorers became more alike in how they responded to this particular item.

80

Table 4.4a Student Responses to ABCD Items #1-14

 

% Who Strongly % Who Strongly or Chi-square

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ABCD item & time or Mostly Agree Mostly Disagree Value p
Highs Lows Highs Lows
7 1. Teachers should avoid in students by ability or level of performance.
I Pre-questionnaire 27.5% 27.3% 20.9% 14.6% 4.668 .5870
| Post-questionnaire 44.9% 32.8% 16.3% 73% 8.316 .2158
2. A lot of my ideas about teachinglnd leamin come from my own experience as a student
Pre-questionnaire 90.6% 83.6% 0% 1.8% 3.804 .4332
Post-questionnaire 69.4% 70.9% 4.1% 1.8% 1.472 .9163

 

3. Teachers should use the same standards in evaluating the work of all students in the class.
Pre-questionnaire 44.9% 34.5% 14.2% 23.7% 1 1.270 .0804
Post-questionnaire 12.2% 20.0% 26.5% 25.5% 4.809 .5685

4. It is impractical for teachers to tailor instruction to the unique interests and abilities of different students.
Pre-questionnaire 63% 5.4% 56.3% 47.2% 5.444 .4881

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Post-questionnaire 4.0% 3.6% 69.4% 45.4% 1 1.821 .0661
5. Students learn best if they have to figure things out for themselves instead of being told or shown.
Pre-questionnaire 27.5% 31.5% 14.6% 16.7% 1.774 .9392
Post-questionnaire 26.5% 22.3% 22.5% 27.8% 9.277 .1586
6. When working with slow learners, teachers should focus nearly all their instruction on "minimum
comma” objectives. j
Prejuestionnaire 0% 1.9% 54.1% 41.5% 3.709 .5920
Post-questionnaire 0% 0% 47.0% 50.9% 2.501 .6444

 

 

 

7. Rguired high school courses should have separate classes for low- and big-achieving students.
questionnaire 12.2% 13.0% 36.9% 25.9% 4.770 .5737

Post-quesfionnaire 10.2% 16.4% 42.8% 27.3% 14.034 .0273
8. The main job of the teacher is to transmit the values of the mainstream American culture.
Pre-questionnaire 4.2% 3.7% 60.4% 24.1% 20.187 .0026
Post-questionnaire 0.0% 13.0% 71.5% 37.0% 21.497 .0007
9. The main job of the teacher is to encourage students to think and question the world around them.
Pre-questionnaire 79.6% 58.2% 2.0% 3.6% 6.614 .3580
Post-questionnaire 81.7% 59.3% 0% 1.9% 8.384 .1363
10. The main job of the teacher is to teach subject matter.

Pre-questionnaire 40.8% 25.4% 8.2% 7.2% 6.228 .3980
Post-questionnaire 10.7% 25.4% 12.2% 12.7% 7.479 I .273
11. All students should be taught in English. , ‘
PIE-questionnaire 25.0% 40.0% 20.8% 10.9% 3.928 .6864
Post-questionnaire 12.3% 32.7% 20.4% 7.3% I 14.266 I .0268
p 12. There are some students who can 2122' ly never be m at wriing.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre-questionnaire 4.0% 3.6% 47.2% 3 . 1% 9.4J33 .1506 ‘

Post-questionnaire 4.1% 7.3% 57.1% 36.3% 6.418 .3780
13. Somepeoplearenaturally abletoor anize their thou ts for writin . 7

Pre-questionnaire 65.3% ism—W “5.6% | .836 .9746
Tom-questionnaire 69.4% 69.1% 2.0% 0% | 5.148 .3981

 

_ 14. To be good athathematics, you need to have a kind of "mathematical mind”
[ Pre-questionnaire 8.1% I 14.5% 40.8% 21.8% 9.669 .1392
| Post-questionnaire 4.2% 21.9% 48.0% 27.3% 11.572 .0722

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4.4b

81

Student Responses to ABCD Items #15-22

 

15. (paraphrased) When students are

successful in achieving intended

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

goals or objectives, which do you Highs Lows Chi- Chi-
believe is the most frequent source square square
0‘ 8W8? Pre Post Pre Post Pre Post
Student's home background 22.4% I2§0% 23.6% I 25.9_‘_70_
Student's enthusiasm or perseverance 40.8% I 37.5% 32.7% I 40.75 9.691 2.732
Teacher's attention to students’ 20.4% 14.6% 9.1% 11.1%
interests/abilities
l6. (paraphrased) When students fail
to achieve intended goals or Highs Lows Chi- Chi-
objcctives, which do you believe is square square
the most frequent sornce of Post
failure?
Student's home background
Student's indifference or perseverance 6.378
Tchr's inattention to students
interests/abilities
17. If you were working with low
achievers in mathematics, which Highs LOWS Chi- Chi-
m of the following would you square square
emrhasize most? Pre_ Post Pre Post Pre Post
Problem-301mg 9.5% 16.7% E370 I 12.2%;
Helping students understand theories 14.3% 12.5% 17.1% 9.7% .884 2.181
Making math class fun for students 66.7% 54.2% 54.3% I 45.2%
18. If you were working with high
achievers in mathematics, which Highs LOWS Chi- Chi-
mOf the following would you square square
emphasize most? Pre Post Pre Post Post
Problem-solving 3.6% I 29.2: 32.4 32.1%
HelE'gg students understand theories 23.8 37.5% 23.5% 28.6% 2.599 1.150
m math class fun for students 28.6% 12.5 14.7 14.3
19. If you were working with low 7
achievers on learning to write, Highs Lows Chi- Chi-
which E; of the following would square square
you anvimzc most? Pre Post Pre Post Post
. Basic ' and tical skills WWW. 1% 40.6%
‘ Developing turd refining an argument 0%— 7. 7% 2% 12.5 4.637 .644
in writing
Having funthroughcanposinghaiku, 39.1% W757 1% 3.1%
etc.
20. If you were working with high
achievers on leaning to write. Highs Lows Chi- Chi-
which mg of the following would square square
you unphasizc most? Pre _ Post Pre Post Pre Post
Basic ' and tieal trans 439.5. W 2.8% W
Developing and refining an argument 61.9% 44% 2.8% 51.7% 4.059 2.424
in writing
Having funtinoughcomposinghaiku, 1437915— 8% 83% 6%
etc.

 

 

82

Table 4.4b (cont) Student Responses to ABCD Items #15-22

 

21. (paraphrased) Ifyouweretoteach
inaclassroomthatincluded

students
from a variety ofethnic and social
backgrormds, circle the three things
you would be most likely to do.

Highs

Pre

Post

Lows

Post

Chi-
square

Chi-
square
Post

 

Make sure gli_students have the
opportunity to uruierstand the subject
matter.

57.1%

56.3%

46.3%

40.0%

 

Make sure all students feel good about
themselves even if they aren't learning
what is in the curriculum.

20.4%

16.7%

27.8%

29.1%

 

Honor and celebrate diversity by
having students from different
backgrounds share their foods,

customsI langu_age, and values.

10.2%

 

16.7%

11.1%

 

10.9%

3.693

6.933

 

22. (paraphrased) Which of the
following is closest to your view
on the issue of school celebrations
(1' Christmas?

Lows

Pre

Post

Chi-
square

Chi-
square
Post

 

1) Thereshouldnotbeanycelebration
of any religious holiday.

3.8%

7.4%

 

2) If we celebrate Christian holidays,
we also need to celebrate holidays

49. 1%

55.6%

 

of other religions.
4) Om culture is predominantly
Christian, and our children should
learn these values.

 

 

 

 

7.5%

 

3.7%

 

9.641

 

10.727

 

Note: For items #15-22, students selected their responses from a list of six or more

choices. In my opinion (which may be different from that of the developers of the

items), no one of the choices offered in these items (with the exception of item
#22) could properly be considered as the ”right” or even the ”best" response.

None of the p

values for these eight items approached significance.

 

83

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 4.4c Student Responses to ABCD Items #23-25
WAgreeing %-Disagreeing Thi-
23. (paraphrased) Dialects like Black Square p
Englisb are fully legitimate mzes- Hi hs Lows Highs Lows Value
Pre-Questionnaire ‘_7_6. 1% 717% 23.9% 53% 9.539 .023
Post-Questionnaire 77.3% 60% 22.7% 40% 5.767 .124
24. How would you rate the
Opporttmities to learn that minority. Good-Excellent Poor - Fair Chi-
special needs, and impoverished Square p
Students “filmed in WW Highs Lows Highs Lows Value
hr h school?
e-Questionnaire 58.7% 75.9% 41.3% 24.1% 3.417 .331
Post-Questionnaire 52.1% =77.0% 47.9% 23.0% _‘7L.994 .046
25. (paraphrased) Do you think
minority, special needs, and Yes No Chi-
ifmpmisirowormmsmdm’tciminlc m" H gh Lo High Lo Sxilaiiam P
3061111“! cs 0 m- i s ws ' s ws ue
Pre-Questionnaire 69.6% 55.5% 19.6% 33.3% 3.541 .315
Post-Questionnaire 95.6% 49.2% 0.0% | 37.0% 34.952 .00000

 

 

 

In my chi-square analysis of students' responses to the end-of—the-semester
administration of the ABCD questionnaire, I noted several differences between the
responses of highs and lows which suggest that students in the two groups may have
reacted quite differently to the course content. On the 25-item questionnaire, there were
only five items for which I found a significant difference between highs and lows, plus
one item where the difference approached significance. Not surprisingly, these six items
were the ones on the questionnaire that were most closely related to the content covered
in the course. There was only one item related to content covered in the course-item #1,
which dealt with ability grouping--for which the difference between the responses of
highs and lows did not approach significance. Since there was a significant difference
between highs and lows on the item related to tracking (item #7), I would have expected a
similar difference on item #1. I'm not sure why there was no difference on this particular
item. I will now briefly discuss each of the six items on which there were differences.

First, the initial difference between the two groups on item #8 not only persisted
but actually increased in significance (from p < .003 to p < .0007). While the percentage
of students who disagreed with item #8 increased for both groups, the percentage who

K

84

agreed with the statement increased among lows from 3.7% on the initial questionnaire to
13% on the final questionnaire. In contrast, the percentage of highs who agreed with the
statement decreased from 4.2% to 0%. One of the emphases of the course was on
accepting diversity and on making the school curriculum more inclusive of other cultures.
While high scorers seem to have been influenced in the desired direction by the course, a
number of the lows actually appear to have moved in the opposite direction. Apparently,
exposure to a course with an express focus on the necessity of acknowledging and
celebrating diversity did not alter the belief of many lows that "the values of mainstream
American culture" are what all of their students should learn.

Although there was no difference on the first questionnaire between the responses
of highs and lows to item #7, on the final questionnaire the difference was significant
(p < .03). Item #7 stated, ”Required high school courses should have separate classes for
low-achieving and high-achieving students.” On the first questionnaire almost 37% of
the highs disagreed with this statement, as compared to only 26% of the lows, while on
the final questionnaire the percentages were 43% and 27% for highs and lows
respectively. The negative effects that tracking can have on diverse learners were
addressed in the course readings and lectures. Student responses on the final
questionnaire again suggest that exposure to the course content influenced high scorers'
existing beliefs about tracking, while the beliefs of the low scorers remained essentially
unchanged.

A second item for which I found a significant difference (p < .03) on the final
questionnaire but not on the initial one was Item #11, which stated that "All students
should be taught in English." On the initial questionnaire 40% of the lows and 25% of
highs agreed with the statement, while at the end of the course 33% of the lows agreed, in
contiast to only 12% of the highs. The topic of bilingual education also received
considerable attention in the course readings and lectures. The views of low scorers on

this issue were mostly unchanged. Interestingly, however, although the percentage of

85

high scorers who agreed that all students should be taught in English declined by half,
there was no corresponding increase in the percentage who disagreed with the statement.
This suggests that many of the high scorers shifted to the middle, apparently having
become less clear about their position on this issue.

A third item where a significant difference appeared on the final questionnaire
was item #24, which dealt with how respondents rated the opportunities to learn for
minority, special needs, and impoverished students in each respondent's high school. On
the first questionnaire 41% of the highs and 24% of the lows rated minorities'
opportunities as being poor to fair, but on the final questionnaire 48% of the highs and
23% of the lows gave the same ratings. Apparently, the hi ghs' exposure to the course
material led some of them to re-evaluate how minorities and special needs students had
been treated in their high schools. On the other hand, the perceptions of the lows appear
to have been unchanged.

Although the difference between highs and lows on item #4 did not reach
significance (p < .07), it is nonetheless worthy of mention. Item #4 asked students
whether they thought it was impractical to tailor instruction to meet the needs of different
pupils. Among the hi ghs, the percentage of students disagreeing the statement increased
from 56% on the pre-questionnaire to 69% on the post-questionnaire. Among the lows,

- the percentage of students disagreeing decreased, albeit slightly, from the pre- to the post-
questionnaire (from 47% to 45%). The importance of adapting instruction to
accommodate the learning needs of diverse learners was a dominant theme in the course
through the entire semester. Apparently, the course enabled more of the highs to realize
that meeting the unique needs of individual students was practical, whereas not as many
of the lows came to this realization.

Perhaps the most revealing differences that I found between highs and lows were
in their responses to the last item on the questionnaire. Item #25 asked the participants

whether or not they believed that minorities, special needs, and impoverished students

86

continue to face unequal opportunities to learn in school. On the initial questionnaire,
about 56% of the lows and 70% of the highs expressed the belief that opportunities are
unequal, while about 33% of the lows and 20% of the highs asserted that opportunities
are equal. These differences were not statistically significant. On the final questionnaire,
however, 59% of the lows and 96% of the highs believed that opportunities were unequal.
Quite surprisingly, the lows who still believed that opportunities are equal actually
increased to 37%; in contrast, none (0%) of the highs continued to believe that
opportunities are equal. These differences on the final questionnaire were highly
significant (p < .00000). Explanation of the inequalities that have existed in the
educational system for minorities and special needs students was a major focus
throughout the course, one that was reiterated again and again in a variety of ways
through readings, lectures, and lab section discussions (see Appendix A). Considering
that this issue was given such extensive treatment throughout the semester and that high
scorers and low scorers were all exposed to the same information, the fact that more than
one-third of the lows still held to their belief that everyone has equal opportunities to
learn in school while none of the highs retained this belief seems to support my
hypothesis that students' racial attitudes mediate what they learn from a course on
diversity.

My examination of the group gain scores for each of the six previously-discussed
items on the final questionnaire seems to provide further support for my hypothesis. If
students' racial attitudes are related to what they appear to learn from the course, one
would expect students with more favorable attitudes (high scorers) to demonstrate more
change in the desired direction than those with less favorable attitudes (low scorers). As
illustrated in Table 4.5, on each of the six items where I found the greatest difference
between highs and lows on the final questionnaire, the views of students who entered the
course with the most favorable racial attitudes did, in fact, evidence more movement in

the desired direction than did students who entered with less favorable attitudes. In fact,

 

87

the views of students with less favorable racial attitudes appeared to have been little
affected by the course content and demonstrated little or no positive change over the

SCIDCSICI'.

Table 4.5 Change Scores for Highs and Lows on Selected ABCD Items

 

Low
ABCD Item &Time IScoirers IChange Scorers Change I Fvalue p

 

4. It rs impractical for teachers to tailor instruction to the unique interests ad abilities of different students.

 

Pre-questionnaire 5.354 5. 127

 

Post-questionnaire 5.979 .625 5.327 .200 4.138 .018

 

 

 

7. Required high school courses should have separate classes for low- and high-achievin students.

 

Pre-questionnaire I 4.809 4.451

 

 

 

Post-questionnaire I 5.234 .425 4.216 -.235 4.308 I .015

 

8. The mainjob of the teacher is to transmit the values of the mainstream American culture.

 

Pre-questionnaire 5.596 4. 529

 

 

Post-questionnaire 5.957 .361 4.686 . 15 7 .071 .0

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

11. All students shouldbetaughtinEnglish __
Pre-questionnaire I 3.936 I | 3.327

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I
Post-questionnaire | 4.234 | .298 | 3.291 -.036 1.915 |.151

 

24. How would you rate theopportunities to learn that minority, special needs. and impoverished
students experienced in your high school?

 

Pre-questionnaire 2.244 1.9% I

 

 

fl l
Post-questionnaire 2.366 .122 1.896 I 483 3.43 |.035

 

 

 

 

 

 

25. (paraphrased) Do you think minority, special needs, and impoverished students continue to face
unemial opporttmities to learn?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre-questionnaire I 2. 93—3 I r | 2.45 | I
Post-questionnairel 3.600 | .66 | 2.396 | -.057 I 16.36 |.000

 

 

Course Records

At the conclusion of the course, I analyzed the course records of all students (i.e.,
attendance, exam grades, and course grades) to determine whether there were any
important differences in the attendance or academic performance of high students and
low students. While students' responses to some of the items on the ABCD questionnaire
indicate that the course appeared to influence the views of highs considerably more than
those of lows, my examination of students' exam scores suggest that there was no
difference between the two groups in terms of their attendance and academic
performance. Specifically, my analysis of the exam scores revealed that highs and lows
did not differ in their performance on the midterm and final (See Table 4.6). Although

88

highs did receive the highest scores on the two exams and the lows received the lowest
scores, the difference between the groups was not statistically significant. The midterm
and final each consisted of 40 multiple choice questions worth 80 points and 2-5 essay
questions worth a total of 20 points. Both exams drew heavily on the factual information
presented in the readings and lectures, and students' essay responses also had to be

supported with specific references to the readings and lectures.

Table 4.6 Mean Scores for Attendance, Midterm Exam, Final Exam, and Final Grade

 

While exam scores are certainly not the most reliable indicator of student learning, if one
were to assume for a moment that these two exams do provide some indication of what
the students may have Ieamed in the course, it would appear that lows may have learned
about as much in the course as did highs, a situation, if it were in fact true, that would be
contrary to what has been reported in earlier studies (Bennett, Niggle, & Stage, 1990;
Ross & Smith, 1992).

My quantitative analysis of course records further revealed no difference in the
attendance patterns of lows and highs. In fact, highs actually missed classes more
frequently than did lows. This would seem to contradict the assumption that those with
less favorable attitudes toward minorities are likely to express resistance to multicultural
course content by missing classes more frequently. Highs and lows also did not differ on
the final grades they received for the course.

Qualitative Data

I collected qualitative data only for the 28 volunteer students. As explained in the

previous chapter, I selected 14 of these 28 volunteers (seven with high QDI scores and

seven with low QDI scores) to be my target students. I then interviewed these target

 

89

students at the beginning and at the end of the course, and also at approximately two-
week intervals throughout the semester. In this section I will report first the patterns that
I observed in my analysis of the pre- and post-interviews with the target students. Then I
will present a close-up look at three selected target students, drawing on data from the
intervening interviews, as well as from the pre- and post-interviews.
Target Students

One of my research questions focused on how students with more favorable racial
attitudes might be similar to and different from students with less favorable attitudes.
While this question was answered to some extent in my eariier discussion of the QDI
responses of high scorers and low scorers, my analysis of the pre- and post-interviews
with the fourteen target students (see Table 4.7) revealed some additional interesting
similarities and differences between highs and lows in several broad areas: students'
background experiences, their beliefs about the education of minorities, the apparent

impact of the course on the students, and their reactions to being interviewed.

Table 4.7 Target Students

 

_lTi—Sc ghorers Low orers
Cindy Bill
Ernest Bob

Judy Claire
Karen Jan
Kathy Jill
Terri Joy
Tina Kate

 

 

 

 

Bac und ri ces
During the first interview (see Appendix D), the target students were asked a
number of questions about their background and their previous interracial experiences, in

addition to questions about diversity issues. In analyzing their responses to these

90

questions for patterns of similarity and difference between highs and lows, I was able to
identify several categories of background experiences which appeared to be important for
understanding the two groups of students. These categories were community
characteristics, friendships with minorities, and awareness of racism and discrimination.
Although the data supporting these categories were drawn primarily from the first
interview, a couple of students made relevant comments in the final interview which
were also considered in my analysis.

Community characteristics. Eleven of the 14 target students (six lows and five
highs) came from communities that were at least 95% White, according to 1990 census
data. In most cases, therefore, the schools that the students attended were not very
diverse racially. One of the low students and two of the high students came from three
different small cities that were each about 80-85% White and from 10-15% Black.
However, the low student, because of housing patterns in the 'city, attended a high school
that was virtually all White. The two high students, on the other hand, each attended a
high school that was very racially diverse. The fact that most of the low-scoring students,
as well as most of the high-scoring students, came from communities that were very
similar in their racial composition would seem to suggest that this factor alone is not a
reliable predictor of students’ racial attitudes.

Friendships with racial minorities. Although all students reported having at least
a few racial minorities in attendance at their high schools, highs reported having more
friendships with individuals from different racial groups than did lows, and they also
reported higher quality friendships. During the first interview, students were asked to
think of friendship as having three levels: Level Three being their closest friends, those
whom they confide in and spend a lot of time with; Level Two being their casual friends,
those whom they do things with or go out with owasionally; and Level One being their
acquaintances. Only two of the low students reported having a Level Three (close) friend

from a different racial group (and coincidentally, in each case the friend was a Native

91

American). The other five low students reported having no Level Three friendships with
individuals from a different racial group, and four of these five also reported no Level
Two friendships either. In contrast, only one of the high students indicated that he had no
close friendship with a person of a different race. (This student did have a close Arab
friend, but Arabs are generally considered to be of the White race.) The six remaining
high students all reported having at least one interracial friendship at Level Three and
numerous friendships at Level Two. These data parallel and would seem to corroborate
the pattern I observed in students' responses to the QDI, where highs were significantly
more likely than lows to report having a friendship network that was racially-mixed.
Although the data I collected do not enable me to determine whether highs have more
interracial friendships because they have more favorable racial attitudes or whether they
have more favorable racial attitudes because they have more interracial friendships, they
do suggest that there is a strong relationship between the two variables.

Awareness of racism and discrimination. Despite the similarities in the racial
makeup of their communities and schools, at the beginning of the course, highs showed
greater awareness than lows of racial prejudice and discrimination in their hometowns
and in the schools they attended. For several of the low students, prejudice and
discrimination were things that occurred elsewhere, but in their communities and in their
schools they contended that everyone was treated the same, that a person's race didn't
matter. Jill claimed that "in my school, it didn't make any difference what you were or
who you were. It didn't make any difference” (Jill 201-199,201). Similarly, Kate
contended that all students in her school were treated the same.

I don't feel like anyone was like treated different just because they think that, like,

guys are better in math and science than girls. That was never the casein my

schools. I thought that everyone was taught the same, and if you needed help,
then they were there to help you, but they didn't look upon you as like being dumb
if you did need help.

So you don't think minorities have unequal opportunities?

That's the same, too. Our school was, like, right by Detroit. We had some Black

kids and we had some White kids and we had Chinese and Latinos, and we had all

races and everything so that was the same for that, too. I mean, everyone's put
together and no one's segregated. [Kate 207-89, 93]

92

Bill echoed these sentiments in his response to a question about the reasons for lower
minority school achievement:
. . . it's hard to say discrimination, because I don't see how a teacher could, like,

openly discriminate against a student, so I don't really know.
You haven't seen evidence of any teacher discrimination against students of any

type?

No, never. [Bill 131-152,154]

Claire firmly believed that everyone has equal opportunities and that discrimination is not
a problem either in schools or in society. When asked to explain the lower school
achievement of minorities, she responded, "I don't think it's because they've been taught
less or something to that effect 'cause, like I said before, everybody's got the same
opportunity, I believe" [Claire 211-84].

While the three other low students acknowledged that racism and discrimination
might be problems for racial minorities, their beliefs in this regard tended to be both
tenuous and tentative. Bob, for instance, averred that racism and discrimination has
handicapped racial minorities in this society and that it has also served to depress
minority school achievement. At the same time, however, he expressed the contradictory
notion that minorities have equal opportunities to learn, except in certain places where
schools may be inadequately funded, and regarding funding he went on to say, "the
opportunities may not have been equal, but I've seen that minorities and special needs do
have a lot of opportunities now to go to college, and there's financial support and
special--, so I think that's equaling it out” [Bob 127-140]. Though acknowledging the
historical presence of racism and discrimination, he seemed to underestimate the depth
and breadth of its continuing impact. Asked to explain the lower school achievement of
minority pupils, Jan suggested that the attitudes of teachers and administrators might
serve to inhibit minority achievement. She commented, "Maybe they think that if you're
a minority, you can't do as well" [Jan 128-168]. She admitted, however, that she was
merely speculating, and she did not appear very confident in this belief. Also addressing

the question of lower minority achievement, Joy posited that the prejudice of teachers

93

might be a factor. ”I think a lot of teachers--, I don't know if it's like consciously or not,
but I think they gravitate more to the White children because they're the same as them”
[Joy 128-85]. Interestingly, Joy saw the prejudice as a predilection for White children
rather than as an aversion to minority children. White teachers gravitate to White
children because ”they're the same as them," suggesting that their doing so is both natural
and understandable. Joy seemed to attempt to further soften the image of the teachers'
prejudice with her assertion that it was ”Not conscious prejudice. I think it's unconscious.
I don't think a teacher would on purpose single a--, like, gravitate to the White people”
[Joy 128-87]. While she acknowledged the existence of prejudice, she did not appear to
be too comfortable with it, nor did she show a good understanding of its true nature.

In contrast to the low students, the high students generally seemed to be much
more cognizant of the problems of prejudice and discrimination in their schools and
communities. Tina, for instance, demonstrated not only an awareness of the differential
treatment that minority students received from teachers but also an understanding of the
depth and breadth of the problem of racial prejudice. When asked about how minorities
were treated in school, she responded,

They get talked down to. It's not the material; it's the way it's presented, and that

again is based on just observation, I guess really, but it seems like they're talked

down to, just like, 'Well, you're not smart enough to understand if I do this quick

and fast in normal language, so I've gotta be nice and sweet.” [Tina 127-181]

A short while later our conversation proceeded as follows:

So, if the teachers weren't prejudiced, then the minorities and poor students would

have equal opportunities?

Or more equal, yeah. Probably not still equal because our society--, tlrat'll be nine

gabillion years down the road, just because of society, but I think if teachers are

less prejudiced, the students will have more opportunities.

What does society have to do with it?

Because that comes to where the prejudice comes in. Teachers aren't gonna not

be prejudiced for a while unless they've been raised to not be prejudiced, and in

our society that's very, very difficult to do.

Why?

Just because it is. I mean, no matter how--, even my prejudices that I have, my

family has tried very, very hard to make us non-prejudiced. I mean, they have,

and society makes it very difficult with the stereotypes that society puts out and
that you're in everyday to not have some biases. [Tina 127-201,203,205]

94

Karen was also cognizant of the differential treatment that minority students received
from teachers.

. . . part of our problem is that there are teachers that are unfair, in general, in the
classroom to minorities.

What are you basing that on?

I've had teachers that have been unfair to minorities that--

But I thought there weren't minorities at your school?

There were, actually. There were three Black children in my class, and I can say
that the teachers sometimes were not fair to them. I mean, you could see--

Can you give me an example?

Well, there's a lot of prejudice, and sometimes there are prejudiced statements
made and, a lotta times they weren't called on, and it still exists; I mean, it hasn't
gone away. [Karen 128-166,168,170,174]

Judy spoke of culturally biased tests and prejudiced teachers as being major contributing
factors to the lower achievement of minority students, and Kathy also expressed the belief
that prejudice was a factor.

Two of the high students reported that they had not personally witnessed evidence
of racism and discrimination in their high school, but both students were aware of their
presence in the larger community. Cindy, first of all, commented that

. . . it was not in my school, but I have experienced it at the job I worked at.

How so?

Our staff that I worked with was—, I wouldn't say predominately White 'cause I

don't think it was. I think it probably was just about equal, I would say, and you

could just see how some of the workers that were White would treat some of the

Black customers or the way some of the Black workers would treat some of the

White customers, you know, but I'm just saying in my school, there wasn't that

kind of discrimination. From experiencin' that at my job, you know, I'm just

assuming that it would be at other schools since there is so much of it. I would

assume there is some at other schools. [Cindy l31-120,122]
Terri's comment that she was not aware of racism and discrimination in her high school
was rather surprising to me. She attended a high school which she described as being
fifty percent minority, and her remarks elsewhere in the first interview, as well as in the
final interview, clearly indicate that she was one of the students in the class who were
most experienced with and knowledgeable about racism and discrimination. For
example, in the first interview Terri observed,

My friends are from all different backgrounds, all different races, and when I sit

in the class and when we talk in our lab, I hear people saying, "I've never met
anyone that's different than me. My school was all White. My school was all

 

— _

95

this.” Well, my school was very diverse. I Ieamed all that--, I mean, I just think

that a lot of the experiences I've had and knowing what to do and what not to do,

I've learned definitely not to stereotype people, and I see so many people doing it

here. It's because they don't know at all, and I think that I've been educated well

enough. I mean, I just think that I have had enough experiences right now that a

lot of these things we read about, a lot of these things I have already known, I've

already experienced, but there's a lot of people in the class that are looking at this
for the first time, and they're just thinking, "Oh, my gol." It's so new to them, but

to me it's not new at all. [Terri 131-60]

During her final interview Terri offered a more pointed statement of her awareness:

I think that it's very apparent and there are still a lot of people who do have racist

beliefs, and there are people who are discriminated against. I do think it's getting

better. I mean, I do think that people are waking up and finally, actually, like
younger generations, are seeing it, but I think that it is something that is very alive

today. [Terri 426121]

Only one of the high students, Ernest, reported no awareness of racial prejudice in his
high school or community, although at one point he did hypothesize that maybe White
teachers give less attention to and expect less from Black students.

Although several low-scoring students claimed that racism and discrimination
were not problems in their home communities, given the fact that their communities were
so similar to those of hi gh-scoring students in terms of their racial composition, what
seems more likely-and the data reported above would appear to bear this out--is that high
students had a greater awareness of and sensitivity to instances of racial minorities’
receiving differential treatment. Also, while highs and lows alike generally reported
some degree of awareness of racism and discrimination in the larger society beyond their
home communities, highs tended to display a greater breadth and depth of understanding
of these problems, as illustrated in the quotations cited earlier in this section. I think
again that this may well relate back to the fact that highs tended to bring to the course a
broader base of interracial experiences. It is possible that having this broader base
enabled them to develop broader perspectives on various issues of diversity.

Beliefs about Qe flucation of Mingrities
Minorities' opportunities to learn. At the beginning of the semester only three of

the seven low students expressed the belief that minority pupils have unequal

 

96

opportunities to learn in school, and this number was unchanged at the end of the
semester. On the other hand, six of the seven high students initially believed that
opportunities were unequal, and all seven expressed this belief at the end of the course.
The low students' belief that minority pupils had equal opportunities to learn seemed to
be based exclusively on what they themselves had seen and experienced during their own
schooling. For example, Bill asserted that ”I've never been in a situation where I've seen
people were discriminated against or anything like that (Bill 131-118),” and Claire
explained her belief that opportunities were equal by saying,
I don't believe that these people that are listed--the minorities, special needs, girls,
etc.»face unequal opportunities. I'm a girl. My major is math, sol kind of like
prove it wrong in a sense there. If somebody has a will, then they'll go as far as
they want to, and whether a person does go far, it's not they don't have the
opportunity. I just believe it's because they don't want to. [Claire 211-70]
When asked whether she thought minorities had equal opportunities to learn in school,
Kate responded, ”I think they do 'cause, I mean, they're all in the same classes" [Kate
207-91]. She seemed to believe that since minority pupils were in the same classrooms
as majority pupils, then they must have equal opportunities to learn. Another low
student, Bob, also expressed this belief and provided the following rationale for it:
. . . if you have a teacher that's teaching to a class and, you know, it's half Whites
and half people of other cultures or Black, and they're giving out the information.
I guess everybody has an equal opportunity to study and read their books and take
in the information as anyone else, and everybody has equal opportunity to search
out that education. [Bob 127-146]
The comments of these low students suggest that they were oblivious to many subtle
ways in which minorities experience inequalities in the American educational system. In
addition, although several of the low students admitted the possibility that minority
students might face unequal opportunities in other schools (but not in their schools), they
relied primarily on their perceptions of their own experiences. In other words, they
placed more credence in their own personal experiences than in the reported experiences
of others. Specifically, Bill commented that he had never seen people discriminated

against, Claire felt that because she was a girl and she hadn't experienced discrimination,

97

then it couldn't be true that girls were discriminated against, and Kate believed that
minorities had equal opportunities to learn because she had not seen unequal
opportunities at her school. Only a couple of the low students seemed to acknowledge
the possibility that their experiences (and their interpretation of those experiences) may
have been limited.

In contrast, the high students, while also drawing primarily on their personal
schooling experiences, were nevertheless able to identify specific ways in which
minorities' educational opportunities were not equal. For example, one student
commented,

. . .yeah, I believe people do face unequal opportunities. I'm not saying that about
everybody. I'm saying, you know, it does happen.

What are some examples of these unequal opportunities that you're thinking of?
For one, how in an AP course is there all White kids and then in a lower class all
Black kids? I don't understand, you know. What's the explanation for that?
[Cindy 506-1 12,114]

‘

And another student identified other ways that minorities may face unequal opportunities
to learn.

A lot of tests that measure your competency sometimes don't ask questions that
are fair. I know they are revising the SAT. I've read a lot about that, but I
remember there was a big controversy about that. [Karen 128-146]

There's questions that are partial to--, I can't think of a specific example right
offhand, but there are questions that are partial to White males, and, you know,
students that are of color or European or Asian don't have the same experiences
and couldn't answer the questions as easily. [Karen 128-152]

UK, are there any other ways or reasons that these groups have unequal
opportunities to learn?

Well, I think a lot of schools that need funding, such as Benton Harbor, is mainly
minority, and I don't think that that's fair. There's a lot of violence problems
there, and I think if they had more f unding--, I mean, that's not fair to everyone
who goes to that school. [Karen 128-156]

Another way that high students differed from lows was in their willingness to believe that
unequal opportunities exist even though they had not personally witnessed them.

I've only had experiences with the female part, but I think it holds true for all
groups. Math and science are considered the two hardest subjects. I mean, in
general, and I really think that people who are impoverished or minorities or
female really get talked down to when it comes to those subjects. I don't know
why. I don't like it, but I've noticed it, I mean, personally, that they're not taken
as seriously, they're not taken as, well, they can do this on the high level that I'm
teaching it because they can, period. Oooh! It drives me nuts. [Tina 127-163]

98

Kathy showed a similar willingness to believe that minorities' opportunities to learn were

unequal.

I think that they probably are not pushed as hard as everyone else.

Why not?

I don't know. Because of stereotypes. [Kathy 202-176, 178]

. . . [minorities] get that attitude, maybe not as directly, but in the way the teacher
treats 'em and in the way they look at 'em and stuff like that, and in the way they
act towards them. . . .

This difi'erent treatment that you're saying minorities get, what makes you think
that's true?)

What makes me think that's true? Just from what we talked about in this class,
actually. I can't honestly remember seeing that.

But you still believe it?

Yeah, just because I see what happens everywhere else. [Kathy 202-182,]84]

Even though she had not seen actual evidence of unequal treatment in school, based on
what she had seen elsewhere, she readily believed that it also occurs in schools.

In addition, the high students demonstrated more awareness/knowledge of the
educational disparities beyond the confines of their particular school system, as the
following exchange with Judy indicates:

I don't think they have equal opportunities to learn.

0K, what makes you think that?

Well, you know, just the studies they've done about the SAT and the ACT. I
believe it's changing and getting better, but I believe that typical education in
America is geared towards the White male, because when they started teaching in
the United States, that was what--, that's who they were teaching. They didn't
care about the girls. They didn't care about any of the races or cultures. All they
cared about was the White males. . . . [Judy 204-100, 104]

In some of her comments Tina also demonstrated an understanding that the problem is a
national one.

Do you think that's minority, special needs, poor students have unequal
opportunities to learn in schools?

Yes, I do based on teachers' personal prejudices towards whatever the child may
have been categorized as. The American school system is set up primarily for the
middle class White student--male, and if you're not that level, then you're
automatically gonna be biased against. The tests are gonna be White-biased, the
texts are gonna be White-biased, and the way the teachers teach is gonna be
White-biased. Middle-class White- biased. Therefore, that automatically puts
that student at a disadvantage, and puts them at a lower level of being able to
achieve what they want to achieve. They're gonna have to work twice as hard to
get there. [Tina 422-160]

 

99

As a final example, Terri recognized and was distressed by the inequities experienced by
minority students in our inner cities.

. . . in a lot of the readings that we had to do, like in my 188 last semester, we read

a lot about inner-city Chicago, inner-city New York. . . . kids were going to

school in an old roller skating rink, and I mean, just like all these things that

happened to these people, and sometimes because they are of lower class and
because they don't have enough money and then again because of their
background, the color of their skin, they're getting put in these schools that--,
because the predominantly White parents don't want them in their school, and to
me that is so ridiculous because, I mean, I just don't even see how people could do

that. [Terri 131-106]

Explanation of lower minority achievement. In the first interview, when students
were asked to explain why most minority students don't do as well in school as most
White students, I observed some interesting similarities and differences in the
explanations that they offered. Table 4.8 offers a summary of the explanations that the
target students offered for the lower school achievement of minority students. (The
numbers in parentheses indicate how many of the seven students in group mentioned a
particular response.) Explanations which related to characteristics within the individual
or within the individual's home life I classified as personal (or trait) explanations.
Explanations which related to school factors or other factors outside the individual I
classified as situational explanations (Cushner, McClelland, & Safford, 1992). Whether
prospective teachers attribute lower minority achievement primarily to personal factors or
. primarily to situational factors is an important consideration because their attributions are
likely to determine how they will respond to the problem. As Table 4.8 illustrates, low
students were considerably more likely to offer personal explanations than were high
students, and conversely, lows were less likely to offer situational explanations. In fact,
situational explanations were offered only five times by the low students, and three of
those explanations came from the same student. Clearly, therefore, the lows were
inclined to view the causes of lower minority school achievement as lying in the students

or in their families. Kate, for example, identified students' personal motivation and their

home life as the primary explanations for lower minority achievement.

100

Table 4.8 Explanations of Lower Minority School Achievement

 

 

 

Low Students High Students
(5) home background (4) home background
(2) low self -expectations (2) personal motivation

Personal Explanations (2) heredity

(1) being/feeling different
(1) Black culture

(1) personal motivation

 

 

(2) teacher attitudes (3) teacher attitudes
Situational Explanations ( 1) teacher expectations (2) discrimination
(1) test bias (2) school quality
(1) school quality (1) teacher expectations
(1) test bias

 

 

 

 

I guess it's on their own personal, like, striving for doing the best I mean, maybe
there's a study showing that Whites strive harder or--- . . . . Maybe home life, or I
don't know. I mean, if kids are poor, maybe they just don't have like the life at
home that parents are like pushing you to do better and maybe they just don't care.
Maybe they see their parents as failing and themselves being like, well, if my
parents failed, then why should I even try. I might not get anywhere in life.
There's no use in trying. I mean, kids might have that attitude. [Kate 207-
101,105]

Claire likewise partly attributed the lower achievement to the students' home life, but she
also attributed it partly to heredity.

I think a lot of it has to do with home background. They're not intending to bring
problems to school with them, but if they're constantly on their mind at home,

they're going to affect their ways in class. . . . I don't know, maybe it's
hereditary and the genes don't carry through to cany a lot of information.
[Claire 204-7684]

Finally, Bob offered low expectations-on the part of teachers, society, and the students
themselves--as an explanation, and he also suggested that Black culture played a role in
low school achievement.

I think a possibility could be that the effect of racism and prejudice towards
people, you know, lowers your expectations for yourself, so it's kinda like the
self-fulfilling prophecy, you know, that's put out throughout society, you know,
on television, so that perhaps they' re not expected by teachers or society to do as
well and therefore they don't. Also, I can see having a big effect rs that in Black
culture today education isn't stressed as much as looks and material things like
that, so they're, you know, not putting as much effort into education or desiring to
and therefore maybe possibly reducing test scores and their performance.

[Bob 127-152]

101

Despite his mention of low societal expectations, Bob still seems to believe that most of
the explanation is to be found within the students themselves, or at least within their
culture.

Although many of the high students also made reference to personal (trait) factors
in their explanations, as a group they seemed to be more aware of the various situational
factors that have been associated with lower minority achievement. Whereas only three
of the low students made any reference to situational factors in their explanations, all but
one of the high students did so in their explanations. Tina, for example, cited teacher
attitudes and school quality as primary factors.

I think for one, teachers probably spend less time. It goes back to the stereotypes

that, well, this person is poor, this person is a certain minority, and they're not as

smart or whatever. That goes back to that, but I also think that kids who are
poor--, if it's a poorer community, they're gonna have poorer quality schools

'cause there's not as much money for funding, for books, for whatever, and so

they're gonna get a poorer education, and I mean, they're not gonna perform as

well if they take a standardized test because they haven't had the background for it

'cause there's not the money for the background for it. I think that's the big one.

[Tina 127-213]

Cindy commented that “the first thing that comes to mind to me would probably be
discrimination. You know, the White students are given more attention by the teachers”
[Cindy 131-134]. Finally, Karen attributed the lower achievement to discrimination and
home background factors.

They aren't given as much attention.

By whom?

By teachers. By society. A lot of minorities are single-parent families, more so

than White children, and I think that the single-parent families can't devote as

much time to their children as they need to, and that creates a problem.

[Karen 128-176,178]

Teaching minority students. During the final interview I asked all of the target
students the following question: ”Given the fact that poor minority students don't do as
well in school as White students, if you were teaching poor minority students, would you
have to do anything differently to be effective with them?" Although on this question the
responses of highs and lows were not as sharply dissimilar as on other questions, some

differences did emerge. First of all, four of the low students expressed the belief that the

102

minority students should receive the same instruction as everyone else. For example, in
response to the above question, Bill replied, "I don't think so. Just treat everyone the
same" [Bill 428-131]. Similarly, Jill responded, "I would try the same thing with
everybody. I don't see any diff erence" [Jill 426—138]. Another of the low students,
Claire, commented,
. . . as far as them being minority, I think again it’s just coincidental because
there’s, again, White people that, you know, don’t do as well either. Not
everybody can be on top.
So you wouldn ’t see yourself doing anything dtflerently with minorin low
achievers than you would with White low achievers?
No. [Claire 429-74,?6]
In Claire's opinion, the fact that minority students are more likely to be low achievers
than White students is merely ”coincidental.” Consequently, she sees no reason to teach
minority students any differently. Another low student, Joy, acknowledged that minority
students might require extra attention, but she felt that giving some students extra time
would be inequitable to the others.
So you 'd give the same attention to the ones who aren't achieving as you would to
those who are achieving?
Um hmm. I would try to.
But if they aren't achieving, don 't they need more attention?
They do, but then you're cheating the children who are excelling, you know, if
you're taking away their time and you're giving more to these children.
[Joy 428-13 1,133]
Only one of the low students, Bob, made a statement suggesting that he might approach
the teaching of minority students somewhat differently.
I would have to find out what level they are at and what their things are that they
relate to, I guess, and what their interests are. And bring some of their culture
into it so they feel proud about that. [Bob 426-140]
Thus, for most of the low students, the fact that minorities' school performance has
historically been lower than that of White students would have little, if any, impact on
how they would go about teaching their minority students. Although one of the high
students , Ernest, also expressed the belief that all students should be treated the same, he
appeared to be a bit more sensitive to the fact that minority students might have difierent

needs. He asserted,

103

Obviously I'd have to change a little bit if a student's needs are different. But on
the whole, as far as one class versus another, I'd expect the same out of both
groups. I guess and I wouldn't change my style. Like I wouldn't be easier on one
class than the other just because they have it tougher, I guess. [Ernest 425-1 14]

In contrast to the low students, most of the high students seemed to believe that in
order to address the historical disparities in minority school achievement, they would
have to do something different for minority students in their classrooms. High students
appeared to be much less likely to believe that all students should be taught the same.

For example, one student responded,

Well, I think all kids learn differently, so I think to teach everybody in your class
effectively, you're gonna have to use different ways of teaching. I think to be
effective you just use a lot of different teaching techniques and know where your
students are, 'cause if you know where your students are and what the problems
are, then you can compensate for it. I mean, I can't say that I know how I would
have to teach differently, you know, to get the same results with minority students
as non-minority students but--- [Judy 425-158]

Terri offered a response that was very much like Judy's.

I would probably just teach how it's going to be more productive to them. I mean,
maybe if they haven't got the attention that they've needed from teachers
whatever, or they may be behind or just something like that, I think I would have
to, you know, find what it is that's gonna have them, you know, find hope again
in the school system, or find hope in learning, and just kind of go from there. I
don't really know anything too specific. [Terri 426-83]

Although she expresses it less clearly than the previous two individuals, Cindy seemed to
hold a similar idea about teaching minority students.

I was gonna say, you know, not to treat anybody differently but then again, I
know we had talked about in class that teaching fairly--, or equally equals fair or
something. I can't remember exactly what it was, but about just because you're
teaching them fair, doesn't mean it's equally, or whatever that was. That you treat
them and teach them to what is fair to them. To their learning ability.

[Cindy 506-88]

Explaining what she would do with minority students, Karen said that she would do

"probably whatever needs to be done” [Karen 427-79]. Finally, Tina also indicated that

she would endeavor to identify and then address the particular needs of each individual.
If you were teaching poor minority students, what kinds of things would you have
to do difi’erently, to be eflective with them?

I don't know because it depends on what the problem is. . . . That's probably
where I would get stuck because I would wanta talk to every single kid that's

 

104

having problems in my classes and find out what was going on, why they were

having problems, as far as what I could do to help them, blah, blah, blah-~which is

never gonna happen because there's not enough hours in a day. (Brief pause) I

really don't know. It would really depend on the type of school, the situation,

what was going on with the kids, if it was a behavioral problem, if it was a

motivational problem. [Tina 422- 140]

In analyzing the target students' responses to the question about teaching minority
students, I also observed an interesting but somewhat disturbing similarity between the
highs and lows. As illustrated most cleariy in the comments of Judy and Terri above,
none of the students seemed to have any clear ideas about what they could do to bolster
the achievement of minority students, though several did talk about the necessity of
taking pupils' individual needs and differences into account. This circumstance is not
completely surprising, given the fact that these students have not yet begun their teacher
education courses. However, during their semester in CEP 240, students were exposed
not only to the various ways in which common school structures and practices may serve
to depress minority student achievement, but also to a number of strategies for working
effectively with pupils who are culturally different, including using cooperative learning
groups, diversifying the curriculum, giving some students more time or help to complete
their work, and valuing the experiences that the students bring to the learning situation.
Virtually none of these ideas appeared in their responses. Apparently, most of the target
students did not make the connection between what they had learned in the course and
how that learning could be applied in their actual teaching of minorities. This findings
seems to be consistent with Paine's (1990) finding that prospective teachers ”had the
greatest difficulty analyzing and being explicit about the pedagogical implications of
diversity' (p. 11). Or perhaps, also consistent with what Paine reported, when these
students think about teaching minorities, they conceive only of teaching individual
children and not groups.

Immt of @urse
Most important leamings. During the final interview the target students were

asked to identify the three most important things that they felt they had Ieamed from the

105

course. My examination of the students' answers to this question revealed no clear
differences between the responses of highs and lows; the two groups of students seemed
to report learning the same types of things. In particular, all of the students reported
increased awareness of some diversity issues. Table 4.9 briefly summarizes the leamings
identified by each student and illustrates that highs and lows reported similar types of
gains in knowledge and awareness. While self -reports cannot be regarded as reliable
measures of students' knowledge growth, they do suggest that students' perceptions of
what they had learned were very much alike for highs and for lows.

Although highs' and lows' perceptions of what they learned from the course
appeared to be very similar, their perceptions of what they learned about themselves were
quite different. Four of the low students indicated that they had Ieamed nothing about
themselves from the course, whereas all seven of the highs reported some increase in
their self -awareness or self-understanding. One of the purposes of the course was to have
students examine their own attitudes and beliefs in light of the information presented
during the semester; apparently, high students engaged in this kind of self-examination
moreso than low students. For example, in response to the question "Have you learned
any important things about yourself from this class?” Bill, one of the low students,
replied, "Not really” [Bill 428-26]. Jill offered a similar response: ”No. Not for myself.
It's just that I'm just learning more stuff for a teacher. Not really about myself. I pretty
much knew" [Jill 426-14]. In her mind, the content that she had learned related to her as
a teacher but not as a person. A third low student, Jan, was unaware of or just unable to
verbalize whether she had Ieamed anything about herself. She told me, ”I probably did
but either I can't think of it or I can't put it into words. Right now, I don't know" [Jan
429-34]. Claire indicated that the class had not given her any new insights into herself,
only reinforced something that she already knew.

A lot of it emphasized about how I'm willing to give everybody a chance, you

know, whether they're Black or White or tall or short whatever, and it just kind of

emphasized that that's really important; it wasn't really anything new.
[Claire 429-16]

106

Students' responses to the Quick Discrimination Index and the ABCD questionnaire
indicated that the low students were the ones who had the most distance to travel in terms
of developing positive attitudes toward minorities, but the comments of these four
students suggest that the lows may have been the ones who were least affected personally
by the course content Although it is possible, as may have been the case for Jan, that
these students were either unaware of or unable to verbalize what they had learned about
themselves, I think it is more likely that they were not significantly affected in a personal
manner by the course. If they had been affected, why would they be any less aware or
less able than the high students to verbalize their new learrrings about themselves?
Another possibility, of course, is that for some students the personal impact of the course
may not have become apparent to them until weeks or perhaps months afterwards.

In contrast to these four low students, all of the high students identified one or
more ways in which their self awareness or self -understanding had been expanded as a
result of the course. Karen, for example, realized that she needed to think more about her
own values.

Have you learned any important things about yourself in this course?

Pretty much that a lot of my values are values that my parents had and you made

me think about them a little bit more. So it's gonna make me wanta go out there

and try to decide things more on my own, you know. I'm gonna wanta look

things up now before I make a decision.

So you learned to examine your own values?

Yeah, exactly. [Karen 427-8,10]
Terri reported that, in addition to reaffirrning or changing some of the beliefs that she
began the course with, she became aware that she seemed to be more tolerant than many
of her peers.

I think that I've expanded on a lot of things that I believed in before and now I

either believe in them really more or my mind has been changed about different

things. I've found that I seem to be a little more tolerant than a lot of people.

[Terri 426-12]

Tina also became aware of the fact that she was more accepting of diversity than were

many of her classmates.

 

 

Table 4.9 Most Important Learnings
Low Students

107

Hiih Students

 

Bill.

1. learning styles

2. Openedmindtomorepeopleandtowhatpeople
are thinking

3. identifying children with learningdisabilities

Cindy

1. to be more open-minded with diversity issues

2. accepting people for whatever they are and not
discriminating

 

m

l. needtobeawareofthediversityinthe
classroom and all the things diversity requires

2. involve students

3. looking at the person before the label

Ernest a

l. more minority awareness

2. reinforcement of a lot of stuff he already knew

 

3. some issues are big

Clare

1. never assume anything about a child's ability

2. have a complete open mind and give everybody

My
1. about other people's attitudes
2. different ways educators are trying to deal with

 

l. the differences that people can have
2. laws
3. more about learning disabilities

a chance diversity
3. diversity is so apparent in real life 3. different ways to help kids that are labeled
4. lots of interesgrg little facts
in Km

1. pros and cons of inclusive education

2. classroom techniques for including diverse
students

3. how to celebrate diversity in the classroom

 

Jill

I. about ADD and other learning disorders
2. about diversity in general

3. all the commrmitym

My
1. important to celebrate diversity in the classroom
2. laws about inclusion and stuff

 

3. tokeepanopenmind

 

2. everyone is different and we have to treat people
differently
. 3. can't label people because ofthe way they look

 

191 Ian
1. inclusiveness (inclusion) 1. being more sensitive to others' needs
2. discrimination 2. lot of things that she looks at differently
3. communicating with people who are diffaent 3. understanding that in the classroom there are
4. gender issues going to be kids who are different
5. different lifestyles, like gay/lesbian mid
1n
6. labeling
1mg
Kae Ilsa
1. mostly about diversity, learning about different 1. remembering that everyone doesn't come from
c same background

2. beawareofspecialneedskids
3. importanttocooperatewithpeoplewelearn
with

 

 

 

108

. . . I have a lot more experience with multiculturalism and diversity because of
the way I was raised with my mom than a lot of people do. It really shocked me
how naive some people were as far as the biases and the prejudices that still go
on. I've always known that my parents were real big on treating everybody the
same, blah, blah, blah, but I never really realized how different that was from how

a lot of people are raised. [Tina 422-44]

At the end of the course another high student, Cindy, reported that she had become more
confident about her decision to work with special education students.

. . .back in January, going into special ed. and everything, I wasn't positive that I'd

like, you know, special ed. differences like that. I didn't know if I'd be able to

handle it. And now I think I know that I can handle it. [Cindy 506-16]

For Ernest taking the course led to a greater awareness of his feelings about the issues
presented. "It just made me think a little bit about how I really did feel about certain
issues” [Ernest 425-12]. Kathy Ieamed about the importance of keeping an open mind,
and Judy came to the realization that "I just didn't know as much as I thought I did about
the way things are being run in education today" [Judy 425-28].

Although four of the low students reported learning nothing new about themselves
from the course, it is important to note that the other three low students did report
leamings that seem similar to those reported by the seven high students. For example,
Kate reported that she had Ieamed to change her tendency to prejudge people who are
different.

Not to label and treat people the same but then some people different. I don't

know if you understand that, but just not to label anymore. I used to label and [I

Ieamed] just not to do that and to treat people like for who they are and not for

what they look like and how they act. [Kate 421-12]

Bob apparently gained a new awareness of the benefits of interacting with people who
have disabilities or special needs.

I guess the personal and emotional benefits that can come from interacting with

people with disabilities or special needs, you know, like people that are blind or

deaf. It broadens your understanding of the human condition, I guess, and your

compassion for people and respect for people. [Bob 426-32]

While she did not identify specific leamings about herself, Joy seemed very sure that she

had Ieamed things that were going to make her a better person and a better teacher.

109

Yeah, just everything that I'm taking away from here that's making me, one, a
better person, two, more open to differences and changes, and all that's going to
do is help me become, one, a better person, and, two, a better teacher, you know,
and a better mom, too, someday. [Joy 428-26]
The fact that highs in this study were more likely than lows to report learning about
themselves from the course may well be coincidental, but a number of other explanations
seem equally possible. For instance, highs may have been inclined to be more self-aware
than lows, they may have been better able to see connections between the course content
and their personal lives, they may have been more open to the material being presented,
or they simply may have found the course content more personally relevant than the lows
did.

In the final interview students were asked to identify the class sessions which they
considered the most valuable and those they considered the least valuable. My analysis
of student responses to this question revealed few noteworthy differences between highs
and lows. Table 4.10 lists the class sessions which highs and lows identified as most and
least valuable. (The numbers in parentheses indicate the number of students who
mentioned each class session.) "The F.A.T. City" video, which dealt with strategies for
working with students with learning disabilities, was rated by eleven of the fourteen
studentsufive highs and six lowsuas one of the most valuable class sessions. No other
session was mentioned by more than five students. In identifying the class sessions
which they considered most valuable, high students mentioned five sessions which were
not cited by the lows, while the lows mentioned three sessions not cited by the highs.
There were eight sessions that were named by students in both groups as being valuable.
As for the least valuable class sessions, only three sessions were mentioned by students
in each group. High students identified two sessions not identified by lows as being the
least valuable, while the low students identified three sessions not mentioned by the
highs. Perhaps the only noteworthy difference between the two groups of students on this

particular question was that more low students identified more sessions that they

considered not valuable. Among the lows, six different sessions were identified as least

110

Table 4.10 Most/Least Valuable Class Sessions

 

 

Hfgh Students Low Students
(5) "F.A.T. City” video (6) F.A.T. City video
(2) bi/gay/lesbian panel (3) bi/gay/lesbian panel

(2) cooperative learning
(2) role-playing activities
(1) ”Educating Peter" video

(1) cooperative learning
(1) role-playing activities
(3) "Educating Peter” video

 

 

(l) deaf student panel (3) deaf student panel
Most Valuable Sessions ( 1) community panel (2) community panel
(1) blind student presentation (1) blind student presentation
(2) "True Colors” video (1) Riskbreakers video
(1) behavior management (1) "Joey" activity
(1) Windwolf article (1) guest speaker on Hawaii
(1) trust walk
(1) guest speaker on Africa L
(2) bilingual education (2) bilingual education
(1) cooperative learning (2) cmperative learning
Least Valuable Sessions (1) role-playing activities (1) role-playing activities

 

(1) community panel
(1) tntst walk

 

(3) last lab session
(2) lecture on gender issues
(1) bi/gay/lesbian panel

 

valuable a total of eleven times by seven students, whereas among the highs, four

different sessions were identified a total of six times by five students. If this difference

means anything at all, it may suggest that, overall, lows were either less satisfied with the

class sessions or maybe they were just slightly more critical than the highs. These

similarities between the high and low students in terms of the class sessions that they

identified as most and least valuable suggest to me that the two groups were quite similar

in their overall response to the course. They do not support the notion that students with

less favorable racial attitudes responded less favorably to the class.

Feelings about course.

During the final interview I obtained additional evidence

on the students' feelings about the course when I asked them whether they felt as though

they had gotten more or less than they had expected from the course. Five high students

and four low students reported that the course had met or exceeded their expectations (see
Table 4.11). Two highs and three lows indicated either that they had had no set

 

 

111

Table 4.11 Students' Feelings about the Course

 

 

 

 

 

 

High3tudents Low Students
Students who had no definite expectafions Cindy Bob
but were satisfied with course Claire
Kate
Students who had dilTerent expectations Kathy
but were satisfied with course
Students who felt course offered what was Ernest Bill
expected Jan
Students who felt course offered more than Judy Till
what was expected Karen Joy
Terri
Tina

 

 

 

 

expectations for the course or that they had expected something different; nevertheless,
these students all said that they were satisfied with what they had gotten from the course.
The fact that four of the high students, as compared to only two of the low students,
stated that the course had exceeded their expectations could possibly be interpreted as an
indication that high students responded more favorably to the course than did low
students; however, I don't believe the data are strong enough to support such an
interpretation. While I can say for sure that all fourteen of the target students were
satisfied with the course, my data provide me insufficient bases to infer that highs were
more satisfied than lows.

Students' comments about the course were pretty consistently positive. Asked
whether or not she was satisfied with what she had gotten from the course, Claire, a low
student, responded, ”Definitely! Most definitely” [Claire 429-56]. Jill, another low
student, observed, '1 never got what I had expected. I got more than I expected. I only
expected like something and then I got more” [Jill 42680]. A third low student
commented,

I learned a lot. Actually, I didn't really know exactly what the course was really

about going into it. I mean, I just took it pretty much because I needed to take it

and I really didn't know what it was about until like the first day and so, yeah, I

think I learned a lot. [Kate 421-98]

High students were perhaps even more laudatory in their remarks about the class.

 

112

Do you feel you've got more or less than you expected fiom this class?

Oh, a lot more. Easy. I can easily say that. Oh yeah. There was a lot more

information given than I ever thought I would ever get in a semester course in

college. [Tina 422-86]

1 had the following exchange with another high student.

Did you get from this course more or less than you expected to get?

More, I think.

What makes you say that?

'Cause it made me think about things that I didn't think it would. I kinda thought
that I would go in and it would kinda be maybe a rehash of things that I'd heard
about in our racial relations [class], but it really made me think about a lot of
things and about the way that I treat people and just the way that society and the
state and the school system deals with people who are different. [Judy 425-94,96]

A third high student offered another revealing remark about the course:

Last semester I had 8 o'clocks that I would miss because I'd sleep in or whatever.

You know, turn off my alarm or something. This class met two days a week at

8 o'clock and I was there every time, except when I went on vacation one time.

But you know, I never even once thought about skipping this class. I don't know

if that really tells you anything. [Cindy 506—62]

Although some of the data reported earlier suggest that high students and low students
may have come away from the course with different things, my data also suggest that
there were no practical differences between highs and lows in terms of their satisfaction
with the course.

Eflect of being interviewed. Because I wondered whether or not the bi-weekly
interviews would influence students' perceptions of the course or the course material,
during the final interview I asked each student whether they felt that the interviews had
influenced their perceptions of the course. Eleven of the fourteen target students (five
highs and six lows) said that the interviews had had little or no influence on any of their
beliefs. When low students were asked whether talking with me had affected their
perceptions of the course, Jill, for example, responded, "I don't think so. Not too much. I
mean, if it has, it's been in a very minute way” [Jill 426-220]. Claire said, ”As far as my
perceptions of how I looked at an issue, I don't think it changed it” [Claire 429-112].
Kate responded, "No, because you don't really give any opinion on anything" [Kate 421-

230], and Joy answered, “Probably not, 'cause I think people are very set in their ways. I

113

think it made me aware, but I don't think it changed me" [Joy 428-191]. High students
offered similar responses to this question. Tina said, ”I think it makes me think more. I
don't know if it's changed it so much as it's made me think about it more" [Tina 422-230].
Kathy responded, "It may have. Not anything that I'm conscious of, I don't think” [Kathy
506-160]. Cindy and Judy also indicated that they had been pushed to think more but
their actual views had not been changed by the interviews. Karen thought that though she
had become less sure of some of her beliefs, her views had not been changed.

Would you say that at some point talking with me changed your perceptions of
something?

Just that you made me a little bit less sure in some things.

Okay, but I didn't actually change you, though?

Not yet. [Karen 427-121,123]

Only three of the target students felt as though any of their beliefs had been substantially
affected by the interviews. Bob, one of the low students, seemed unsure about the extent
to which he was influenced by the interviews

I'm sure it's had some effect on the issues, because you've questioned me on them
and I hear racial reactions. You're like, "You're sure you think that?" you know.
”Aren't you to blame for that, too?" Sol think that's had an effect on me, more
personally, thinking about it more. And maybe possibly made me a little more
biased in one direction.

I did?

Possibly.

Have I changed any of your perceptions?

It probably hasn't that much. Possibly in causing me to review and rethink about
the different things we did in the class. Made me more aware of it and to think
about it a little more, you know, and put it more in my mind. [Bob 426-

253,255,259]
Terri, one of the high students, was more sure that her views had been influenced by the
interviews.

Did talking with me actually change some of your perceptions?

In some ways I think it did, and in some ways I think that", I don't know. I think
sometimes, like, I couldn't--, there were some things that I really, you know, was
like in the middle. I really didn't know what to say here and there, and I think that
talking with you did help work out a lot of those things, to help me understand,
you know,why I felt that way, but I don't really know. A couple of things were
changed. [Ten'i 426-15'7]

Ernest, another high student, was also pretty definite that his views had been affected by

the interviews.

114

Has talking with me this semester affected your perceptions of the course or the

way you think about any of the issues of the course?

Yeah, I think so.

Can you tell me how?

Well just, I mean, I thought a lot more about the class. I think I've got a lot more

out of the class because of this. This is the only time I'm involved in any type of

discussion about these issues, and that kind of thing kinda makes me think a little

bit and then that makes me maybe reconsider or reaf f irm what I feel. Or it just

kind of makes me think about the course a little bit more.

Okay. You said it makes you think about the ideas more. More in depth. Do you

think it's actually changed the way you thought about any of the issues?

Yeah. In fact, specifically, I recall talking about whether gay/billesbians should

be able to have kids or not. We talked about that and I kinda thought about it, and

then I--not to sound wishy washy--but I kinda rethought about it. You know,

when it was laid out on the table, yeah, you know. Why not? I guess. Whereas it

was just kinda this thing inside me that said, you know, it's kinda wrong. But

there's not really good reasons behind it. [Ernest 425-166,168, 170]
These three students each credited the interviews with changing their perceptions about
something; however, their explanations actually suggest that the interviews merely
stimulated them to think more deeply about the course content and about their beliefs and
then to change their opinions. Bob said that the interviews led him to "review and rethink
about the different things we did in the class,” Teni asserted that "talking with you did
help work out a lot of those things, to help me understand, you know, why I felt that
way," and Ernest felt pushed to "think a little bit and then that makes me maybe
reconsider or reaffirm what I feel." Since the fourteen target students were nearly
unanimous-Jill, a low student, was the only exception-~in saying that they believed that
the interviews had pushed them to think more deeply about the course material and about
their own beliefs, I don't believe that the interviews necessarily affected Bob, Teni, or
Ernest any more than they did the other target students; rather, I believe that these three
students were simply more aware of particular ways in which their views had changed
through the self examination and rethinking that the interviews had stimulated.

During my bi-weekly interviews, with the target students, I made a conscious
effort to question many of the beliefs that the students expressed, continually pushing
them to explain and justify themselves. Although the interviews were not intended to be

an intervention, because they did stimulate more self -examination and more reflection

 

115

about the course content, I believe that the target students may have gained more from the
course than most of the students who weren't interviewed. Ernest (high), for instance,
directly stated, "I think I've got a lot more out of the class because of this" [Ernest 425-
168], and Bob (low) indicated that the interviews "made me more aware of [the content]
and to think about it a little more, you know, and put it more in my mind” [Bob 426-259].
Most of the other target students also made comments suggesting that their involvement
in the interviews had been beneficial. Jan, one of the low students, remarked,

Well, it probably helped in thinking about [issues] more, 'cause I've had to think
about answers I've given or why I think that way, so yeah, and instead of me just
taking it in and maybe not knowing what they were saying, just going home and
coming back next week to the lecture, now I'm forced to think about it.

[Jan 429-]

One of the high students made a very similar comment.

It's helped me to think a lot of my thoughts on things, sol think that does help.
You don't just listen to a lecture and then, you know, take it in and then not really
ever think. Some people, I'm sure, don't ever think about it again. There are
some parts of this class that I've done that, you know. You take it in, but that's it,
you know. So this has helped me to rethink things and not necessarily rethink
them but like just to go over them again. [Cindy 506-178]

Joy, a low student, commented a couple of different times on the value of being
interviewed. Early in the final interview she stated ”...just through talking to you because
you made me, like, realize a lot of things about myself that I probably wouldn't have
realized unless I would have talked to you...." [Joy 4284]. Later in the same interview
she said, "I think it's made me more aware about my views on different races and
different subject areas. You've made me think a lot about myself and just what I thought"
[Joy 428-189]. Kate, another low student, also reported that the interviews had been
helpful to her.

Did the interviews have any impact on how you see the course or how you think
about the issues?

Yeah, in some ways.

How so?

Just 'cause if I say an answer, you kind of come back and say something else or
ask me why, and then I've got to explain it, and it just kind of helps me get in my
head or whatever, like the lesbian/bi/ gay, like that whole subject we talked about.
That kind of changed my thinking. [Kate 421-234,236]

116

Several of the high students also offered insightful comments about ways in which they
found the interviews helpful. Kathy observed that ”it probably makes me think about the
issues more than I would have. Definitely" [Kathy 506-162]. Judy seemed to find value
in having her ideas questioned: "You just brought up different kinds of points and stuff
like that, just different points of view and kind of made me think a little bit, kinda
challenged what I was saying, you know. You challenged my ideas mostly" [Judy 425-
270]. Karen found that having her ideas questioned in the interviews caused her to
examine her beliefs more closely.

So I think you're telling me that when I question you about your beliefs, it makes
you think more deeply about them. Is that what you're saying?

Yeah. Made me think more deeply about it. Why I believe it's right and for what
reasons and where that comes from and what do I have to back it up. [Karen 427-
1 19]

The interviews pushed students to think more deeply about their beliefs and as a result of
this extra thinking, some of them modified some of their beliefs. For example, Terri told
me that her feelings about the acceptability of Black English had changed as a result of
discussing the issue with me.

Was that change because of the class or because of talking to me?

I think talking with you 'cause you kept asking me more questions and asking me
this and, "Well, you're saying this, but you're saying that," you know, just kind of
like I was contradicting myself a lot and a lot of different things, and I think that
when I got back in my room whatever and I thought about it and I realized how
stupid I sounded and I, like, thought about it, you know, all the questions you
asked me and stuff, yeah, I do think that most of it did come from talking to you.
But it came from your thinking about [ inaudible, overlapping talk]

Yeah, my thinking about it [inaudible overlapping talk]

«not my saying you should think this way or---

No, you never said, "You should." You just kept asking me and saying, ”You feel
like this," and with you saying that, you know, it made it like sound [inaudible]
that's how I think whatever, and it bothered me. [Teni 426-159,161,163]

Finally, Tina explained how she thought the interviews had pushed her to become more
engaged with the course material.

Has talking with me this semester afiected either your perceptions of the course
or the way you think about any of the issues covered in the course?

I think it makes me think more. I don't know if it's changed it so much as it's
made me think about it more.

How so?

117

(Pause) Because I knew I was gonna have to talk to you about it, about whatever.
I had to think about it sol could form my own opinion and make rational thought,
most of the time. And in that sense, I don't think it changed what I learned, as far
as it made me explore it more. Sol guess--, I can't spit out what I'm trying to say.
I think it affects not what I thought, but how I thought it. Which doesn't make
any sense whatsoever. (Pause) I think regardless of if I were to talk to you or not,
I would have come out thinking the same way I think.

Okay.

But because I've had to talk to you, I think it deeper than I would have thought,
not talking to you.

So thinking more deeply about things but not changing anything?

Right. But it's made me think about it maybe more. Whereas before I would
have said, "Oh, yep. Good point [and then] store it away for future knowledge.”
This way I said, "Why is it a good point, you know? How is it gonna affect the
way I work? Da dada da.” That applied it. There you go! That's the word!
Talking to you has made me apply what I've leamed!--instead of just storing it
away in some little back comer of my head, going "Oh yup. Interesting. Wow.”
[Tina 422-230,232,234,238]

Thus, though the interviews were not intended to be an intervention, all of the preceding
excerpts strongly suggest that they had considerable effect on the target students' thinking
about the course material. The excerpts further suggest that these students may have been
more deeply affected by their experience in the course than were others in the class who
were not interviewed and who may not have been pushed to think so deeply. It is worth
noting, however, that high students and low students seemed to have reacted similarly to
the interviews.

Response to Black interviewer. All fourteen of my target students were White,
and I wondered whether and to what extent their responses to the interview questions
may have been influenced by my being a Black person. Therefore, I asked each student
this question in the final interview. Low and high students alike told me that my race had
had little or no influence on how they had responded to my questions. For instance, I
had the following exchange with one of the low students:

Did it ever make any dtfierence to you that you were being interviewed by a Black

person?
Uh uh.

Even when we discussed racial issues?

No, not really.

So you 've been honest in expressing your opinions. ?
Yeah. Yeah. [Bill 428-200,202,208]

118

Bob, another of the low students, answered, ”Perhaps on some racial questions, [but] I
don't think that it has too much" [Bob 426-267]. Two of the high students stated more
clearly why they felt my race had not influenced their responses.

Did it ever make any difi’erence to you that you 're being interviewed by a Black
person?

No, it didn't make a difference to me. You're Art and I figure you're here
interviewing me cause you wanta hear my opinions and you don't wanta hear
what I think you think you do. You don't want me to lie about it. I mean, this is
something you're writing a paper about and I think you need me to be as honest as
possible, and I tried to be. [Karen 427-129]

The second high student responded,

No. Cause I figured you'd be just as impartial as I am. I mean if I make racial
slurs, I think maybe you'd take offense to it, but given my attitudes, I wouldn't
think that there should be any cause for tension or anything when discussing
racial issues. [Ernest 425-188]

Another of the high students reported no awareness of being influenced by my race.

I don't think so. It might of, but not that I'm aware of .o I mean, it might of in some
subconscious choice of words or whatever but not any conscious effort on my part
that changed it. [Tina 422-244]

Unlike these five students, however, the majority of the participants admitted that on
some occasions they had felt some uneasiness due to our racial difference, especially
during our early interviews, as the following dialogue with one of the low students

illustrates.

Did it make any dtflerence to you that you were being interviewed by a Black

person?
No.

Why wouldn't it afiect what you think or say?

I don't know. In some ways it does, but then in some ways it doesn’t.

In what ways does it?

Does it? 'Cause I'd feel bad talking about some things, but then other things I
don't really care. I might hold back a little more or something in saying
something.

So you hold back; even now you're holding back?

No, just like at first. [Kate 421-238,246,248,252]

Some of the students had felt uncomfortable because they didn't want to offend me, but
they claimed that they had still been honest in answering my questions. Joy, for example,
another of the low students, made it clear that her discomfort and her concern about

possibly offending me did not stop her from being honest with me.

119

It never mattered to me. I think sometimes when we were talking and stuff, I'd
get uncomfortable, like when [talking] about, like, the Black girls in my hall
whatever. I didn't want you to take offense, you know, because you were Black
whatever, but it wasn't like a big deal to me, at all.
But then what's this concern about me being offended by what you said?
It was concern of me offending you. That's all.
So you 've been honestly telling me about how you feel about things, even the
racial things ?

' Um hmm. I have. [Joy 428-195,197,201]

A few of the students reported some initial uneasiness because they had felt unsure about
how to address me. Terri's comments illustrated this dilemma.

Did it make any diflerence to you that you were being interviewed by a Black
person?

I think at first, because I think today, like, there's different--, somebody wants to
be called African American or Black or whatever, and I think sometimes it's kind
of hard for me because I mean there are a lot of people that, you know, "I'm
American," they'll say, and they don't want to be called African American or
whatever, and so it was kind of hard because I didn't know, like, what to say to
you when we were talking about a lot of those topics whatever, and I would catch
myself saying ”African American” or I would catch myself saying ”Black" and I
didn't know if it would offend you whatever way I said it, so I think that was
really like the only thing. I mean, nothing personal or anything. [Terri 422-165]

I also asked the students if they had ever felt some concern about possibly being viewed
as a bigot because of something that they said to me. Most of the students acknowledged
having felt this concern on occasion, but they generally asserted, particularly the high
students, that it had not deterred them from saying what they thought. Tina made this
latter point very clear in her response to my question.

So you never thought about the fact that you might say something either that
would hurt my feelings or that I might take exception to what you're saying?
Yeah, but it still didn't change the fact that I said it. [Tina 422-246]

Cindy, another high student, offered a similar response.

Were you ever concerned that you might say something which in my mind would
make you a bigot?

I have been concerned about that, but then again, they are my opinions. They're
one person's opinion. And like, I don't know, a few times whatever, like you had
been really argumentative and I thought later, like, Man, I wonder if I offended
him? But they're my opinions, you know. That's a part of me. I'm sorry if it has
offended you. Yeah, I don't want to offend anybody but obviously if I do, I do.
Would you say that you 've been honest with me through it all?

Oh yeah, I've been honest with you. Most definitely. [Cindy 506-197,199]

120

A couple of the low students made statements suggesting that their concern about being
perceived as a bigot sometimes led them to think more carefully about what they said.
For instance, Claire explained,
Any apprehension about saying something that I would interpret as your being a
bigot. Did that ever cross your mind?
Well, a couple of times I think it might have. As far as specific examples, I don’t
know. . . . There were times where I would think of something to say, and then
I’d think, well, is that prejudiced, you know? I don’t know, I guess maybe I just
got to questioning myself because, you know, we’ve just been discussing it. . . .
[Claire 429-130]
Bob also recognized that concerns about being perceived as a bigot might have subtly
influenced his responses or those of other students.
I would assume sociologically tlrere'd be some subconscious pull to be less, you
know, to say yes, I am less prejudiced against Blacks because you're Black or
sometimes a hesitation to be as open about racism or whatever. I think especially
for a student that is more racist.
Concerned about hurting my feelings or being perceived as a bigot or something?
Yeah. [Bob 426-269,27 1]
I don't believe the fact that these low students admitted that they thought more about
some of their responses out of fear of being considered a bigot is necessarily an indication
that their responses were any less honest--at least not consciously so--than those of the
high students. However, their comments do seem to indicate that most of the lows were
more concerned about my perceiving them as being prejudiced than were any of the high
students. As illustrated in some of the preceding examples and in Judy's comments
below, the high students appeared to be more secure in their own beliefs about not being
prejudiced.
Was there any concern about hurting my feelings?
No, not really. I think you're a pretty tough guy. You can take it.
Any concern about me thinking you were a bigot or something for something that
you said?
No, I don't think I'm a bigot, so-- [Judy 425286288290]
Perhaps because the high students knew themselves that they were not bi gots, whether or
not I thought they were was less important to them, and they were more willing to speak

their minds, regardless of what I might think of them.

121

In conclusion, while some of the fourteen target students were more conscious of our
racial difference than others, it appears that none of them believed that my race had any
significant bearing on how they had responded to the interview questions. Consequently,
I am inclined to also believe that this variable did not have a major influence on students'
responses to the interview questions, especially not the responses of the high students.
Nevertheless, I acknowledge that these students' perceptions of their response to a Black
interviewer may not have been accurate and that it is still possible that many of the
students, both high and low, were affected in ways of which they were unaware.

A Close-up Look at Three Students

Up until this point, I have been examining only groups of students and reporting
similarities and differences between these groups. Now I would like to take a close-up
look at three individuals from my group of target students to identify their noteworthy
characteristics and to examine how they each responded to the course. I selected three
students whom I felt would be illustrative of the range of students in the target group.
The first student, Claire, resembled four other low-scoring students in terms of the beliefs
and attitudes she expressed and in the ways that she responded to the course material and
activities. The second student, Joy, was very similar to one other low student in that,
during the course of the semester, both of them seemed to be critically re-evaluating their
present beliefs and were moving toward developing more favorable racial attitudes.
Although Terri, the third student, had considerably more prior experience with diversity
than the six other hi gh-scoring target students, she was nonetheless quite similar to them
in terms of the beliefs and attitudes she expressed in our interviews and in the ways that
she responded to the course material and activities. In this section I will begin by
providing some background information on each of these three students. Then I will
discuss how these students seemed to respond differently to some of the course content
Finally, I will discuss how some of their personal qualities seemed to influence how they
responded to the course.

122

Student Profiles

Claire (low) Claire, a sophomore, is the youngest child in a middle-class family
of four. She attended high school in a small suburban town where the minority student
population was extremely small. Claire's high school activities were limited to band,
track, and Students Against Drunk Driving, and she also held an after-school job. Claire
reported some personal involvement in a nondenominational church during high school,
though it was apparently not sustained, and she gave no indication of the extent that her
parents were involved. Her father has an associate's degree and is employed as a
firefighter in the neighboring city. Her mother works in a university dormitory and just
recently earned her degree from a local business college. Although it is difficult to say
much about her relationship with her parents, some of her statements during the
interviews indicate that they have had a strong impact on her thinking in several areas.
Claire described herself as a very outgoing person who is not a follower. Although she
had made friends with people of different races since coming to the university, all of her
close friends were White because, as she explained it, those were the people that she had
grown up with; it was not because she didn't like other people.

At the beginning of this course, Claire's awareness of prejudice and discrimination
seemed to be quite limited, and she did not appear to be particularly open to evidence of
their continuing existence. Her own experience seemed to be the standard by which she
judged the veracity of allegations of discrimination. For example, because of her own
experiences in school, she rejected the notion that women and minorities face unequal
opportunities to learn.

I don't believe that these people that are listed-the minorities, special needs, gids,

etc.-face unequal opportunities. I'm a girl. My major is math, sol kind of like

prove it wrong in a sense there. If somebody has a will, then they'll go as far as
they want to, and whether a person does go far, it's not because they don't have

the opportunity. I just believe it's because they don't want to. [Claire 211-70]
She didn't seem to even consider the possibility that the schooling experiences of others

might have been vastly differently than hers. Throughout the semester Claire professed

 

123

an exceptionally strong belief that everyone has equal opportunities, and as a corollary,
she also believed that a person's success or failure was dependent strictly on his/her own
efforts.

I was always told when I was young, you know, I can do whatever I want, and I

think it's that way with anybody. I don't see why it would make a difference if

you're minority or special need or anything. If that's what you want to do, you're

going to set your goal and work towards it. [Claire 211-74]

Although she considered herself to be unprejudiced and open-minded, Claire seemed to
possess some stereotypical beliefs about racial minorities. First, she seemed to conceive
of them as being poor, and she acknowledged that sometimes lack of money could
constrain their opportunities. She also seemed to believe that the lower school
achievement of minority children is a consequence of their problem-filled home
environments. Third, when asked for an additional explanation of why most minority
students don't perform as well in school as most White students, Claire responded,

I don't know. Maybe it's hereditary and the genes don't carry through to carry a

lot of information. I mean, I don't think it's because they've been taught less or

something to that effect, 'cause like I said before, everybody's got the same

opportunity, I believe. [Claire 211-84]

In her perception, since all students have an equal opportunity to learn, if minority
students are not achieving on a par with White students, it must be the result of some
deficiency in the minorities, perhaps a hereditary deficiency. Claire discounts the
possibility that schools or teachers mi ght contribute to the achievement discrepancy.

Joy (low). Joy comes from a middle- to upper middle-class family of five, the
oldest of three girls. From a large Detroit suburb, she attended a high school which she
described as ”very diverse,“ though, based on her descriptions, it sounded as though the
largest minority group was the Caldearrs. Joy was very active in high school activities,
including student government and sports. During the last three years of high school, she
coached elementary and junior high girls' basketball teams. There was never any mention
of her or her family being involved with a church. Both of her parents are college

graduates. Joy's mother teaches in a nearby suburban city and her father owns a

124

manufacturing business. Joy did not talk much about her father, but she seemed to be
quite proud of her mother. It also appears that her mother had a major impact on Joy's
life, particulariy on some of her attitudes toward minorities and her beliefs about
teaching. Joy reported that her circle of friends, close and casual, was not very diverse,
instead being very much like her. She seemed to be a bright, bubbly, friendly person.
She was usually quite talkative and always seemed to be open and honest. Joy took her
involvement in the research quite seriously and was the only one of the participants who
regularly came to the interviews with a few notes written down about things she wanted
to say.

At the beginning of the course Joy seemed to be somewhat more aware of
prejudice and discrimination than was Claire. For example, regarding new immigrants to
this country, she said, "I don't feel that we should be able to, like, discriminate because a
child doesn't really understand English that well.” It is noteworthy that she recognized
the failure to provide equal learning opportunities for immigrants as a type of
discrimination. Joy also expressed the belief that being open-minded and accepting
people's differences were important.

You have to realize that everybody's different and because they believe in

something different than you doesn't make them wrong; it doesn't make them

horrible people whatever; that's just their views. What I think we need to teach

our children is that being different is okay. [Joy 128-34]

On the question of whether schools, along with celebrating Christmas, should also
celebrate the holidays of other religions, Joy commented that "Sometimes the majority
shouldn't always rule. I think we need to accept everyone's views." Further evidence of
Joy's belief in being accepting of differences comes from her response to a question about
how she, as a teacher, would respond to a group of shy Native American students who
were not participating in class.

I'm going to want a lot of participation because I think people learn through

participation, being in active discussion and stuff, but I would never want to, like,

make the children feel uncomfortable if that was their background, that maybe

they were shy. . . . I mean, if that's what they have learned and that's what their
customs are. [Joy 128-99]

125

The fact that this belief appeared in different forms at different points in the interview
suggests that it was a sincere and deeply held one. Finally, Joy acknowledged that
minority students do not have equal opportunities to learn in school, and she posited the
major reason as being the unconscious prejudice of teachers.

Despite her open-mindedness, her acceptance of differences, and her awareness of
prejudice and discrimination, Joy also held some other beliefs that would appear to be
problematic in working with diverse learners. First, a recurrent theme in her first
interview was the belief that working hard pays off, a belief that was instilled in her by
her mother.

I mean, [my mother] taught me from when I was a little girl, you know. We'd go

out and play basketball together. She taught me everything, and she always

taught me that working hard pays off. [Joy 128-24]

As was the case with Claire, this belief led Joy to conclude that when people didn't
succeed, it was due to their not being willing to work hard. '

I hope I'm not generalizing, but like Detroit, and how kids aren't seeing that if

they work hard in school that that can get 'em just as far as going out and selling

drugs. I think a lot of people, like in general, don't understand that working hard

pays off. [Joy 128-22]

In addition, I think this belief made it easy for Joy to adopt her mother's belief that
minority students do poorly in school because they lack motivation and don't come from
good homes. Her mother teaches in a school with a large percentage of minority
children, and Joy commented,

She is constantly thinking of motivating, because that's what these children», they

just need motivating right now. I mean, they're just so stuck in a rut, and a lot of

these children don't come from very good homes. [Joy 128-14]

Along a similar vein, Joy believes that one reason White children do better in school is
that they come from homes where the expectations are higher. Thus, although Joy
seemed to have a genuine belief in the importance of accepting differences, some of her

other strongly held beliefs seemed to be in conflict with that belief. Additionally, while
Joy said that her high school was "very diverse,” it seems significant that she reported

126

having no Level Three (close) or Level Two (casual) friendships with individuals who
were not White.

Terri (high). Terri, a freshman, comes from a middle-class family of five, the
oldest of three children. She attended a racially diverse school in medium-sized city,
where she was very active in a wide variety of school activities. Terri and her family
have also been active in their church, and her religion seems to be very important to her.
She reported having a lot of experience with people who are different than she. Terri
appeared to be quite sensitive to and compassionate toward others. Her high level of
involvement in school and church activities, as well as numerous comments that she
made during the initial interview, suggests that she is a doer; she wants to be the kind of
person who goes out and changes things. She wants to make a difference. Terri has a
boyfriend whom she described as biracial, and she said that at first her parents had a lot of
trouble accepting that finally, Terri’s reports of past incidents in her life seem to suggest
that she is a strong and a principled person who will stand up for what she believes in.

In numerous ways Teni demonstrated greater awareness and a much deeper
understanding of the problem of prejudice and discrimination than did either Claire or
Joy. In our initial interview she commented that because of her background, she had
found during the first few class sessions that she was farther along the path of accepting
and celebrating diversity than were many of the other students in the class.

My friends are from all different backgrounds, all different races, and when I sit

in the class and when we talk in our lab, I hear people saying, 'I've never met

anyone that's different than me. My school was all White. My school was all
this." Well, my school was very diverse. I learned all that. I mean, I just think
that a lot of the experiences I've had and knowing what to do and what not to do,

I’ve learned definitely not to stereotype people, and I see so many people doing it

here. It's because they don't know at all, and I think that I've been educated well

enough. I mean, I just think that I have had enough experiences right now that a

lot of these things we read about, a lot of these things I have already known, I've

already experienced, but there's a lot of people in the class that are looking at this

for the first time, and they're just thinking, "Oh, my gol.” It's so new to them, but
to me it's not new at all. [Terri 131-60]

127

In many respects, Terri began the semester already possessing much of the awareness we

hoped to develop in students taking the course. Although she believed that minorities had
equal opportunities to learn at her high school, she demonstrated a fairly good
understanding of how learning opportunities were not equal elsewhere. Terri believed
that the lower school achievement by minority students was due to several factors: lower
expectations on the part of the teachers, poor student motivation, and lack of appr0priate
parental influence. In talking about the lower school achievement of minority students
and about the Native Americans in the vignette, Terri clearly demonstrated a reluctance to
make broad generalizations about racial/cultural groups. In addition to her boyfriend,
who is biracial, Terri indicated that several of her closest friends were Black.

As can be seen from the background descriptions, each of the three students began
the course with different beliefs about racial minorities and different levels of awareness
of racism and discrimination. My analysis of our interviews across the semester revealed
that these three students also appeared to have reacted differently to some of the
information and activities and to have Ieamed different things from the course. While I
believe that these outcome differences are primarily attributable to the differences in
students' beliefs and attitudes that existed at the outset of the course, I also believe that
students’ personal qualities played an important role. In this section I will explain how
the students reacted differently to course content, what they learned from the course, and
how some of their personal qualities seemed to influence their responses to the course
content.

I_-Iow Students Reacfl to Course Content

Although all three students were exposed to the same information and to the same
activities during the CEP 240 course, their responses to the material were often quite
different. In fact, it appeared as though the students' racial attitudes and beliefs served as
a filter through which they interpreted the information and the experiences that they were
presented with in the course. In other words, it appeared as though the meaning that the

128

students gave to a particular lesson or activity was at least partly a function of the
attitudes and beliefs through which they perceived the lesson or activity. In this section
of the paper I will highlight two particular course activities and illustrate how these three
students' responded differently to the activities.

The first class activity that provides a good illustration of the differences in the
students' responses was a videotape of a 20/20 (ABC) television segment entitled "True
Colors," which all students viewed in their lab sections early in the semester. In this
particular segment two men--one Black and one White-who were very similar in terms
of their age, education, socioeconomic status, etc., were asked to go to St. Louis, where
they were followed with a hidden camera and microphone as they went shopping, looked
for an apartment, applied for jobs, and were placed in various other situations. The two
men were treated very differently in nearly every situation, and the major message of the
video was that racial discrimination is still a problem in our society. Claire, Joy, and
Terri each responded differently to their viewing of this video.

Claire. In mid-February during her second interview with me, I asked Claire for
her reaction to the ”True Colors“ video.

I really didn't think there was that much difference out in the real world. I kind of

sat there in shock. . . . I guess I just didn't realize that it was that different, you

know, that they're treated that different [Claire 211-367]

So, her initial reaction was one of great surprise. She said that she did not realize that
Blacks were treated so differently. I said to her, 'But you saw evidence, didn't you?” and
Claire responded, ”Yeah, this is true. Unfortunately, it obviously happens" [Claire 211-
388]. A short time later in the same interview, after some additional discussion, I asked
Claire, "The people who treated those two guys differently, what would you call what
they were doing?" Claire's response was, "Definitely discrimination” [Claire 211-438]. I
asked this question to ascertain whether or not she recognized that the video was

illustrating the existence of racial discrimination. Apparently, she did recognize it.

129

Two months later in mid-April during our fifth interview, I had the following
exchange (edited) with Claire:

In what ways is it a benefit to be White in this country?

I don't really see any. I guess in society you make it out to be that there are

advantages to being White. I don't see 'em that way. [Claire 412-225]

Claire's comment seems to be inconsistent with the message of the "True Colors” video,
which showed that the White man had the advantage of not being discriminated against.
Her comment is consistent, however, with the belief that she expressed numerous times in
the first interview: that everyone has equal opportunities. If Claire were to admit that
there are advantages to being White, it would be difficult for her to also believe that
everyone has equal opportunities.

After some more discussion, I showed Claire a newspaper article with statistics on
the income differential between Whites and minorities in the metropolitan area I then
asked her to explain the discrepancy in income.

I don't think it's because there isn't an equal chance. I think everybody has an

equal opportunity, and especially now and within the last couple years because

they've become more aware of not hiring somebody because they're Black or

whatever. [Claire 412-298]

Even in the face of contradictory evidence, Claire clings to her belief that everyone has an
equal opportunity. She doesn't know why there is such a wide discrepancy in the income
levels of Whites and minorities, but she refuses to even entertain the notion that it could
be because of differential treatment.

As our discussion continued, Claire made a comment suggesting that a person's
income level is related to their educational level. I asked her whether Whites tend to have
more education than Blacks and Hispanics.

No, I don't think so at all. Like I said, everybody has an equal opportunity as far

as who wants to pursue it more; that's their option.

This article shows unemployment in the metropolitan area. Do you have any

theories as to why there are more Blacks and Hispanics unemployed than there

are Whites?

I think if I had seen that for, like, ten years ago, I would have said it was because

of the problem with not employing somebody because they are Black or because
they are Hispanic. As far as now, I have no idea.

130

. . .As far as why there's more Blacks and Hispanics unemployed, I don't know,

but there's a variety of reasons for unemployment, and it's not because of race or

color. [Claire 412-298]

Claire continues to cling tenaciously to her belief that everyone has equal opportunities,
despite being presented with more information to the contrary. She doesn't know why the
unemployment discrepancy exists, but once again she refuses to even allow the
possibility that it could be because of racial discrimination. In mid-February, after
watching the "True Colors” video, Claire appeared to recognized that racial
discrimination still occurs, but apparently during the next two months, she either had
forgotten or had reconstructed the message of that video.

In our final interview, when I asked Claire to identify for me the three most
important things that she Ieamed from the course, she said, "I know one of the things that
I noticed was that diversity is so apparent in real life, butl guess I never realized it, like
the ‘True Colors,‘ when we watched that. It was really interesting" [Claire 429-2]. A
short time later, when I asked her to identify the class sessions that she thought were the
most valuable, Claire responded, ”I really liked ‘True Colors.’ I found that really
interesting of how the diversity is so different and so intense out there" [Claire 429-46].
Still later in the interview, as she is responding to the question ”Why do most poor and
minority students not perform as well in school?” Claire makes the following comment:
”If you relate it to the movie ‘True Colors,’ like, you know, the Black guy went to get a
job and he couldn't get 'em, you know; it was the White population out there" [Claire
429-64]. The fact that Claire refers to the ”True Colors” three times in this interview is
irrefutable evidence that she had not forgotten about it. Not only has she not forgotten
about it, she identifies it as one of the most valuable parts of the class and its message as
one of her most valuable leamings. The problem, however, is that she has recast the
message. In her mind, the video was about diversity, not about discrimination. Although
it is not clear what she meant by ”diversity,“ it is clear from her earlier comments that she

knows what discrimination is, and she chooses not to use the term ”discrimination" in

131

reference to the video. Therefore, the meaning that she has given to the video is different
than what was intended. But by giving the video a different meaning, Claire was able to
hold on to her belief that everyone has equal opportunities, as the following passage from
later in the same interview illustrates.

Do you think minorities have equal opportunities to learn?

Yeah. Again, there's always going to be people out there that are prejudiced,

but I think they have the same equal opportunities.

Okay, you 're saying minorities have the same opportunities. What are you basing
that on?

Especially, again, like lately, like they can't ask you what your race is on a job
application, and I think it's just progressing further that they have just as much
opportunity as everyone else. [Claire 42982.84]

It seems clear that the original impact and message of ”True Colors” has been lost. Its
message of discrimination was not consistent with Claire's belief that everyone has equal
opportunities, and because she could not simultaneously acknowledge that discrimination
exists and at the same time hold on to her belief that everyone has equal opportunities,
she reconstructed the meaning of the video so that it would not conflict with her belief,
rather than change her belief.
Joy. The ”True Colors” video had quite a different impact on Joy than it did on
Claire. In our second interview Joy offered her reactions to viewing the video.
I watched that in my sociology class last semester. To me it's just fascinating how
in this day and age how everything's supposed to be so equal and equality blah,
blah, blah, how things are not equal. I think it's not even just on the Black-White
issue, 'cause I know I've been in stores, like we talked about this in our recitation.
I've been in stores, like, by myself and because I'm a teenager, you know, they
watch you. They look at you differently, whereas I go in the same store, you
know, and I have my mom with me, and they're there to help you, no problem, so
I think that it's on all levels, but I think it's really interesting. Because I'd seen it
before, it wasn't as powerful. Do you know what I'm saying? It was more
powerful the first time I saw it, but it was really neat to, like, see people in my
class going, ”I can't believe this really happens,” you know. It was really, really
fascinating to me. [Joy 210-228]
Because she had seen the video the previous semester, Joy did not react to it with the
same surprise as did Claire. Joy does indicate, however, that the first time she saw it, it
had had a powerful impact on her. Her observation that "things are not equal” seems to

be an indication that she was clearly aware that the message of the video was that racial

132

discrimination is still a problem in this society. Additionally, her comment that it is not
just a Black-White issue and her relating of her own experience with being discriminated
against in stores suggest that she began the course with a greater awareness of
discrimination than did Claire. For Joy, therefore, viewing the video again served as a
reaffirrnation of something she already knew, and she seemed to derive satisfaction from
watching many of her classmates' reactions of surprise to the events in the video.

Two months later, I asked Joy the same question I asked Claire: "Do you believe
that there are benefits to being White in America?” Joy responded as follows,

Definitely. It goes back to in lecture how we saw the Black man and the White

man who were totally equal and the White man was getting so many more

opportunities and not, like in the store, not looked at as maybe a thief or whatever,

and as a White person, with my parents being, like, middle-class whatever, I feel I

got a lot of--, a very good education, like before college, and then being White

also. It goes back to money. Being able to come to Michigan State and get an

even better education. So definitely I think being White has advantages.

[Joy 407-449] -
Not only does she readily admit that there are benefits to being White, she also cites the
"True Colors” video as evidence for her belief. In doing so, she appears to demonstrate
an understanding that discrimination against one group generally translates into or is
associated with advantages for another group. In contrast to Claire, who apparently
forgot about the message of ”True Colors" two months later when discussing the
condition of minorities in this society, Joy did not forget and seemed to use it as one basis
for her belief that Whites are advantaged in this society. Because she had already
acknowledged that racial discrimination exists in this society and that Whites have
numerous advantages as a result of this discrimination, I did not ask Joy to explain the
discrepancies between the education and income of Whites and minorities, as I did with
Claire. It was pretty evident to me that Joy already possessed this awareness.

In my final interview with Joy, she made two additional references to the "True
Colors” video which clearly indicated that, in contrast to Claire, she had neither forgotten

nor reconstructed its central message. First, she identified the "True Colors” video as one

133

of the class sessions that had been most valuable for her. She offered the following
explanation.

”True Colors” was just the fact that--, it was a realization for me of how
prejudiced our society is, just in the simple fact of you have the Black man and
the White man going to the store. I mean, (sound effect), it just (sound effect). I
don't know; it bothered me. Just the outright prejudice, you know, that you could
see on the camera, and then when people got caught, [they'd say] "I didn't do it" I
mean, what are you talking about? We were watching you do it right now, you
know. [Joy 428-60]

Clearly, Joy was able to recall the central message that the video had presented. Her
second reference to the video actually came at an earlier point in the final interview, when
I had asked her to identify the three most important things she had Ieamed from the class.
As one of her leamings Joy mentioned discrimination. Our dialogue then proceeded as
follows:

What do you mean by you learned about discrimination? Give me an example or
something.

Okay, when we watched the movie on--

"True Colors "?

Yeah, "True Colors” whatever. It's kind of like I always knew it was out there,
but literally seeing it in front of my face, I realized, God, I mean, like the store
owner automatically suspected that the Black person was going to steal
something, and I think there's been times where I thought that also, like working
in the store, and I realize that I must have a little bit of discrimination also in
myself, and I realize that that's wrong, like I shouldn't have those biases and those
prejudices against-u

Why is that an important learning to you?

Because I think it's going to help me out. If I realize I am now, in the classroom
hopefully I'll be able to keep everyone equal, you know, instead of being like-.
I'm learning all about separate but equal, you know. I don't want that. Equal is
equal, you know. Whether you're Black or whether you're White or whether
you're Hispanic or Asian, I think all children should be regarded the same, and
that's my responsibility, to make sure that my views, maybe stuff that, like I said
before, has been instilled in me from a long time ago, that that doesn't come out,
because as a teacher I'm a huge role model for these children. I'm a mom to 30
children, and if they see my prejudice and negative views, that's what they're
going to take from me, and I have to set an example for these kids.

[Joy 428-6,8,10]

While at the end of the course Claire did not even acknowledge the existence of racial
discrimination in our society, Joy definitely does. In fact, Joy's remarks show that she
has moved beyond simply having an increased awareness of it in the larger society; she

also reports realizing that she herself has discriminated. She seems to have internalized

134

her awareness and is now able to see biases not only in others but also in herself. For her,
racial discrimination is no longer just something "out there”; she recognizes that she
herself has biases and that, as a future teacher, she needs to overcome those biases for the
benefit of her students. Certainly, Joy, much moreso than Claire, shows evidence that she
is moving toward developing the awareness and attitudes that will enable her to work
more effectively with minority children.

Terri. Because Terri began the course with a pretty well developed awareness of
racism and discrimination, her response to the ”True Colors” video was quite different
from that of Claire or Joy. Having grown up in a diverse community and having attended
a high school that was approximately 50% minority (predominantly African American),
Terri brought to the course considerable knowledge of and experience with diversity.
Early in the semester Terri became aware of just how different her background was from
that of most of her classmates and how much more aware of racial issues she was. In her
first interview with me Terri commented,

I think that based on a lot of the experiences that I've experienced in [my

hometown] that it makes me a stronger person. A lot of pe0ple who come here

and see things firsthand are really surprised in the way some people act and some
ways people react and that. I feel that I've already experienced a lot of that,
considering a lot of the things that have happened to me, and so while everybody
else is reacting to what they've seen, I can just look at it from a different
perspective because I've already seen a lot of the things that people from little
towns haven't seen at all and only see on TV. I know the difference between
stereotypical things or things that really happen because you learn to decipher

between those things. [Terri 131-16]

Although she doesn't explicitly mention racism or discrimination in the preceding
passage, I believe that that is what she was making reference to because most of the eariy
class sessions addressed those two topics. As I had done with Claire and Joy, during my
second interview with Terri I asked for her reaction to the ”True Colors” video.

. . . I've already seen it before. I believe my reaction was pretty much the same. I

think that it does happen. . . . I think that if everyone could watch that tape and

people [could] see that it happens. You know, there's too many people in the

United States that say, "Racism doesn't happen. This and this doesn't happen.”

You can say all those stories, but it's never happened to you. People just assume

that people aren't going to be that rude or aren't going to—, you know, that they
aren't consciously doing it when maybe they are consciously doing it. They are,

135

and it really can hurt people, so I do think that that was very eye-opening for
people who haven't seen it yet. It opened my eyes, definitely, when I watched it
last semester.

So if I asked you what you learned fiom it, you 'd say what?

Well, that racism does exist and that people do treat others differently, I would
have to say.

Even though you went to a diverse high school, you weren't aware of that?

Oh, yeah. I mean, I have a boyfriend who is [biracial]. I mean, we have gotten
stares; we've gotten this and that I mean, I've heard comments. Standing in line
at Cedar Point, some guy said, "What a waste, and blah blah blah.” I mean, I hear
comments all the time. I got comments from my parents. I got comments from
whomever, sol mean, I myself have seen it and have felt it--not to an extreme of,
you know, a lot of people who go through it everyday, but I mean, I at least know
that it exists. Definitely.

So then how did this video open your eyes if you were already---?

I just think that a lot of the different varieties that it came in--at the store and this
and that, so I can see a store and I can understand. I've seen that before, so that
wasn't really anything new, but even the car salesman, the man himself who was
Black and didn't rush out there either, and the different prices [that they were
quoted] and when [the salespeople] were confronted about it. It's just a lot of
different things. I mean, I've never gone and priced a car, so I've never seen that
before, so it's really just a lot of the different areas that you found it in.

[Terri 217-312330334342]

Like Joy, Terri had seen the ”True Colors" video in a class the previous semester, but
whereas for Joy the initial viewing of the video represented a surprising introduction to
the reality of racial discrimination, for Terri viewing the video served primarily to
reinforce and extend what she already knew from personal experience. Unlike Joy and
many of her classmates, Terri already knew that racism and discrimination existed and
that some people truly are as rude and discriminatory as the individuals depicted in the
video. As a partner in an interracial relationship, Teni had experienced numerous racial
comments directed at her personally, and evidently, she had also witnessed acts of racial
discrimination in some settings. Despite her prior awareness, Terri still found the video
instructive, but in a different way than it was for Joy. As Terri explained, seeing the
various settings in which racial discrimination occurred in the video expanded her
existing understanding of the different forms that it can take.

In her final interview, Terri identified ”True Colors” as one of the class sessions
that she considered the most valuable. When I asked her to explain why she thought the

video was valuable, she explained,

136

I think that one got the most response out of a lot of the people. . . . I think that the

”True Colors", you know, would show something to a lot of people.

What impact would it have?

Well, I think the realization that people are treated differently, and I think a lot of

people, you know, they know that doesn't happen anymore and this and that, but

that whole show was just total proof of whether it's still happening in our society

today. [Teni 426-32,42]
Interestingly, Terri appeared to feel that the primary value in the showing of the ”True
Colors” video lay, not in any new knowledge or awareness that she herself might have
gained from seeing it, but rather in the awareness that it might bring to some of her
classmates, particularly those who contended that racial discrimination ”doesn't happen
anymore." Terri obviously believes that discrimination is still a problem in this society,
and she seems to want others to come to that realization as well. Whereas the video
seemed to lead Joy to examine her own attitudes and actions, it prompted Terri, who
already possessed favorable racial attitudes, to see it as a vehicle for possibly increasing
the awareness among her classmates.

In summary, the message of the "True Colors” video clashed with Claire's belief
that everyone has equal opportunities in this society; therefore, she ascribed to it a
meaning different than the one it was intended to convey. By interpreting "True Colors”
as being about diversity, not discrimination, Claire was able to consider it one of the most
valuable parts of the course and still hold on to her belief that everyone has equal
opportunities. For Joy, the message of the video was easy to accept and remember
because it reinforced her growing awareness of the problems of racism and
discrimination. With this awareness she was beginning to recognize her own biases and
to think about the implications that they would have for her as a teacher. Thus, viewing
the video seemed to serve as an additional catalyst for growth. Finally, for Terri, the
message of the video was a type of affirmation of something she was already well aware
of through personal experience. In fact, she seemed to consider the central value of the
video as lying in the fact that it made visible for others the reality of discrimination and,

in so doing, might serve to increase their awareness.

137

Another class activity that illustrates the different ways that the three students
responded would be the role-playing activities (see Appendix A) in which students
engaged at different points during the semester. The role-playing activities dealt with
issues like racism, sexism, inclusion, immigrants, sexual preference, abortion, and
numerous others. For these activities students were typically divided into groups of four
to five students. Each student was then given a slip of paper which briefly described the
position he/she was to take on the particular issue that the group was to discuss.
Generally, one of the five students would serve as an observer and would not participate
in the discussion, but at the end of the discussion (usually no more than ten minutes), this
observer would tell the other group members what he/she had observed. Depending on
what other activities were scheduled for that particular class period and the amount of
time available, there would generally be some whole-class discussion of what had
occurred in the various groups.

Claire. Claire did not have a positive reaction to the role-playing activities. In
particular, she objected to having to assume someone else's position in a discussion.

I like it as far as just reading through 'em and reading, like, this person has this

view point and there's this one, but knowing that I have my own and how I would

react is what I would rather do than to try and react as somebody else is going to,

because going through and reading it, I know their opinion and so it just kinda», I

don't know how to phrase it, but does that make sense? They have their own

opinion and I have mine. I accept theirs whetherI agree with it or not.

But you find it hard to argue their opinions?

Well, not necessarily that, but I mean, I would rather go at it with my opinion and

attempt to do or say something that I would in real life, under my opinion,

knowing theirs and kinda, I guess you'd say "compromising,” rather than to know
my opinion but try and act somebody else's opinion. I guess I would just rather be

able to read it and know of this other opinion that's out there. [Claire 325-134]
Although Claire was interested in reading about the opinions of others, she did not seem
to see the value in taking on another person's perspective in discussing an issue.
Apparently, despite having participated in the activity several times, she didn't seem to
recognize that arguing a position different than her own could help her to understand that
position more fully. Typically, the various positions were described only in 2-4

sentences on little slips of paper that the students were given, yet Claire asserted that

138

" going through and reading it, I know their opinion,” suggesting that perhaps she felt she
already understood the positions just from these brief descriptions. Her later statement,
"I would just rather be able to read it and know of this other opinion that's out there"
offers further evidence that she may have been more interested in knowing about other
positions than she was in understanding them; or, maybe in her mind, awareness of
others' opinions was equivalent to understanding them.

In her final interview Claire identified the role-playing activities as one of the
least valuable aspects of the course, for essentially the same reasons as she had mentioned
previously.

I think I would have found it just as interesting to talk about it as a group and just

kind of mention that, okay, this is an opinion and this is what they might think or

this is how they might react whatever, but I’m always going to have my opinion,
and like I’ve said, just to know the other opinions and other sides of things has
been what’s come across most to me in this class, and so I--, I don’t know, I guess

I found it not that important to play a different role, when I’m going to have my

own [opinion], but just to go through and discuss the different sides rather than to

play ‘em out. [Claire 429-44]

Claire says, ”I'm always going to have my opinion," and it seems that she is reluctant to
let go of her opinion, even for a few minutes during role-playing. Because she has her
own opinion, she believes that it is ”not that important to play a different role.” She
seems to be saying that because her opinion on the issue is already decided, she doesn't
need to try to look at it from another perspective; she is merely interested in hearing what
the other opinions are. Her comments give me the impression that her opinion is already
set and being exposed to others' opinions isn't likely to change hers.

Joy. Joy's reaction to the role-playing activities was quite different than Claire's.
Rather than resisting the taking on of another person's perspective, Joy seemed to enjoy
doing so.

What really sticks out in my mind is when we do role-playing. I think that's so

fascinating to take on a completely different opinion than my own. It kind of

scares me because sometimes I can argue that opinion really well, and people are
looking at me like, ”Does she really think that?" I mean, something horrible, like
about racism or stuff, and then I have ask to myself, ”I made a lot of convincing

arguments right there, you know. Maybe this isn't--," do you see what I'm
saying? Like, maybe there is a little bit of prej», I know there's a little bit because

139

I think we all have prejudice, but I think there is prejudice in the back of my head.

For me to be able to argue a situation so well actually kind of scared me, you

know. [Joy 210-228]
Joy didn't explain why she thought it was "so fascinating to take on a completely different
opinion than my own,” but she obviously saw some value in doing so, whereas Claire
apparently did not. The fact that Joy was able to argue a different opinion really well
suggests that she had the ability to look at an issue from another's perspective. This being
the case, I suspect that she was probably able to gain a better understanding of that
perspective than was Claire. But for Joy, perhaps more important than any
understanding that she may have gained of a different perspective may have been the
insight that she gained into herself. She commented that her ability to play negative roles
so well was rather frightening because she realized that that could indicate that she had
some of those prejudiced thoughts in the back of her head already.

Is it possible that the role-playing brought out your real feelings, and the rest of

the time you're just pretending to be a certain way?)

I'm sure it's possible. I'm sure some of the stuff that I said is in the back of my

head. Do you know what I'm saying? Like some of the prejudice that I have---

Yeah, I think a truth comes out, you know, when you do that kind of stuff.

[Joy 210-322]
Joy acknowledged that some of the prejudiced views she expressed in the role-playing
may actually have been her true feelings. Thus, for Joy, the role-playing provided an
opportunity to learn not only about others but also about herself.

In her final interview, Joy identified the role-playing activities as being one of the
most valuable aspects of the course for her.

Role-playing was because even though they weren't, like, their views, it just

seemed [valuable] to try and work out different situations, you know, because

maybe I don't have those views, but somebody out in that world is as negative as I

was playing that role, and how do I deal with that person. That was that for me.

[Joy 428-60]
One value that Joy saw in the role-playing was that it provided some preparation for
dealing with individuals who actually hold the views represented in the role-playing

situations. Unlike Claire, who seems most interested in merely gaining an awareness of

others' views, Joy seems to be interested in understanding others' views and how to deal

140

with them. Also unlike Claire, Joy says nothing that suggests that her views on the
various issues are already set and not open to change.
Terri. Although Terri talked about the role-playing activities only in the final
interview, she also identified them as one of the most valuable parts of the course.
I liked a lot of the different role-plays that we had to do, and I liked the
discussions that we would get into in lab. My suggestion would probably be that
sometimes, because you just presented it to your group, you would work on it and
then, you know, end up doing whatever, but I think that if you had to get up in
front of the whole class tha --, although there's a lot of people that would get
nervous about it, but it would help with people not getting nervous 'cause you get
to know the people in the class, but I think that also, you know, it would raise
other people's consciousness, and when you're doing that in front of everyone,
you're going to work hard to be your part and to discuss and to do things I think a
little more. [Teni 426—24]
Terri does not say so directly, but the fact that she liked the role-playing would suggest
that she wasn't bothered by having to represent an opinion other than her own in the
discussions. Terri's perception of the value of the role-playing activities was quite
different from that of either Claire or Joy.
And the role-playing, what was the value in that?
In that, it got a lot of discussion and because it told you what to say on there
whatever, too. A lot of those ideas were things that people wouldn't think of. I
mean, they weren't ideas of like a lot of people, and to argue that was kind of
hard, but then when you heard people talking about it and arguing the different
sides, I think that it just brought out a lot of conversation, brought out a lot of
things that people feel and then we got to talk through it. [Teni 426-38]
In Terri's eyes, the greatest value in the role-playing activities was the discussion that it
generated because it brought out people's feelings and gave them the opportunity to talk
about them. As with the "True Colors” video, Terri seemed to be more interested in how
the role-playing impacted her classmates than she was in its impact on herself. Again, I
think this rrright be a reflection of the fact that she saw herself as being more racially
aware than most of her classmates. Terri's comments on "True Colors” suggested that she
wants to see her less aware classmates exposed to things that will increase their
awareness of racial issues, and she apparently saw the role-playing activities as another

vehicle for doing that

141

In summary, the three students' responses to the role-playing activities follow a
pattern similar to that I observed with the ”True Colors” video. Once again, Claire seems
to have missed the point of the activity. She did not appear to regard the role-playing as
an opportunity to "walk a mile” in someone else's shoes and to gain a better
understanding of others' perspectives. Claire stressed that she already had her own
opinion on issues, and she apparently did not want to give up those opinions, even for a
few minutes, to view the issues from another's perspective. As with the ”True Colors”
video, she seemed reluctant to allow outside information to interfere with what she
already believed. Of the three students, Joy, again, seemed to be the one who learned the
most from the activity. Not only could she see value in taking on the perspectives of
others through role-playing, she also gained some insight about herself. Like the ”True
Colors” video, the role-playing activities helped to increase Joy's awareness of her own
biases and probably served as another catalyst to her growth. Although Terri did not
explain any of her personal reactions to the role-playing, she did view it as one of the
most valuable activities in the course. Once again, however, she seemed to see their
major value as lying in the fact that they might serve to increase the awareness of some of
her classmates.

The Influence of Personal anljties

While this study was centered on how racial attitudes and beliefs influence what
students learn from a course on diversity, it became apparent to me during my analysis of
the interviews for the three focus students that certain personal qualities also seemed to
play an important role in determining how they responded to the course content.
Specifically, I noticed that these three students seemed to differ in terms of their openness
and their ability to be self -reflective. In this discussion I define openness as being
receptive to others' ideas or arguments (i.e., open-minded) and also as being accepting of

diversity. I define self-reflective as having an awareness of one's own beliefs and

142

attitudes, as well as being willing and/or able to think critically about them. While these
two qualities are different, they are related, sol will discuss them together.

Claire. Although she considered herself to be open-minded, in my opinion Claire
actually showed little evidence of openness. In our third interview I asked her to explain
what she meant when she said she was open-minded.

I need to get a sense of what you mean when you say you're open-minded.

I feel that everybody has an equal opportunity, that, you know, if maybe

somebody is Black and maybe somebody is White. It's a physical difference, but

we still both put our pants on one leg at a time. As far as anything else, like, you
can walk around on campus and see maybe somebody has had half their head
shaved and half of it's not. Well, if that's what they want, then so be it. It's not
something I would choose to have done, but as long as it's not disruptive to other
people or something to that effect, if someone wants to do something like that,

that's their choice. [Claire 225-70]

She seemed to understand the meaning of open-minded, and there were occasions in the
interviews when she made comments that seemed consistent with being open-minded.
For example, in our fourth interview she commented,

I have picked up a lot from this class as far as seeing situations, seeing other

people's opinions and vieWpoints on the subject, other than my own, and whether

or not I agree with them, I accept them because they're theirs, but it also lets me

see the other side. [Claire 325-134]

Nevertheless, despite occasional remarks like the one above, her interviews overall
suggest that she was not at all open to ideas that conflicted with her own. The role-
playing activities in CEP 240 provided students with opportunities to further their
understanding of different perspectives on various diversity issues and to reflect on and
perhaps clarify their own beliefs. As I explained in the previous section of this chapter,
Claire resisted the role-playing activities because they required her to take on a
perspective different than her own.

I’m always going to have my opinion, and like I’ve said, just to know the other

opinions and other sides of things has been what’s come across most to me in this

class, and so I don’t know; I guess I found it not that important to play a different

role, when I’m going to have my own [opinion], but just to go through and
discuss the different sides rather than to play ‘em out. [Claire 429-44]

143

Apparently, Claire wanted to hear about other perspectives, but she did not want to look
at an issue from one of those perspectives, though doing so might have enhanced her
understanding of that perspective. She seemed to believe that because she already had
her opinion on the issue (an opinion that, apparently, was not open to change), there was
no need for her to try to understand others' opinions; awareness of those opinions seemed
to be sufficient for her. It is possible that Claire's distaste for role-playing, in and of
itself, had nothing to do with her openness or her self-reflectiveness; however, the weight
of other evidence suggests otherwise.

In analyzing Claire's interviews, I noticed a number of instances where being
exposed to new ideas or ideas that conflicted with her own led her, not to reappraise and
reflect on, but to reiterate and defend what she already believed. For example, during our
fifth interview I asked Claire whether or not she believed there were advantages to being
White in this society, and we spent a good portion of that interview discussing this
question. Claire answered that she didn't think that Whites had any advantages. I then
asked her to consider the question from another perspective:

Try to imagine someone who would argue that there are advantages to being

White. What would they say would be some of the benefits?

I think maybe it's not a benefit but I think more expectation would be one because

out in society your majority have the power and so you should be able to do

whatever. I think being minority actually has better benefits as far as society goes
because they've got their scholarships--Latino and Black, and there's scholarships
for White but not just a White person. I mean, from what I've seen, and I haven't
seen 'em all, but if a White person can apply for a scholarship, anybody can, but
there's specified scholarships and stuff for just Blacks or just Latino or whatever,
so as far as being White, I think that would be a disadvantage in society, but then
they have the higher expectations so they're expecting you to be able to make

more money and not need the scholarship or whatever. [Claire 412—244]

Rather than identifying possible advantages to being White, Claire instead asserted that
minorities have more benefits than Whites. Her response suggests to me that she was
either unable or unwilling to identify benefits to being White in this society. Once again

she seemed to have her opinion on the issue, and she didn't seem willing to entertain an

alternative perspective. Later in the same interview I showed Claire an article from the

144

local newspaper which pointed out the discrepancies in the average annual incomes for
Whites and non-Whites in the local metr0politan area.

Looking at this article from the [local newspaper], how would you explain the
dtfi‘erence in the average income of Whites and minorities in the [metropolitan]
area?

I don't think it's because there isn't an equal chance. I think everybody has an
equal opportunity, and especially now and within the last couple years because
they've become more aware of not hiring somebody because they're Black or
whatever. Maybe it is a White person in a higher paid position. I mean, there's
several reasons I'm sure, but maybe the Hispanic or Black whatever didn't want
that position. . . . I don't think it has anything to do with being Black, Hispanic,
or being White. I think a lot of it has to do with what they want to pursue.
[Claire 412-298]

When confronted with statistics that would seem to contradict her idea that everyone has
equal opportunities, Claire, rather than reconsidering her belief, attempted to explain the
statistics away by suggesting that the explanation might lie within the individuals
themselves. She suggested that maybe Blacks and Hispanics didn't want the hi ghet-
paying jobs. As we discussed the income differences further, Claire later commented, ”I
don't know why there's a difference. Maybe Whites have more motivation. As far as
why, I don't know." [Claire 412—381]. She steadfastly refused to reconsider her notion
that everyone has equal opportunities, preferring instead to attribute the differences to
Whites being more motivated than minorities. (I find it interesting that, on the one hand,
Claire suggested that race didn't matter, but on the other hand, she argued that Whites
may be more motivated.) I continued to push Claire by showing her another article with
statistics on unemployment in the area.
This article shows unemployment in the [metropolitan [area. Do you have any
theories as to why there are more Blacks and Hispanics unemployed than there
are Whites?
I think if I had seen that for, like, ten years ago, I would have said it was because
of the problem with not employing somebody because they are Black or because
they are Hispanic. As far as now, I have no idea. I don't think it's because of lack
of motivation, although there are people, Black and White and Hispanic and
everybody, who don't have the motivation. They just don't want to do anything,
but it's not because of their race. That's just them. I don't think it's lack of
opportunity. I mean, anybody could get a part-time job, I'm sure, flopping
burgers. . . . As far as why there's more Blacks and Hispanics unemployed, I

don't know, but there's a variety of reasons for unemployment, and it's not
because of race or color. [Claire 412-427]

145

The first part of Claire's response indicates that she believed that racial discrimination
was a thing of the past, and apparently she was still not willing to re-examine that belief
in light of the statistical data that I had shown her. In my mind, the preceding excerpts
provide clear evidence of Claire's lack of openness to conflicting ideas and her
unwillingness to be critical of her own beliefs and attitudes. However, there is additional
evidence.

Eariier in this chapter I explained how, for Claire, the showing of the "True
Colors" video did not push her to re-examine her beliefs about everyone having equal
opportunities in this country. Rather than critically re-evaluating her belief in light of this
new information, she appeared to reconstruct the meaning of video to make it consistent
with her existing belief. As further evidence, one of Claire's comments during our second
interview suggests that in her lab section she may have been exposed to conflicting
opinions which she also either failed to acknowledge or perhaps just misinterpreted.

There is a lot of diversity, just in our room alone, which makes it really interesting

because then you can get both sides of any story, seeing how, for example, the

Black people feel like they're being discriminated against, and the White people,

as well», just getting both sides of the story, which was really interesting.

Besides being interesting, is there any other reason why that seems important?

Just to show that, I mean, everybody has the same opportunities. It's available to

anyone, I guess. [Claire 211-257]

I was not present in Claire's lab section; however, if the Black students in her class were
complaining about being discriminated against, it is unlikely that they also felt that
everyone has equal opportunities. Yet, in some mysterious way, Claire seemed to
interpret what these students had to say as being consistent with her belief that everyone
has equal opportunities. Claire may have heard both sides of the story, but it doesn't
appear as though hearing the other side had any impact on her beliefs, except maybe to
reinforce them. Again I think she demonstrated either an inability or an unwillingness to

open up her existing beliefs and attitudes to critical re-examination when she was

confronted with conflicting information.

146

While Claire seemed to believe that she was open to diversity, some of her comments
suggest otherwise. During our second interview, Claire offered the following remark:
There's one thing that, I guess, really bothers me. I don't have like a great all-time
solution, but we've been talking about diversity and everything, like the story we
read for class about the Indian. . . . okay, this Indian comes into class. Well, then
they have to start changing everything, so ”Oh, okay, let's have a day for
everybody to have their own holiday and let's do this so that everybody's
included.” . . . sometimes, and this is kinda mean, but sometimes I'm glad I'm in
math because everybody deals with numbers; they're straight across the board and
I don't have to worry about, you know, Egyptian numbers or (laughs) [inaudible]
numbers. It's just numbers, and so sometimes in that respect I'm kind of glad that
I'm there. [Claire 211-494]
Claire's apparent concern about having to change things in order to accommodate people
who are different seems to suggest that she regarded celebrating diversity as a problem
that she'd rather not have to deal with. She went on to explain that she thought it would
be difficult to balance between those who want to include others and those who want to
leave others out. Though it may not have been her intention, this explanation suggests
that she would make changes in her classroom primarily to please others and to avoid
controversy, not out of any personal belief in acknowledging and celebrating diversity.
Her insinuation that diversity would not be an issue in teaching math prompted me to ask
her another question:
Don't diversity issues come up in mathematics? I know you're dealing with
numbers, but you 're also dealing with people.
Oh, this is true. When I become a teacher, I don't want to become, like, next door
neighbor, best-friend buddies with every single student, but you know, to be a part
of their life maybe as a coach or just a friend that they can come talk to or
something, so there'll be differences but still in that fact it's not going to mean any
difference in the way I teach. It'll just make it interesting because I'll have a
variety of backgrounds and cultures et cetera. (Claire, 211-547]
In essence, Claire seemed to think that having diverse learners in her classroom would be
interesting, but it would have no effect on her instruction. She went on to explain that ”I
wouldn't treat 'em any different or think that they're any less of a person, although it
might take more one on one or something" [Claire 21 1-571]. This final comment subtly

suggests that she thought diverse students were likely to be academically deficient and to

147

require extra attention. In her final interview Claire made another comment which leads
me to question her openness to diversity

. . . Black people have, as far as I know, the exact same rights as we do. I mean,

they can vote; they have freedom of speech, etcetera, you know, and it’s almost to

the point of where I think, “What else do you want?” [Claire 429-104]

If Claire feels that racial minorities already have equal opportunities and are asking for
too much, she is less likely to see the need for or to be supportive of efforts to promote
diversity.

In addition to Claire's lack of open-mindedness and her lack of openness to
diversity, there was also evidence that she was not very aware of her own racial attitudes
and beliefs. Numerous times during the semester she made statements that people were
people to her and that their race didn't matter, but she also made a couple of shocking
statements which seemed to contradict those assertions of equality. Specifically, she
hypothesized that one reason for the lower school achievement of Blacks may be that
they are genetically inferior. On another occasion she suggested that one reason the
average income of Whites is higher than that of Blacks and Hispanics is that Whites are
more motivated. There were also numerous instances when she voiced more subtle
stereotypes that also contradicted her claims of equality, including her apparent
assumption that minority children come from problem—filled home environments, that
they will need more help academically, and her well-meaning observation that ”any Black
person can be just as good as a White person" [Claire 211-457]. Given the preceding
evidence of some of Claire's stereotypical beliefs about racial minorities, the following
comment from the final interview seems to highlight her lack of self-awareness in this
respect.

I don’t try to be prejudiced, and if I am, I don’t realize it, but I mean, maybe I am.

Maybe I’m just this total hypocrite, you know; I’m just flying off the wall here,

but I don’t tlrinkl am, and I don’t realize it if I am. [Claire 429-130]

Though I searched for disconfirrning evidence, I could find few instances in the

interviews where her exposure to new or conflicting ideas about racial issues led Claire to

148

reflect on and reevaluate her existing attitudes and beliefs. (It is possible, of course, that
she did her questioning and re-examining outside of the interviews, but frankly, I feel that
that is unlikely.) One instance occurred during the second interview, which took place
shortly after the class had viewed the "True Colors” video. Claire offered the following
initial reaction to the video:

I really didn't think there was that much difference out in the real world. I kind of

sat there in shock. . . . I guess I just didn't realize that it was that different, you

know, that they're treated that different.

But you saw evidence, didn't you?

Yeah, this is true. Unfortunately, it obviously happens. [Claire 211-367,385]
The impact of the video, however, seemed to be short-lived, for as I reported earlier in
this chapter, within a few weeks Claire had somehow reconstructed the message of the
video so that it no longer illustrated racial discrimination and, hence, no longer conflicted
with her deeply-held belief that everyone has equal opportunities in this society. In
another instance, when Claire expressed the belief that the ratio of majority students to
minority students on campus was about 50-50, I corrected her by saying the ratio was
more like, at best, 80-20. She responded, "I thought it was close to 50-50, you know,
without any numbers or anything. I guess it's not So I guess in that aspect there isn't as
much diversity as there should be” [Claire 412-184]. Claire expressed mild surprise, but
she seemed to have no difficulty accepting these figures. I suspect that the reason Claire
_let go of her belief so easily was that, because she was only guessing about the majority
to minority ratio, it was not a belief that she strongly held. One other instance when
Claire responded positively to a conflicting idea occurred during our fifth interview. In
this interview we had a long discussion about whether or not there were advantages to
being White in this society. At one point we had the following exchange:

Aren't there a lot of difierent ways that there are advantages to being White

because you 're constantly reinforced, but if you 're over here, you're either put

down or you 're not as visible, so you don 't feel good about yourself?

Yeah, I guess, I think it is possible. (Pause) As far as in that aspect, I think it's a

lot on the student and the child's part to», okay, they're gonna know that they're in

the minority, but they've got to look at it that it's the other person's problem if they

feel they have to pick on me, the minority child whatever. I think a lot of it is just
going to be ignoring it and realizing that they are just as good as the next person.

149
Unfortunately, this may put extra burden on the minority child, but again, it
doesn't mean they have any less of an opportunity. . . . [Claire 412-004]
While she initially seemed to accept the plausibility of the idea being presented to her,
she then proceeded to try to explain it away and to show me that it didn't conflict with her
belief that everyone has equal opportunities, even though it seems rather contradictory to
say on the one hand that minority children will have an extra burden, but then on the
other hand say that this extra burden doesn't result in any less opportunity for them.
While I have argued that Claire showed little awareness of and little ability to reflect
critically on her attitudes and beliefs, that is not to say she was completely lacking in
these respects. For example, she demonstrated some self -awareness on one occasion
when I asked her to compare herself to a person in an article that the class had read.
In what ways do you see yourself as being similar to Vanessa, and in what ways
do you see yourself as being different?
As far as being similar, she said that it doesn't matter if they're Black or White or
whatever. I feel the same way. It doesn't matter what somebody is, but yet you've
got to be able to realize that, like, you are Black and your culture is different, so
not to hide», to be able to celebrate your diversity but also to be able to say that
you're just as equal as I am. I feel that's how I'm similar. As far as being
different, as far as I know, I try not to use the contradicting terms that she did.
"Well, I'm not prejudiced, but the Blacks do this." Well, you know, for instance,
Blacks maybe are poor. There's White people that are poor, too. There's Black
people that are rich; White people»- Without realizing it, you know, I don't think
I do, but maybe I do. [Claire 412-205]
Evidence that I have cited earlier suggests that Claire was guilty of the same
contradictory behavior of which she accused Vanessa (e. g., saying that people's color
doesn't matter but also saying that Blacks are genetically inferior to Whites).
Interestingly, however, she expressed an awareness that she might be behaving in that
fashion even though she tried not to. In other words, she seemed to be aware that she
might not be aware of some of her own prejudices. During the final interview Claire
demonstrated some ability to reflect critically on her attitudes and beliefs.
I try to give everybody an equal chance and, you know, everybody has an equal
opportunity in general anyways, but I think also I’ve said that sometimes you
don’t realize you’re doing something unless it’s pointed out to you. There were
times where I would think of something to say, and then I’d think, well, is that

prejudiced, you know? I don’t know. I guess maybe I just got to questioning
myself because, you know, we’ve just been discussing it. . . . [Claire 429-130]

150

The above passage suggests that Claire did sometimes engage in self -questioning and
critical evaluation of her ideas. Thus, Claire did show some evidence of openness and
self -reflectiveness; however, in both of these qualities she was far behind Joy and Terri.

Joy. In my interviews with Joy throughout the semester, there was substantial
evidence of her openness to others' ideas. For example, at one point during our second
interview Joy expressed the belief that the media plays up the negative aspects of Detroit
because a large percentage of the people who live there are Black.

What makes you think that that's the reason?

I think our society, like, sometimes tries to blame a lot of things that go wrong on

Black people, for some reason.

What makes you think that?

I'm studying a lot right now about, like, the slave trade and all that, like going

back to early colonial times, and I think a lot of that "the White man thinks they're

better than the Black man” is still here, and it's called prejudice, and I think it's

still there and I think it's a scapegoat for White people to blame it on Black people

because, I mean,obviously the only difference is the color of our skin. I think

White people honestly feel that they are better than Black people. . . .

[Joy 210-65,68]
When asked to explain what was, to me, a rather surprising insight on her part, Joy made
reference to what she was learning in another course, thus indicating that she had
embraced at least some of the information that was presented to her in the course and that
this information had become part of her understanding of why things are they way they
are. A second example of Joy's openness to others' ideas can be found in her response to
the "True Colors” video.

. . . to me it's just fascinating how in this day and age how everything's supposed

to be so equal and equality blah, blah, blah, how things are not equal. . . . .It was

more powerful the first time I saw it, but it was really neat to like, to see people in

my class going, "I can't believe this really happens,” you know. It was really,

really fascinating to me. [Joy 210-228]
Unlike Claire, Joy had seen the video before, but she still found it ”fascinating." Also
unlike Claire, Joy did not reconstruct the central message of the video with the passage of
time. In her final interview Joy said that she considered the video valuable because "it
was a realization for me of how prejudiced our society is" [Joy 428-60]. Apparently, the

video introduced Joy to new information, and she was open to it A third example of

151

Joy's openness occurred during our fifth interview. When I questioned her assertion that
a White person walking down the street in a Black neighborhood would be discriminated
against, Joy explained her reasoning:

My thing is majority rule, and in any situation, like, when you have a group of
people who get together and they're all the same, they're powerful, and they know
they're powerful, and they can walk on people who aren't powerful.

When the first White people came here, your pilgrims, they were in the minority.
The Indians were very friendly to those people and did not stomp on them, so is it
really true that just because you 're in the majority that you 're necessarily going to
step on people who are less? When Columbus came, they welcomed him.

Yeah, but maybe that's just the nature», I don't know. I don't know. That's a
good point. It totally contradicts what I just said. [Joy 407-128,l36]

While there were many occasions in our interviews where Joy would argue her position,
the above exchange illustrates that she remained open-minded in doing so. She was
willing to listen to and seriously consider ideas that clearly conflicted with her own.

In addition to being open to others' ideas, Joy also indicated that she was open to
diversity. During our first interview she commented,

. . . you have to realize that everybody's different and because they believe in
something different than you doesn't make them wrong; it doesn't make them
horrible people whatever; that's just their views. I mean, what I think we need to
teach our children is that being different is okay. [Joy 128-34]

It was very obvious to me, from other things that Joy said in the interviews, that she was
genuinely interested in being exposed to and learning about people who were different
For example, in the second interview she explained why she thought it was important to
have experiences with people of different backgrounds.

I think the real reason I'm at Michigan State is because it's culturally diverse, and
I feel that that's what the real worid is going to be. I told you last time about the
two high schools that were in my district One was extremely culturally diverse, .
and I had the choice whether I could go to that one or go to a completely all-
White, very upper-class school, and I chose the diversity one. When I was in
eighth grade and I made that decision, it was the same decision I had to make
going here. I looked at the schools, smaller schools, small Catholic schools, like,
just because of the range, like, five or six thousand people. I'd like the small
classes and the individual attention, but I realized that that's not how the real
world's going to be. Michigan State, for me, with the diversity and the larger
classes, as much as I hate 'em, that's how the real world is gonna be. You know,
you're not gonna always have the individual attention. You're going to need to
cope with struggling with that

How's this going to prepare you for it?

152

How's it going to prepare me? Because if I have to learn how to deal with
different types of people now, it's only going to benefit me with my career, like as
a teacher. If I'm learning to deal with people, like for example, on my floor where
I live, there are Black people, there are Indian people, there are Chinese people.

If I'm interacting with these people on a daily basis, it's only going to help me
when I get out into the real worid because I 've had situations before where», it's
like if I didn't, I wouldn't know what to expect I would maybe have, like,
classifications in my head of people and maybe prejudge. [Joy 210-001, 021]

Through the rest of our interviews, I really did not see any evidence that would lead me to
question the sincerity of her openness to diversity. In fact, at one point she expressed
disappointment that there was not more interaction between races at the university. She
believed that interracial contact was an important key to improving interracial
understanding.

I think by working with 'em that that dissolves the stereotypes. I think if I didn't

work with 'em, then those stereotypes would always be there. Like, unless you

have an experience to go off of, why would your mind ever change? Do you see

what I'm saying? Like, if I learn something, if I work with someone, then I'm

going to be more apt to realize that that was a stereotype in my head and that

people really aren't like that, you know. [Joy 210—448]

On many different occasions Joy also demonstrated considerable awareness of her
own beliefs and attitudes, as well as the ability to think critically about them. For
example, during our second interview, she showed surprising insight when she made the
following observation:

What really sticks out in my mind is when we do role-playing. I think that's so

fascinating to take on a completely different opinion than my own. It kind of

scares me because sometimes I can argue that opinion really well, and people are
looking at me like, "Does she really think that?" I mean, something horrible, like
about racism or stuff, and then I have ask to myself. You know, I made a lot of
convincing arguments right there. Maybe this isn't», do you see what I'm saying?

Like, maybe there is a little bit of prej», I know there's a little bit because I think

we all have prejudice, but I think there is prejudice in the back of my head. For

me to be able to argue a situation so well actually kind of scared me, you know.

[Joy 210—228]

Joy recognized that perhaps one reason she was able to argue a racist's perspective so
well was that she might actually hold some of those negative racial feelings herself.
Unlike Claire, who appeared to be completely unaware that she possessed any type of

negative racial attitude or belief, Joy expressed awareness of her racial prejudice.

153

Is it possible that the role-playing brought out your real feelings, and the rest of
the time you 're just pretending to be a certain way?

I'm sure it's possible. I'm sure some of the stuff thatl said is in the back of my
head. Do you know what I'm saying? Like some of the prejudice that I have.
Yeah, I mean, I think a truth comes out, you know, when you do that kind of
stuff. [Joy 210—322]

Instead of responding defensively to my question, as you might expect that she would,
Joy once again demonstrated her openness to other's ideas as well'as her willingness to be
self-critical by acknowledging this possibility. Another example of Joy's self -awareness
comes from our fifth interview, when she gave an example of one of her prejudices.

. . . like I noticed like in my dorm, for example, I get really annoyed at», I don't
know if this is racist or whatever, but how typically loud the Black girls are in our
hall, and I don't know that you could say that's racist or it's just me being, I don't
know, anal sometimes I guess because I'm trying to study or whatever, but there
are little things like that that maybe I guess I am because they're like a little racist
or whatever, because I don't know if I-», okay, for example, there's like loud
music going on like right across the hall from me, and there's two White girls, and
[then] there's a huge, like, a bunch of girls, Black girls that are around, and they're
all talking really, really loud and stuff, and it's the Black girls who I will get more
like a feeling of ”Pleeasse be quiet!” than it's the White girls, and I don't know
why that is. I don't I mean, I think that's racially, like, inside of me for some
reason. Idon't know. [Joy 407-335]

In my eyes, Joy shows great honesty and a lot of self-insight here. Not only was she
aware that she had prejudices, she was able to clearly articulate one of them. In contrast,
Claire was not even aware that she had prejudices and, therefore, certainly was not able to
articulate what they were. Yet another example of Joy's self -insight comes from the same
interview.

So, is there a secret place down in you somewhere where you 're racist?

No, I don't think that I'm racist, but I think I have had some racial imprints or

something put in me, like, just when I was little and hearing my grandfather say

something. I mean, that sticks in your head, you know. . . .

Give me an example of something that was implanted in you as you were growing
a

up.
Like my grandpa, he's so bad, like when I was a little girl, he'd be talking or
whatever, and every time he'd refer to Black people, he would say, ”Burrhead,"
and sol never knew that was wrong until I said it to my mom one time, and she
said, "What did you just say?!” And she explained to me that that is completely
rude and wrong, and I just all of a sudden, I mean, I was ten years old and saying
that word, not knowing that it was anything different than saying "a Black
person,” you know, so there's little stuff like that that you learn just by
communicating with your elders or whatever, that they may have racial views and
they express 'em, and not being able to differentiate whether that's good or that's
bad, you just kind of take on those views, you know. [Joy 407-335360]

154

This was one of many occasions in our interviews where Joy surprised me with her
insight. She was aware that she possessed racial prejudices, she could recognize some of
her prejudices, and she also had some understanding of how those prejudices probably
originated. In addition, as explained earlier in this section of the chapter, she had
reasonable ideas for how to combat her prejudices»through more interaction with
individuals from different racial backgrounds. One final quotation from Joy's interviews
illustrates both her openness to new ideas and her ability to be self -reflective.
Has talking with me this semester affected either your perceptions of the course
or the way you think about any of the issues covered in the course?
Definitely. I think it's made me more aware about my views on different races
and different subject areas. You've made me think a lot about myself and just my
[beliefs], you know, like, what I thought. I mean, before this class I never thought
I was prejudiced. I was like, "I'm not. What are you talking about?" But I, like,
little stuff you made me realize that, yeah, like, I do have those feelings inside me
that I don't know [inaudible], like, grotesque or whatever, but», (brief pause)
Yeah, I've learned a lot [Joy 428-189]
Although I could cite many other examples, it should be pretty clear that Joy was much
more aware of her racial attitudes and beliefs than was Claire, and she also showed much
greater ability to look at her attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors critically.
Terri. In terms of her openness and self -reflectiveness, Terri was much more like
Joy than Claire. There were several ways in which she demonstrated her openness to
other's ideas. First, I consider being able to see the other side of an issue as a type of
openness, and this was an ability that Terri demonstrated. During our third interview,
Terri expressed her opposition to affirmative action scholarships. After some discussion,
I asked her a question to determine whether or not she had any knowledge of the other
side of the issue.
What are the reasons why some people advocate aflirmative action?
Well, I think that a lot of it is that everybody's so sensitive about things right now
and so sensitive about how people were treated in the past and how people are
continued to be treated, and I think that a lot of times people are trying to make
amends, you know, and saying now, "Well, we'll give you this special scholarship
and this and that to show you that we aren't going to discriminate against you and
we aren't», this isn't going to happen and blah, blah, blah, in order to bring that

person into that place, and I think that's a lot of times what happens.
[I‘erri 314-055]

155

Unlike Claire, who seemed either unable or unwilling to see an issue from the opposite

perspective, Terri demonstrated some understanding of the other side of the issue.

Another example of her openness occurred during the first interview, when Terri

indicated to me that the information being presented on racism and discrimination was

not new to her.

. . . a lot of the stuff that we've talked», I guess it really hasn't been that much of a
new experience to me, but I like to see other people because a lot of that stuff is
so new to them, and a lot of the ideas and a lot of different things that we're
talking about, I mean, talking about minority and talking about different things. I
mean, to me it isn't really that different, but I can see that in the future a lot that
we're talking about is in a lot of areas, such as being [blind] and deaf and different
things like that, [that] I'm not very familiar with, and I'm kind of intrigued to learn
about it and maybe even follow into the special education field. [Terri 131-193]

Given Terri's prior experiences with racism and discrimination, it would have been easy

for her to take the attitude that the class was boring and a waste of her time, but instead

she looked forward to learning about issues with which she was less familiar. In a similar

vein, Terri's response to her viewing of the "True Colors" video also showed a type of

openness. Not only had she seen the video previously, she knew from personal

experience that racial discrimination was still a problem in this society. Nevertheless, she

was still able to find value in watching the video again, as she explained,

I just think that a lot of the different varieties that [the racial discrimination] came
in»at the store and this and that, so I can see a store and I can understand. I've
seen that before, so that wasn't really anything new, but even the car salesman, the
man himself who was Black and didn't rush out there either, and the different
prices and when they were confronted about it It's just a lot of different things. I
mean, I've never gone and priced a car, so I'm not», I've never seen that before, so
it's really just a lot of the different areas that you found it in. [Terri 217-342]

Again, Terri does not seem to take the attitude that she knows all that she needs to know;

she clearly seems to be open to learning more. In our firml interview, I found a third

example of Terri's openness.

What if I told you after these interviews and so on that I came to the conclusion
that you were prejudiced?

I'd listen to what you had to say, but (laughs) I probably would feel a little
offended, you know. I'd want to know why you would say that. [Terri 426-177]

156

Though Terri had never said anything to give me the impression that she was racially
prejudiced, I had not shared this impression with Teni, and I was curious to see how she
would respond to the above question. I think it is noteworthy that her first inclination
would be to listen to my reasons for thinking that she was prejudiced. To me, this is
another example of her openness; I think that many, if not most, people would probably
react defensively or maybe just ignore whatever I had to say because they know that
they're not prejudiced. Teni didn't consider herself prejudiced, but apparently she would
still be open to listening to my reasons for thinking she was prejudiced.

In my interviews with Terri there is abundant evidence of her openness to
diversity. She was certainly one of the most open and most accepting individuals that I
talked with. I think part of her openness was attributable to her many experiences with
people from a variety of different backgrounds.

My friends are from all different backgrounds, all different races, and when I sit

in the class and when we talk in our lab, I hear people saying, "I've never met

anyone that's different than me. My school was all White. My school was all
this.” Well, my school was very diverse. I Ieamed all that», I mean, I just think
that a lot of the experiences I've had and knowing what to do and what not to do,

I've learned definitely not to stereotype people, and I see so many people doing it

here. It's because they don't know at all, and I think that I've been educated well

enough. I mean, I just think that I have had enough experiences right now that a

lot of these things we read about, a lot of these things I have already known, I've

already experienced, but there's a lot of people in the class that are looking at this
for the first time, and they're just thinking, ”Oh, my gol.‘ It's so new to them, but

to me it's not new at all. [Terri 131-60]

Based on the preceding excerpt and on other comments that she made about various
experiences that she had had, it was obvious that Teni did more than just express an
openness to diversity; she actually seemed to live it, and one of her comments in the final
interview illustrates that I had asked Terri to explain why she thought she was part of
the solution to the problem of racism and discrimination. She responded,

I think that by my actions and by the things I do, I'm an example to people, and I

never let a person ever get away with ever saying anything that's racist or

anything around me. I will always make sure I say something; I don't ignore it,
and a lot of people would, you know, who would say, ”I'm not racist, I'm not this

whatever," and would laugh at some kind of a joke or something, but I think that
everything about me just shows that I'm not like that, sol think that by being an

157

example to whomever it may be, I mean, people here, people there, whoever

knows me or something, I think that that is kind of part of a solution.

[Terri 426-131]

In my mind, Terri's actions signify a true commitment to respecting diversity. I am
impressed with her recognition that ignoring or laughing at racist comments is a way of
condoning those comments, and she will have no part of that because she wants to make
sure that people know that she disapproves of such comments.

In addition to her openness, Terri also showed her self -reflectiveness through her
awareness of her own attitudes and beliefs along with her ability to think critically about
them. An example of Terri's self -awareness appeared in our second interview. I had
asked her how she could be unprejudiced, as she had claimed, after growing up in a
community with prejudiced people all around her. Her response was as follows:

Well, obviously, I mean, my parents, they were prejudiced. They had a lot of

prejudice in 'em, and my grandfather, oh my gol! I can't even say one thing to

him. He's from the upper peninsula, so, I mean, he's just horrible, but I think that
it kinda comes within yourself. I mean, within myself I just», I guess it's just
something that I've done myself to learn to see. I've seen all the injustice. I've
heard my friends talk about different things that have happened to them and a lot

of different things like that, and I just see that I could never be like that and that I

would never want to do that to anyone, and that I find it, like, rewarding. I mean,

a lot of people don't reach out and have friends from cultural and ethnic different

backgrounds whatever, but I enjoy having people. I don't want somebody who's
exactly like me. That would be so boring, to have someone exactly like me. . . .

[Terri 217-095]
When I have asked other students this question, some of them have had difficulty coming
up with an appropriate response. Terri, however, showed what I consider to be a type of
self-awareness when she was able to provide at least a partial response, although I'm sure
there were other factors involved of which she was unaware. She seemed to be saying
that despite the presence of prejudiced attitudes around her, she had made a conscious
decision not to adopt those attitudes Plus, it seems apparent that having a number of
friends from different racial backgrounds was instrumental in helping her come to
understand the effects of racial prejudice and discrimination. One example of her ability

to think critically about her attitudes and beliefs appeared during our second interview as

158

well. Terri had commented that some of her ideas were changing, and I asked her to
elaborate.

Well, the issue that we talked about concerning the answer that I gave with the
kids in the class speaking Black English, and I was saying that I would expect
them to speak proper English, and I now realize, you know, that that was kind of
a very shallow answer for myself, and through a lot of the reading and a lot of the
examples that we've done in class, too, even today in discussion, I see that there
really is no basic, standard English language. It's just, you know, what I myself
have perceived and so I think I've kind of made amends on that feeling.

[Teni 217-220]

I think this excerpt shows that Terri was reflective, in that after the interview in which we
discussed the issue of Black English, she continued to think about the issue and her
position on it. This excerpt also shows that Terri was able to be critical of her own
attitudes and beliefs. Additionally, I think it serves as another illustration of her openness
to new ideas because, as she explained, the readings and other experiences in the class led
her to change her position on the use of Black English. Another good example of her
self -reflectiveness occurred during our final interview.
Has talking with me this semester afi'ected either your perceptions of the course
or the way you think about any of the issues covered in the course?
Yeah, yes, I would have to say. I don't know what it is but sometimes, like,
talking to you, I'll say whatever first comes to my mind, and I'll just get all mixed
up with what I'm saying, and I won't really think about it, and then I'll get up to
my room and I'll think, "What was I saying? Why did you answer it that way?" or
whatever, and for some reason, I mean, it'll be on my mind for a couple of days or
whatever, and I'll just be like, ”How could I have answered that?“ I kind of work
it out in my head, you know, what I was trying to say or what I was meaning and
stuff, but I do think sometimes it really challenged me, you know, of what to and
what not to say, and I don't know, I would always be thinking, "No, that wasn't
the right answer," you know; "I should have said this or that," sol think it did
challenge me. [Terri 426—151]
In this excerpt Terri illustrated that she often critically reflected on what she had said
during her interviews with me, questioning the things that she had said, pondering what
her ideas really were, and trying to think of ways that she might express them more
clearly.
In summary, the qualitative data reported in this section cleariy suggest that
Claire, the focus student who demonstrated the least movement toward developing more

favorable racial attitudes and beliefs, was also the student who demonstrated the least

159

openness and the least self -reflectiveness. On the other hand, Terri, who began the
course with very favorable racial attitudes, and Joy, who seemed to be moving in the
direction of developing more favorable attitudes, both demonstrated considerable
openness to diversity and to new or conflicting ideas, as well as a high degree of self -
reflectiveness, particularly self-awareness and the ability to be self-critical. Thus, it
appears that the personal qualities of openness and self -reflectiveness may be important
variables determining how students' respond to courses on diversity, and these qualities

may need to be taken into consideration along with students' entering racial attitudes and
beliefs.

CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

In this study I investigated whether preservice teachers' racial attitudes and beliefs
appeared to be related to how they perceived and what they Ieamed from a course on
diversity. Specifically, I sought to determine 1) how students who entered the course
with more favorable racial attitudes and beliefs were similar to and different from those
who entered with less favorable racial attitudes and beliefs, 2) whether students' racial
attitudes and beliefs appeared to change during the semester, and 3) whether students
with more favorable racial attitudes and beliefs would experience the course differently
than those with less favorable attitudes and beliefs. In this chapter I will summarize and
discuss the major findings from my analysis of the quantitative and qualitative data, I will
discuss some of the implications that these findings would seem to have for our on-going
efforts to prepare teachers for diversity, I will identify some of the limitations of the
present study, and finally, I will suggest possible directions for future research in this
area.

Summary of Major [findings

The major findings of this study were derived from both quantitative and

qualitative data. I will summarize separately the findings from each type of data.
Quantigtive Data

The quantitative data sources were the attitude survey, the teaching/learning

questionnaire, and course records of attendance, exam scores, and course grades. My

analysis of these data yielded five major findings:

160

161

1. A comparative analysis of students' responses to the individual items on the Quick
Discrimination Index (QDI) revealed that students who scored high differed significantly
in the following major ways from those who scored low :

a) Perceptions of minorities. Students who scored high were more likely than those
who scored low to regard themselves as unprejudiced, and they appeared to hold
more positive images of racial minorities.

b) Recognition of racism and discrimination. Those scoring high appeared to be
more aware of and more knowledgeable about the racism and discrimination that
exists in our society.

c) Friendships with minorities. Students who scored high reported having greater
quantity and higher quality friendships with people who are racially different than
themselves.

<1) View on interracial relationships. Students who scored high appeared to be much
more accepting of interracial dating and marriage than were students who scored
low.

e) Living near or working with minorities. Students who scored high expressed
dramatically more positive feelings toward living in a diverse neighborhood and
also toward teaching in a diverse school.

0 Sensitivity to minority issues. Students who scored high appeared to be more
sensitive to minority concerns about racism and discrimination than were students
who scored low.

g) View on multicultural education. Students who scored high were more likely to
support the idea of multicultural education than were students who scored low.

This very strong and consistent pattern of differences between students who scored high
and those who scored low on the QDI suggest that higher scores on the QDI may be
reasonably regarded as indicators of more favorable racial attitudes, while lower scores

may be regarded as indicators of less favorable racial attitudes.

162

2. Among students in the volunteer group, those who began the course with more
favorable racial attitudes apparently moved toward having even more favorable attitudes
by the end of the course; in contrast, students who began with less favorable racial
attitudes moved toward having even less favorable ones.
3. On the teaching and learning questionnaire, at the beginning of the course and at the
end of the course, students with less favorable racial attitudes were significantly more
likely than those with more favorable attitudes to believe that ”the main job of the teacher
is to transmit the values of the mainstream American culture.” In fact, the significance of
this difference increased from the pretest to the posttest
4. Based on their responses to the pre and post administration of the teaching and
learning questionnaire, students with more favorable racial attitudes were more likely to
change in the desired direction than were students with less favorable racial attitudes.
Specifically , although there was no difference in the responses of the two groups to the
items below at the beginning of the course, at the conclusion of the course students with
less favorable racial attitudes were significantly more likely than those with favorable
racial attitudes to still believe that

a) tracking in high school courses is desirable.

b) all students should be taught in English.

c) minority students had had good-excellent opportunities to learn in the high schools

which the respondents had attended.

d) minority students no longer face unequal opportunities to learn in school.
5. There were no differences between students with more favorable attitudes and those
with less favorable attitudes in terms of their attendance patterns, their performance on
the midterm and final exams, or their final course grades.

Qflitativg an
The qualitative data sources were the structured interviews and the unstructured

interviews. My analysis of these data resulted in twelve major findings. Throughout this

163

section I refer to racial attitudes as measured by the QDI given to all students at the end
of the semester.

1. With only a couple exceptions, students with more favorable racial attitudes and those
with less favorable attitudes came from communities and high schools that were very
similar in their racial composition, typically 90% or more White.

2. Despite the similarities between the two groups in the racial makeup of their
communities and schools, students with more favorable racial attitudes showed greater
awareness of racial prejudice and discrimination in their hometowns and high schools
than did students with less favorable racial attitudes.

3. Students with more favorable racial attitudes reported more interracial friendships and
higher quality interracial relationships than did students with less favorable racial
attitudes.

4. Students with more favorable racial attitudes were more likely to believe that racial
minorities have unequal opportunities to learn in school.

5. Students with more favorable racial attitudes were more likely to offer situational
explanations for the lower scth achievement of minority pupils, while those with less
favorable attitudes were more likely to offer personal (or trait) explanations.

6. To address the lower school achievement of minority pupils, students with more
favorable racial attitudes were more likely to believe that they would have to do some
things differently for their minority pupils, whereas students with less favorable attitudes
tended to believe that all students should be treated the same.

7. Although there were no clear differences between the two groups of students in terms
of what they reported learning from the course, students with favorable racial attitudes
were more likely than those with unfavorable attitudes to report that the comse had led
them to increased self -awareness or self -understanding.

8. The two groups of students did not appear to differ in terms of which class sessions

they considered most valuable and least valuable.

164

9. The two groups of students did not appear to differ in terms of their overall
satisfaction with the course.
10. While the two groups of students reported that being interviewed had little, if any,
influence on any of their beliefs, they were nearly unanimous in saying that the
interviews had pushed them to think more deeply about what they believed.
11. The data gathered on three focus students indicate that they entered the course with
different beliefs about racial minorities, different racial experiences, and different
personal qualities, all of which seemed to lead them to react differently to some of the
course content
12. The two focus students who displayed more openness to different perspectives and
an ability to be self -reflective appeared to be affected more positively by their experience
in the course than the student who was less open and less self -reflective.
Discussion

1 have talked at length about how students’ racial attitudes and beliefs appeared to
mediate what they Ieamed from CH’ 240. In this section I will discuss how the
mediation might have occurred and what particular messages students seemed to miss
because of this mediation. Also, I will discuss several other things that I Ieamed from
conducting this research but which were not reflected in the findings reported earlier.

Beliefs and Attitudes as Mediating Eactors

Many different researchers (e.g., Bullough, 1991; Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann,
1985; Goodman, 1988; Hollingsworth, 1989; Holt-Reynolds, 1991a; Lottie, 1975;
Pajares, 1992; Richardson, 1996) have explained how prospective teachers’ entering
beliefs about teaching seem to serve as filters through which the information presented in
the teacher education program is interpreted (see Chapter 2). The data collected in this
study suggest that, in a similar fashion, information presented to prospective teachers
about diversity is filtered through their existing racial attitudes and beliefs. In other

words, what students Ieam from a course on diversity is mediated by the racial attitudes

165

and beliefs which they bring to the course. An important question is, how does this
mediation occur? My examination of social psychological literature suggests several
plausible explanations.
Processing of New Information
One explanation is that individuals’ existing beliefs and attitudes directly
influence how they process new information. Scheibe (1970) and Zimbardo and Leippe
(1991) have pointed out that humans tend to respond to new information in a
conservative manner and, therefore, are prone to resist having their minds changed, even
though they may have no conscious intention or desire to be resistant. In fact, they will
often (unwittingly) distort the new information in an effort to make it consistent with
their existing beliefs rather than change those beliefs, as Scheibe (1970) explained,
preexisting beliefs can distort the interpretation of incoming information so that it
is congenial with these beliefs. Incoming information may be distorted (1) to give
more support to an entrenched belief than it should or (2) to deny the relevance of
i9q§ormation to the belief if the information is sufficiently incompatible with it (p.
These two ways of distorting information definitely appeared to be employed by some of
the students in my study. During my interviews with Claire, for instance, she expressed
numerous beliefs and attitudes that were apparently prejudiced and contradictory to the
information being presented in the course. Nevertheless, at the end of the semester she
asserted that the course had not led her to any new insights but rather had only reinforced
her conviction that she was not prejudiced against anyone. Obviously, she distorted the
information presented in the course because otherwise she would have become aware of
at least some of the ways in which she displayed prejudiced attitudes and beliefs. Claire
also demonstrated the second type of distortion. In one interview I showed her a
newspaper article indicating that unemployment rates for Blacks and Hispanics were
significantly higher than they were for Whites in the local metropolitan area. Upon
seeing the article, Claire responded,

I think if I had seen that for, like, ten years ago, I would have said it was because
of the problem with not employing somebody because they are Black or because

166

they are Hispanic. As far as now, I have no idea. . . . As far as why there’s more

Blacks and Hispanics unemployed, I don’t know, but there’s a variety of reasons

for unemployment, and it’s not because of race or color. [Claire 412-427]

Quite clearly, Claire rejected the idea that the information I showed her might be an
indication of racial discrimination in employment because such an idea was completely
incompatible with her existing belief that everyone has equal opportunities. She couldn’t
explain the unemployment disparities, yet somehow she was sure that they were not the
result of racial discrimination. She resisted accepting the new information and changing
her existing belief. I think Claire clearly illustrates the two ways in which people may
unwittingly distort information in order to make it more “congenial” with their
preexisting beliefs, and it seems quite likely that other students may have engaged in the
same types of distortion as Claire. Thus, this distorting of information seems to be one
way in which their preexisting attitudes may have mediated what students Ieamed from
CEP 240.

Stephan (1986) and Zimbardo and Leippe (1991) identified several other ways in
which individuals’ existing beliefs and attitudes seem to influence how they process new
information. In his review of the literature on intergroup relations, Stephan (1986)
reported that existing cognitive structures shape “the processing of information by
guiding attention, by structuring encoding, and by determining what information is most
likely to be retained, how it will be stored, and the degree to which it will subsequently be
available” (p. 604). In short, individuals’ beliefs and attitudes determine how new
information is perceived, interpreted, and remembered. Furthermore, Stephan cited
research suggesting that individuals’ expectancies (which Scheibe [1970] referred to as
“future-oriented beliefs”) bias how they respond to new information. In processing
information, people show a tendency to seek out aspects which confirm their
expectancies. Thus, in the present study, for example, students who began the course
believing (and therefore expecting to hear) that racism and discrimination are no longer

serious problems in American society would be likely to focus on and remember most

167

those aspects of the course which seemed to confirm this belief. Zimbardo and Leippe
(1991) described a closely related phenomenon called selective attention, which is “a
tendency to pay closer attention to a presented message that supports our existing attitude
compared to one that opposes it” (p. 144). The authors explained that “despite good
intentions to be objective, people tend to gather information in such a way as to stack the
deck in favor of confirming their beliefs” (p. 205). By focusing their attention on the
aspects of the information that supports their existing beliefs and attitudes, while
simultaneously failing to attend to aspects which conflict with them, individuals are able
to protect and reaffirm what they already believe and thereby avoid, or at least minimize,
cognitive dissonance. Furthermore, Zimbardo and Leippe cited research which suggested
that identifying even a few instances of information consistent with individuals’ beliefs
seems sufficient to outweigh many more instances of information which is inconsistent,
probably because they disregard or fail to attend as closely tothe inconsistent
information. This practice of selective attention is probably a partial explanation as to
why many of the low students in my study did not change their racial beliefs and attitudes
despite all the disconfirrning information presented to them. Finally, Zimbardo and
Leippe cited research suggesting that people’s existing beliefs influence not only how
they process new information but also how they remember it The authors noted that
“‘the past’ is not a fixed, immutable series of events, but often involves subjective
interpretation and reconstruction of memories in line with what we believe and value” (p.
207). In my study, Claire provided an excellent illustration of how this type of
reconstruction can occur. Early in the semester, shortly after viewing a videotape entitled
“True Colors,” which conveyed the message that racial discrimination is still a problem
in America, Claire acknowledged that the video illustrated racial discrimination.
However, at the end of the semester she described the video as being about diversity, and
in none of her comments about it did she make any reference to the idea of discrimination

(see Chapter 4). Because the video’s message about the continuing existence of racial

168

discrimination was inconsistent with Claire’s deeply-held belief that everyone has equal
opportunities in this society, she apparently reconstructed the message of the video to
make it consistent with that belief. Again, it seems very likely that many other students
engaged in similar types of reconstructions of the information presented in CEP 240.
Consistency Theories

A second plausible explanation of the mediation process is found in a broad body
of social psychological research generally referred to as consistency theories. While
there are many different varieties of consistency theories, Oskamp (1991) has succinctly
characterized their basic nature as follows:

their key feature is the principle that people try to maintain consistency among

their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors. Awareness of one’s own inconsistency is

viewed as an uncomfortable situation which every person is motivated to escape.

Thus, attitude change should result if individuals receive new information which

is inconsistent with their previous viewpoints or if existing inconsistencies in their

beliefs and attitudes are pointed out to them. (pp. 230-231)
Although consistency theories view people as essentially rational and logical beings, they
also recognize that people are often irrational and illogical. As explained in the previous
section, people are inclined to interpret new information in such a way as to make it
consistent with what they already believe. When presented with information that is
inconsistent with their existing beliefs and attitudes, they will go to great lengths to
resolve the inconsistencies and make the information congruent with their existing
vieWpoints. Consequently, no matter how much information is proffered nor how
compelling the information may be, merely presenting people with information which
contradicts their existing beliefs and attitudes provides no guarantee that any change will
occur (Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991; Oskamp, 1991). This human tendency toward
consistency might be another way in which the existing attitudes and beliefs of the
students in CEP 240 mediated what they learned from the course

Bern (1970) identified four ways in which individuals strive to maintain cognitive

consistency in the face of contradictory evidence: denial, bolstering, differentiation, and

transcendence. Though I can’t be certain that participants in my study employed any or

169

all of these devices, it seems highly probable that they did. First, individuals may flatly
deny the truth of the inconsistent evidence. Thus, when low students who began CEP
240 believing that everyone has equal opportunities in school were presented with
information suggesting that minorities still have unequal opportunities to Ieam, the low
students may have simply rejected this information as untrue. Second, when an existing
belief or attitude is challenged by contrary evidence, individuals may attempt to bolster
the belief or attitude “by seeking out other supportive beliefs and thus attempt to swamp
the inconsistency” (p. 28). In so doing, the importance and the impact of the
inconsistency is diminished. For example, low students may have recalled personal
experiences they had had, articles they had read, or stories they had heard from others
about how opportunities have improved for minorities, as evidenced by school
segregation being illegal, by the apparently increasing numbers of minorities attending
college, by the availability of special scholarships and other financial assistance for
minorities, by minorities’ rising scores on SAT tests, and so on. Perhaps these students
then reason that in light of all of these apparent positives, the fact that a few minorities
might still experience some inequalities may seem less consequential and, therefore,
insufficient to change their basic belief that opportunities are equal. Third, individuals
may lessen the significance of the inconsistent evidence by differentiating it in some way.
For example, they may possibly reason that inequalities faced by minorities are the result
of two different causes: through unfair treatment by the majority or through some
inadequacies in the victims themselves. They may further reason that inequalities
resulting from the latter cause are somehow less consequential. Thus, even in light of
information indicating that inequalities exist today, these students are able to view them
as not being of the same order as those which existed in the past as a consequence of
overt racial discrimination. Finally, evidence conflicting with individuals’ existing
beliefs and attitudes may be explained away through transcendence, “a kind of reverse

differentiation in that it sees the two disparate beliefs as part of a larger, or transcendent

170

unity” (p. 29). For some of the low students in this study, an example of a larger unity
might possibly be that humans, and therefore human institutions, are imperfect. These
students may believe that although every effort is being made to ensure equal
opportunities for all, inevitably a few inequalities will continue to exist. Thus, in their
minds, the existence of a few instances of inequality would not invalidate their idea that
opportunities are equal.
Belief IAttitude Strength

Bern (1970) and Zimbardo and Leippe (1991) have suggested a third plausible
explanation of the mediation process: the strength of people’s beliefs and attitudes. Bem
(1970) explained that beliefs have a vertical structure (depth) and a horizontal structure
(breadth). Depth refers to how well elaborated a particular belief is (i.e., how many
reasons or arguments support a single belief), and breadth refers to how extensively a
particular belief is connected to and supported by other related beliefs. Rokeach (1976)
has described the structure of attitudes in an almost identical fashion, although he used
the term difi'erentiation rather than depth to refer to “the degree of articulation of the
various parts within a whole” (p. 117). Beliefs and attitudes which have greater depth
and breadth will show greater perseverance in the face of contradictory information
(Bern, 1970; Rokeach, 1976; Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991). Thus, in the present study,
students’ beliefs and attitudes that were already well developed (i.e., having considerable
depth and/or breadth) were unlikely to be much affected by the information presented
during the course. Another important dimension of belief/attitude strength described by
both Bern (1970) and Rokeach (1976) is centrality, which refers to how important or how
central a particular belief/attitude is in an individual’s belief/attitude system. They point
out that a belief or attitude may have considerable depth and/or breadth but still not be
particularly important to the person; on the other hand, it is possible for a belief or
attitude that is not well elaborated to be very important in the person’s belief or attitude

system. The greater the degree of centrality of a particular belief or attitude, the more

171

resistant it will be to change. Although they use the term involvement rather than
centrality, Zimbardo and Leippe (1991) have explained that this dimension leads to
greater resistance because

people are typically most unbudgeable on issues that involve them personally to

the point where their sense of personal identity, accustomed way of life, or sense

of social connectedness is tied tightly to their stand on the issue. (p. 204)
Zimbardo and Leippe argued that understanding people’s involvement with an issue is a
key to understanding why some attitudes are so resistant to change. In my study it seems
probable that the centrality of some students’ beliefs and attitudes on (or their
involvement with) the issues covered in this course was a conuibuting factor to the
apparent lack of change in their attitudes and beliefs.

Message

As a consequence of the various ways in which students’ racial attitudes and
beliefs served to mediate what they learned, many of the students seemed to miss some of
the main messages the course intended to convey. Based on my involvement with the
course as an instructor of one discussion section, I believe that there were certain key
messages relative to racial issues which the CEP 240 course attempted to convey to
prospective teachers. In my perception, these messages included the following: 1)
racism and discrimination are still major problems in American society, 2) many minority
students still do not have equal opportunities to learn in school, 3) a number of current
school policies and practices serve to depress the school achievement of many minority
students, and 4) in their instruction prospective teachers need to be aware of and prepared
to respond to the special instructional needs of many racial minority students. The data
reported in the previous chapter seem to indicate that most of the students who scored
high on the QDI got the intended messages, while most of those scoring low missed the
messages. I would say that a student " got" the messages when, at the end of the course,
his/her responses to questionnaire items or to interview questions seemed congruent with

the intended messages, and a student "missed” the messages when, at the end of the

172

course, his/her responses to questionnaire items or interview questions seemed
incongruent with the intended messages. To say that a message was ”missed” implies
that a student did not hear or did not comprehend it; however, I am using the term to also
encompass those who may have misinterpreted or outright rejected the intended message.
Although some students expressed ideas at the beginning of the semester that were
already congruent with the key messages of the course, the data suggest that many
students' ideas changed during the semester, probably as a result of their exposure to the
course, whereas the ideas of many other students did not appear to change despite their
exposure to the course. It is this latter group of students, those who apparently missed the
intended messages of the course, with whom I am presently concerned.

One of the central messages of the course was that racism and discrimination are
still major problems in American society. In response to this item on the QDI at the end
of the semester, over 75% of the hi gh-scoring students strongly or mostly agreed that
racism and discrimination are still problems, whereas only 31% of the low-scoring
students strongly or mostly agreed. This large difference between the two groups of
students suggest that most of the low students missed this particular message.

A second key message of the course was that many minority students do not have
equal opportunities to Ieam in school. Students' responses to item #25 on the ABCD
questionnaire would seem to clearly indicate that the students with more favorable racial
attitudes got that message, while those with less favorable attitudes missed it At the
beginning of the semester 69.6% of the high students and 55.5% of the low students
agreed that minority students face unequal opportunities. This difference between the
two groups was not significant (p>.315). However, at the conclusion of the course the
percentage of high students expressing agreement with the statement increased to 95.6%,
while the low students agreeing decreased to 49.2%. This difference between the groups
was highly significant (p>.0000). Apparently, a sizable percentage of the high students

173

changed their response to this item while the low students were mostly unchanged.
Hence, I would argue that many of the lows missed this message.

A third key message of the course was that some current school policies and
practices serve to depress the school achievement of many minority students. One
specific school practice that received considerable attention in the course was tracking.
On the ABCD questionnaire at the beginning of the semester, 36.9% of the highs and
25.9% of the lows expressed disagreement with the practice of tracking students. This
difference was not significant (p>.5737). However, at the conclusion of the course 42.8%
of the highs and 27.3% of the lows expressed disagreement While neither percentage
appeared to change very much, this difference was significant (p>.0293). Therefore,
once again it appeared that more lows than highs missed one of the intended messages of
the course.

A fourth key message of the course was that prospective teachers need to be
aware of and prepared to respond to the special instructional needs of many minority
students. Although none of the questionnaire items addressed this issue directly, the
responses of the fourteen target students to some of the interview questions suggest a
difference between highs and lows. Four of the seven low-scoring target students
expressed the belief that minority students should receive the same instruction as
everyone else, whereas five of the seven hi gh-scoring target students believed they would
need to do some things differently for many minority learners. As with the other key

messages, more lows than highs seemed to miss this intended message.

er 'n s
I designed this study to seek answers to the three research questions set forth in
Chapter 1; however, actually conducting the study led me to a number of additional

Iearnings.

174

Collecting both quantitative and qualitative data led me to an awareness of an
important limitation of attitude surveys like the one used in my study. While students’
scores on such instruments may provide a reasonably good indication of the direction of
students’ racial attitudes (i.e., positive, neutral, or negative), these scores actually tell us
little about the strength of the students’ attitudes, about the beliefs and prior experiences
serving as the basis for the attitudes, or about their susceptibility to change. I Ieamed
from interviewing students that each of these three variables seemed to be important in
understanding the students and their response to the course, and they would certainly
seem to be essential considerations in any systematic effort to change the students’
attitudes. Additionally, from my interviews with students I Ieamed that there were clear
differences not only between hi gh-scoring students and low-scoring students, but also
between students within each of these two groups. The major between-group differences
I have detailed in Chapter 4 and summarized earlier in this chapter. Witlrin-group
differences became apparent when I analyzed the interview data for the 14 target
students. Among the seven low-scoring students that I interviewed, two seemed to be
quite set in their attitudes and did not appear to be particularly receptive to the major
messages of the course, while two other students seemed far less rigid and appeared more
willing to question and re-examine their existing attitudes and beliefs. For example,
Claire and Joy scored similarly on their pre and post attitude surveys, but my analysis of
their interview data revealed huge differences both in how open they appeared to be to
the information presented in the course and in how they interpreted that information (see
Chapter 4). The three remaining low-scoring students appeared to fall in-between these
extremes. Likewise, among the hi gh-scoring students, the qualitative data revealed some
noteworthy differences between students who had similar scores on the attitude survey.
There was considerable variation among the students in terms of the number of interracial
friendships they reported having, their prior experiences with individuals from different

racial backgrounds, and their apparent understanding of racism and discrimination. For

175

example, Teni reported having many friends from different racial groups, had extensive
prior interracial experiences, and often displayed extraordinary insight and understanding
of racial issues. Although Tina reported fewer interracial friendships and less extensive
prior interracial experiences, in many respects she demonstrated insight and
understanding comparable to Terri’s. In contrast, Cindy and Ernest each reported few
interracial friendships, had only modest prior interracial eXperiences, and did not display
the deep understandings that Terri and Tina did. While some of the information
presented in the course seemed to lead Cindy and Ernest to new insights and
understandings, for Tina and Terri it appeared to primarily reinforce and extend what they
already knew. In summary, I have Ieamed the importance of being cautious in how I
interpret and use students’ scores on an attitude survey. The scores that students receive
tell us little about the actual strength (depth and breadth) of their attitudes, and students
receiving similar scores may vary considerably in some important respects.

Some students' comments in the interviews suggest that, as their interviewer, I
may have unintentionally played a mediating role in the learning of the fourteen target
students. Although eleven of the target students asserted that the interviews had had little
or no effect on any of their attitudes or beliefs, thirteen of them felt that the interviews
had pushed them to think more deeply about the course material. Because the interviews
had pushed them to think more deeply, several students, lows and highs alike, expressed
the belief that they had gained more from the course. I found this circumstance
interesting but somewhat surprising because, as I explained in Chapter 4, I had never
intended for the interviews to be an intervention. The purpose of the interviews was to
gather information about students’ attitudes and beliefs and about their experience of the
course; the purpose was not to increase students’ engagement with and learning from the
course; nevertheless, for most of the target students, it appears that the latter is precisely
what happened. Having the opportunity to talk with someone about the issues being dealt

with in the course seemed to encourage the students to think more about them. In the

176

interviews I generally attempted to reflect back to the students what they were saying to
me, but I also attempted to push them to explain what they believed and why they
believed it. Being called upon to explain and then justify what they believed seemed to
lead students to greater self -awareness and self -understanding. As one student explained,
‘you made me, like, realize a lot of things about myself that I probably wouldn’t have
realized unless I would have talked to you” (Joy 428-4). From my experience in this
study, I have learned that another way to increase the potential impact of a course on
diversity may be to provide regular opportunities for students to discuss the issues and to
examine and justify their beliefs about them.

From the interviews I also learned that students' prior interracial experiences
seemed to be of major importance in shaping their racial attitudes and beliefs. First of all,
I found that high and low students alike all seemed to rely heavily on their personal
experiences for justification of their beliefs about various issues. More often than not,
when I asked students to explain the basis for a particular belief, if they were able to offer
an explanation at all, they almost invariably cited some type of personal experience or the
experience of someone they knew. This strong tendency that I observed seems very
much consistent with Bem’s (1970) assertion that “every belief can be pushed back until
it is seen to rest ultimately upon a basic belief in the credibility of one’s own sensory
experience or upon a basic belief in the credibility of some external authority” (p. 5). As
I explained in Chapter 4, I found some evidence that when information presented in the
course conflicted with students’ experience-based beliefs, they often seemed to give more
credence to their own experience than to the conflicting information. Secondly, given the
apparent importance of prior experiences in shaping attitudes and beliefs, it was not
surprising to me that students whose experiences with diversity had been very limited
generally demonstrated more limited beliefs about diversity issues. For example, ~
although they tended to grow up in communities that were very similar to those of hi gh-

scoring students in terms of their racial composition, low-scoring target students reported

177

considerably fewer interracial friendships, demonstrated much less awareness of racial
prejudice and discrimination in their schools and communities, and generally expressed
less favorable attitudes toward and beliefs about racial minorities (see Chapter 4). These
findings suggest to me that there may be a relationship between students’ prior interracial
experiences and their racial attitudes and beliefs. However, my study provides
insufficient data to justify speculating much about the nature of this possible relationship.
This is a question that needs to be investigated more directly in future research. Not
withstanding the need for further research, the data collected in this study suggests to me
that instructors of diversity courses must give attention to students’ prior interracial
experiences (or lack thereof). Perhaps, too, in addition to simply presenting students with
information, instructors should also seek opportunities to somehow broaden the
experiences of those who come with limited prior interracial experiences.

One additional personal insight that I gained from this study may possibly be
related to the important role that personal experience seems to play in shaping people’s
attitudes and beliefs. In examining the class sessions that students considered the most
and least valuable, I could determine no noteworthy differences between high and low
students in terms of the sessions that they identified. When I looked at the class sessions
that both groups of students had considered least valuable, I could not point out any
strong similarities. However, when I looked at the class sessions that the two groups had
considered most valuable, there did appear to be an interesting similarity in their
responses. I found that the class sessions that both high and low students considered
most valuable tended to be either the showing of a videotape or a presentation by a panel.
A number of comments from students suggest that these types of experiences had a
greater impact on them than readings or lectures. For example, Claire, a low student,
explained how the F.A.T. City video had enhanced her understanding of Iearrring disabled
children.

I really liked that one, putting it on a normal everyday level for like you and I.
We saw what a, perhaps, learning disability child might be going through and a

178

lot of those things you never stop to really think about ‘em. . . . I think that it
made me see what kinds of problems that they go through. You know, I mean it’s
easy to say, yeah, okay, they might be slow. Yeah, they might turn letters around
or something like that, but this actually, you know, put it in terms that we could
understand it. [Claire 429-26]
Karen, one of the high students, responded to the video in a similar fashion.
Just watching that made you understand what the kid goes through. You know,
(inaudible) sitting in a classroom. I mean, that kinda made you understand how
they feel. You’ll take that with you when you teach. [Karen 427-24]
Students’ responses to the videos suggest that they can be a valuable tool in helping
students come to understand people who are different than themselves. They can provide
students with a type of vicarious experience with people and situations they may not have
encountered yet in real life. Students’ comments indicated that panel presentations also
seemed to facilitate their understanding of others. One the low students, Kate, expressed
a change in attitude toward gays and lesbians as a result of the bi/gay/lesbian panel
presentation. I asked Kate to explain why.
Just ‘cause I never got to like hear from one of them. I never really, I mean, I’ve
seen like one or two maybe, but I’ve never seen like a panel discussing about how
they’re like in love with a partner and like things like that I don’t know. It just
helped a little. [It] helped me understand them. [Kate 421-70]
One of the high students, Cindy, expressed a similar change in attitude as a consequence
of hearing the panel and actually meeting a person who was homosexual.
I’ve never had a friend who is homosexual. And like we had that panel and then I
got to know somebody and it just helped me to accept them more and not look at
it as totally wrong. I’ve never thought it was totally wrong, but it just helped me,
I think, to be more accepting. To, you know, to hear about their own personal
stories and everything. [Cindy 506-26]
Comments like these suggest to me that for some students--particularly those whose
prior experiences have been limited»providing them with opportunities to meet and
interact with people from different groups may be a promising way to promote positive
attitude change.
Conclusions
The major findings in this study lead me to draw several conclusions. First,

White preservice teachers bring to their multicultural teacher education courses different

179

attitudes toward racial minority groups. While some of them come with mostly positive
attitudes, others--approximately one-third of the sample in this study--come with less
positive perceptions of minorities, little awareness of racism and discrimination, less
favorable views on multicultural education, and less positively disposed toward teaching
minority group children. Other research (Bymes & Ki ger, 1988; Law & Lane, 1987) has
also found that White preservice teachers' attitudes toward racial minorities are not
always positive, and additional research (Duckitt, 1992; Maluso, 1995) has shown that
people's racial attitudes influence how they behave toward members of another racial
group. Given the fact that the student population in our schools is expected to become
increasingly diverse in the coming years, less than favorable racial attitudes on the part of
many prospective teachers are certainly a cause for concern, for a number of reasons.
First, the data collected in this study indicate that prospective teachers who hold less
favorable attitudes toward racial minorities are more likely to attribute the lower school
achievement of minority students primarily to personal (or trait) factors rather than to
situational factors. With this perspective, these prospective teachers are more likely than
those with more favorable racial attitudes to “blame the victims” for their lower
achievement, and they may also be inclined to hold lower expectations for these students.
Second, the data in this study indicate that prospective teachers who hold less favorable
racial attitudes are more likely than those who hold more favorable attitudes to believe
that all students should be treated the same. This suggests that these teachers are likely to
be less willing than those with more favorable attitudes to make appropriate instructional
adjustments to accommodate the different needs of minority pupils in their classrooms.
Finally, prospective teachers with less favorable racial attitudes report having less desire
to work with minority children. Individuals who have indicated they would prefer not to
work with particular students because of their racial backgrounds would seem to be more

likely to behave in a negative fashion toward those students.

180

A second conclusion is that prospective teachers' racial attitudes and beliefs
appeared to serve as filters through which they interpreted the information and
experiences that they were presented within the course. The data indicate that the
participants in this study often tended to interpret the inf orrnation presented to them in a
manner consistent with their existing racial attitudes and beliefs. The idea that
prospective teachers entering attitudes and beliefs serve as filters for processing the
content of their teacher education program has been frequently mentioned in the teacher
education literature (Borko & Putnam, in press; Goodman, 1988; Hollingsworth, 1989;
Kagan, 1992; Richardson, 1996). Furthermore, the fact that individuals' attitudes and
beliefs influence the acquisition and interpretation of new knowledge has also been well
documented in the social psychological research (Bar-Ta], 1990: Bem, 1970; Oskamp,
1991; Petty & Cacioppo, 1981; Zimbardo & Leippe, 1991). Thus, the conclusion that
prospective teachers' racial attitudes and beliefs serve as filters for their learning of
information on diversity is very much consistent with current research in both areas.

Third, the racial attitudes and beliefs of preservice teachers appeared to be little
affected by the course. For the most part, students' entering racial attitudes and beliefs,
whether more favorable or less favorable, appeared to be reinforced by the course rather
than changed. Research results on the impact of diversity courses on students' attitudes
and beliefs have been mixed. Some researchers (Bondy, Schmitz, & Johnson, 1993;
McGeehan, 1982; Reed, 1993; Ross & Smith, 1992; Tran, Young, & Di Lelia, 1994)
have reported that students' racial attitudes and beliefs have been changed in a positive
direction by a course on diversity, but others (Barry & Lechner, 1995; Larke, 1990;
McDiarmid, 1992; McDiarmid & Price, 1990) have reported little or no change in
students' attitudes and beliefs. One distinctive feature of the present research which sets
it apart from earlier research in this area was that change among students with more
favorable racial attitudes was examined separately from change among students with less

favorable racial attitudes. If, as the results of this study suggest, favorable racial attitudes

181

tend to become more favorable and unfavorable attitudes tend to become less favorable
during the course, it may be inappropriate to attempt to measure attitude change among a
class of students as a whole because differences of this type existing within the class
would be obscured.

Fourth, students' prior equal-status contact with racial minorities seems to be
related to having more favorable racial attitudes and beliefs. One of the most striking
differences between students with more favorable racial attitudes and those with less
favorable attitudes was the reported differences in their previous interracial relationships.
Despite coming from communities that were, for the most part, very similar in their racial
composition, students with more favorable racial attitudes reported in both the survey
data and the interview data that they had greater quantity and higher quality relationships
with individuals from other racial groups. Other researchers (McGeehan, 1982; Ross &
Smith, 1992) have reported similar findings. Although it is possible that having more
positive racial attitudes is what leads to more interracial relationships, research cited by
Maluso (1995) suggests that it is the equal-status interracial contact which leads to more
positive interracial attitudes.

Fifth, there did not appear to be any relationship between students' racial attitudes
and what they learned from the course or how they felt about the course. There was no
difference in the performance of the two groups of students on the midterm and final
exams, both of which were primarily assessments of factual knowledge. In addition,
during the final interview when the target students were asked to identify the most
important things that they had Ieamed from the course, I could discern no apparent
differences between the responses of students with more favorable racial attitudes and
those with less favorable racial attitudes. This finding stands in contrast to that of
McGeehan (1982), who found that students with the most positive interethnic attitudes
were the ones demonstrating the most knowledge growth. Also, in my final interviews

with the target students, there appeared to be no difference between those with more

182

favorable attitudes and those with less favorable attitudes in terms of their level of
satisfaction with the course. All of the target students expressed very positive feelings
about the course. McGeehan found that some students responded more positively than
others to the course on diversity, but she could find no pattern of common characteristics
for those who responded more positively and those who responded less positively. I
think these findings indicate that it may be inappropriate to assume that students with less
favorable racial attitudes will respond less favorably to a course on diversity than students
with more favorable racial attitudes. They further suggest that students' positive feelings
about a course on diversity does not necessarily mean that their attitudes were positively
influenced by the course.

Sixth, contrary to the findings of McGeehan's (1982) study, the amount of factual
information that students Ieam from a course in diversity does not appear to be related to
their racial attitudes; however, the meanings that students attach to this information do
seem related to their racial attitudes. In other words, though the students in the course
were all exposed to the same information, those holding less favorable racial attitudes
appeared to construct different meanings for the information than those holding more
positive racial attitudes. The data collected in this study suggest that in response to the
information presented in CEP 240, students holding more favorable racial attitudes, in
contrast to those holding less favorable attitudes, were much more likely to move toward
embracing viewpoints that are generally considered to be more sensitive to the needs of
diverse learners. The idea that prospective teachers' entering attitudes and beliefs serve
as filters for subsequent learning has been well documented in the literature (Anderson &
Holt-Reynolds, 1995; Feiman-Nemser & Buchmann, 1989; Goodman, 1988;
Hollingsworth, 1989; Holt-Reynolds, 1991b; Kagan, 1992; Richardson, 1996).

Finally, there is some evidence that multicultural education courses like the one
investigated in this study may be most effective for students who already possess more

favorable racial attitudes and for those who display a quality of openness and an ability to

183

be self -reflective. There appeared to be no difference between the two groups of students
in terms of their knowledge growth from the course (as indicated by their scores on the
midterm and final exams), but as noted earlier, the students with more favorable racial
attitudes were the ones who seemed to internalize more of the central messages of the
class, particularly the message that many minority students still face unequal
opportunities to learn. Additionally, my analysis of the data on Joy and Claire, the two
case study students who were identified as having less favorable racial attitudes, indicated
that Joy's attitudes and beliefs appeared to be moving in the desired direction in some
respects because of her openness to different perspectives and because of her inclination
to be self -reflective, whereas Claire's attitudes and beliefs appeared to be largely
unaffected by the course because she seemed reluctant to look at issues from a different
perspective and was not very self -reflective. While the data collected in this study clearly
support the idea that students' entering racial attitudes and beliefs serve as filters through
which they perceive the information being presented to them, the differences that I
observed in how Joy and Claire (both of whom scored low on the QDI) responded to the
course would seem to suggest that a student's openness to new information and his/her
ability to be self -reflective may be equally important factors affecting how they perceive
information on diversity. It further suggests that some students who enter a diversity
. course with less favorable racial attitudes are more likely than others with similar
attitudes to be moved in the desired direction by the course.
Limitations of the Study

There are several key limitations that need to be considered in interpreting the
results of this study. One important limitation was that the Quick Discrimination Index
(QDI), the racial attitude survey, was administered only to the volunteer students at the
beginning of the course and again at the end of the course. The rest of the class
completed the survey only at the end of the course. Ideally, all students should have
completed the QDI pre and post. I dealt with this limitation by establishing that the

184

students who volunteered were not significantly different from those who did not
volunteer. I could then reasonably infer from the performance of the target students how
the students in the class as a whole would have performed on a pre-administration of the
QDI.

A second limitation of this study is that the principal investigator was Black and
all of the participants were White. Research cited by Maluso (1995) suggests that White
respondents are not always completely honest about their feelings when addressing a
Black interviewer. I addressed this limitation by asking each of the target students
whether or not their responses to my question had ever been influenced by the fact that
they were being interviewed by a Black person. The target students were unanimous in
saying that my being Black had little or no influence on how they had responded to my
questions; however, I still must acknowledge that sometimes their responses may well
have been influenced in ways in which they were not consciously aware.

A third limitation of this study is that many students, in response to the items on
the racial attitude survey and on the teaching and leaming questionnaire, may have
provided responses that were socially desirable rather than responses that indicated their
true attitudes and beliefs. I could argue, however, that it is probable that this effect was
randomly distributed across the entire sample and, in that respect, was its own control.
Another possibility is that students with less favorable attitudes might be the ones more
inclined to give socially desirable responses rather than their true views. However, even
this occurrence would not necessarily invalidate the results I reported; rather, it might
suggest that the differences between students with more favorable racial attitudes and
beliefs and those with less favorable attitudes and beliefs may actually be even greater
than those which I observed.

Implications
The findings from this study, taken together, would seem to have a number of

implications for teacher educators. First, there appears to be a clear connection between

185

prospective teachers' attitudes toward racial minorities and their openness to the content
of a multicultural education course. The data suggest that teacher candidates who enter a
multicultural teacher education course with less favorable attitudes toward minorities are
significantly less likely to alter their entering beliefs about minority students than are
candidates who enter with more favorable attitudes. It appears that, even after exposure
to a multicultural education course, teacher candidates who hold less favorable attitudes
toward minorities will be less likely to embrace teaching practices generally believed to
be desirable for effective teaching of minority students. Specifically, these teacher
candidates are more likely to support tracking of students, be less tolerant of language
diversity, and be less willing to accommodate individual differences in their instruction.
The findings of this study suggest that preparation programs will need to either
restructure their courses on diversity to better take into account the racial attitudes of
prospective teachers or provide more than a single multicultural education course of the
nature described in this study if they hope to change these teacher candidates' beliefs and
attitudes. In a course like CEP 240, for example, which attempts to present information
on such a wide range of diversity issues, not just on racial issues, I think it is impossible
to also have sufficient time to identify and attempt to address students' attitudes on each
of the issues. Although CEP 240 was well-liked by the students and appeared to have a
positive impact on many of them, based on the research cited earlier in this report, I
believe that a course with an attitude change focus would necessarily have to be
structured and taught differently than CEP 240 or most other multicultural education
courses which primarily focus on the presentation of information about diversity.
Specifically, I believe that, to be effective, multicultural courses will need to be
reconstructed so as to acknowledge and then confront unfavorable racial attitudes that
prospective teachers bring with them to their preparation programs. Although I doubt
that the alternative option»offering a second course that is of the same nature as present

courses--would lead to the desired changes in prospective teachers who enter with less

186

favorable racial attitudes and beliefs, it is nonetheless possible that more students might
respond favorably to messages on diversity if they hear these messages for a longer time
and in different ways.

A second implication is that since students' racial attitudes seem to serve as filters
through which they interpret the inf orrnation presented in a course on diversity, the
entering beliefs and attitudes of students will need to be identified and taken into
consideration in the instruction. This means that different students may need to be taught
different things and in different ways in order to challenge unfavorable racial attitudes
and beliefs. Once again, achieving this objective will necessitate that courses on diversity
be reconceptualized and restructured. I believe that until such reconceptualization and
restructuring occurs, it is likely that the racial attitudes and beliefs of prospective teachers
will, in most instances, continue to be little affected by their exposure to multicultural
teacher education courses.

Third, in this study one of the most striking differences that emerged between
target students with more favorable attitudes and those with less favorable attitudes was
in terms of their previous interracial experiences. The former group reported much more
prior contact and closer associations with people different from themselves, whereas the
latter group were characterized by very limited exposure to and only marginal
associations with nonmajority individuals. The implication is that, although teacher
education programs can do little, if anything, to alter the interracial experiences that
prospective teachers have prior to the time they begin their preparation programs, these
programs can and must do more to promote positive, equal-status contact between their
White students and students of color. For one thing, they can redouble their efforts to
recruit more minority teacher candidates so that White students will at least have some
equal-status interracial contact during their program, presenting the possibility of positive
interracial friendships developing. Additionally, considering the lack of students of color

in most teacher preparation programs, creative ways might possibly be found to promote

187

interactions between White prospective teachers and students of color in other program
areas. Certainly, teacher education programs cannot be expected to become social
coordinators; however, because research (Duckitt, 1992; Maluso, 1995; Ponterotto &
Pedersen, 1993) suggests that equal-status contact with members of different racial
groups is one of the most effective ways of reducing racial stereotyping and prejudice,
teacher education programs would be remiss to not put forth some effort in this regard.
Another way to promote positive interracial contact for White prospective teachers may
be to recruit more professors of color into teacher preparation programs. Research by
Maluso (1995) has suggested that White racial attitudes improve when they are exposed
to a racial minority person in a hi gher-status, leadership position. Maluso cautioned,
however, that the improved racial attitudes did not seem to generalize necessarily to
members of other racial groups. Presently, it seems that efforts to promote interracial
contact for White prospective teachers have mostly been limited to providing them with
one or more field experiences in diverse settings. As noted earlier, research suggests that
this type of unequal-status contact is less effective, if not completely counterproductive,
than equal-status contact I believe the practice of providing prospective teachers with
field experiences in multicultural settings should continue, but by no means should doing
so be regarded as a substitute for promoting equal-status and higher-status interracial
contacts for teacher candidates. Though apparently referring to inservice teachers, Grant
(1994) observed that "little work has been done on effective techniques that can be used
to change teachers' racial attitudes and behavior“ (p. 251), but he went on to note that
Courses that consist primarily or exclusively of lecture presentations have little
impact Diverse experiences, such as seminars, visitations, community
involvement, committee work, guest speakers, films, multimedia materials, and
workshops, combined with factual lectures, are more effective than is any single
approach. Community involvement and cross-cultural interactions (with the
appropriate norms in the social setting) are the most cogent techniques. (p. 252)
Fourth, the presentation of factual inf orrnation as the primary goal of courses on
diversity and the attendant tendency to use how much factual information students learn

as the primary measure of a course’s effectiveness may be inappropriate. The students in

188

the CEP 240 course were all exposed to the same information, but those with more
favorable attitudes t0ward minorities appeared to interpret and utilize this information
differently than those with less favorable attitudes. Apparently, effectively preparing
students for diversity involves more than just filling their heads with information; an
effective intervention may also have to provide them with guidance and support in
processing the information and in integrating it with their existing beliefs. Thus, it may
be more appropriate to determine the effectiveness of a multicultural education course by
assessing its overall impact (or lack thereof) on students’ racial attitudes and beliefs.

Fifth, since the mere presentation of factual information does not appear to be
associated with changes in students’ racial attitudes and beliefs, perhaps multicultural
courses should attempt to cover less information but in more depth so that students will
have more time to really think about the information being presented to them. Several of
the target students commented in their final interviews that, for them, the biweekly
interviews had been an invaluable part of the semester because my questioning had
forced them to think more deeply about what they believed and about what they were
learning in the course. This study suggests that multicultural courses should probably be
structured in such a way as to provide students with regular opportunities for reflection
on what they are learning, something which could be accomplished in a number of
different ways. Obviously, most professors are not able to have individual conversations
with their students; however, there would be more opportunities for these kinds of
dialogues between professors and students if class sizes were smaller. Also, it has been
my experience that some of this interaction can occur successfully through written
mediums, like dialogue journals and e-mail. Additionally, students could be involved in
more small group discussions where they would have the opportunity to talk with one
another about the information being presented and about their own beliefs.

Finally, the findings presented in this study raise the question of whether the

selection of candidates for admission to teacher education programs should be based in

189

part on their entering racial attitudes and experiences, as Haberman (1987) has suggested.
Gomez (1994) has also argued that teacher educators may need to select their teacher
candidates more carefully from the pool of available applicants. Available evidence
suggests that multicultural education courses may be most effective for those who already
possess favorable racial attitudes and least effective for those who possess unfavorable
attitudes. If teacher education programs are unable to change the racial attitudes and
beliefs that prospective teachers bring with them into their preparation programs, it may
make sense to select only those candidates who bring the desired attitudes and beliefs.
Future Research

There is still a lot of research needed in the area of multicultural teacher
education. First, I think the present study needs to be replicated to test the validity of the
major findings reported here. We need to know to what extent the pattern of results
obtained in this study seem to hold true with other participants in other course
configurations in other settings. We also need to study the effects of diversity courses on
students from various minority groups. Second, we need more research that examines the
differential effects that courses in diversity may have for students who enter the course
with different racial attitudes and beliefs. Looking at students' attitudes only as a whole
class may mask important differences in the ways that students with different racial
attitudes and beliefs are responding to the course. To better understand students' ,
responses to attitude surveys, these data sources need to be supplemented with interview
data. Third, we need to study courses and/or programs that seem to have been effective
in changing prospective teachers' racial attitudes and beliefs to determine which particular
aspects of these courses or programs appear to be most critical to their success. If we are
to improve the effectiveness of multicultural teacher education courses, we must expand
our knowledge of what seems to work and why. Fourth, how students' personal qualities
like openness and reflectiveness influence their learning needs to be further explored.

Finally, we need some longitudinal research that examines the long-term impact of

190

courses on diversity. Some of the data from this study suggests that the full impact of
courses on diversity may not become apparent until months, maybe even years, after the

conclusion of the course.

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

CEP 240 SYLLABUS, READING LIST,
AND SAMPLE ACTIVITIES

191

CEP 240

DIVERSE LEARNERS IN MULTICULTURAL PERSPECTIVE
SPRING SEMESTER, 1994

Thursday, 8:00-9:50 am, Room B-104 Wells Hall

Labs: Section 1--Tuesday, 8950, Room 115 BH (Mary Scott)
Section 2--Tuesday, 8-9:50, Room 005 NR (Whitney Hosmer)
Section 3--Tuesday, 1920-1210, Room C111 WH (Gretchen Halenbeck)
Section 4--Tuesday, 10:20-12: 10, Room 217 Anthony (Mary Scott)
Section 5»Tuesday, 12:40-2:30, Room C105 WH (Gretchen Halenbeck)
Section 6--Tuesday, 12:40-2:30, Room C213 WH (Anne Mungai)
Section 7»Tuesday, 10.20-12:10, Room 317 EBH (Art Garmon)
Section 8--Tuesday, 8-9:50, Room C107 WH (Ann Mungai)

Instructors: Dr. Eugene Pemell, Jr. Dr. Stanley Trent

Offices: Room 338 Erickson Hall Room 342 Erickson Hall
Phone: 355-1835 Phone: 355-1835
Office Hours: W 9-11; F 2—4 Office Hours: By appointment

(call & schedule apprnt during office hours)

Required Texts: Hardman, Michael L., Lif ford, J. Drew, and M. Winston Egan Human
Exceptionality: Society Schools and Family. London: Allyn & Bacon,
Inc. (1993).

Cushner, Kenneth, Averil McClelland and Philip Saf ford. Human
Diversity in Education: An Integrative Approach. New Yorlc
McGraw-Hill, Inc. (1992).

Course Packet -- available at International Bookstore

COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course aims to provide students with a basic orientation to the nature and pattern of
diversity in learners encountered within the context of multi-cultural classrooms. The
notion of diversity embraces the full spectrum of differences, including those which place
students at risk and those which do not. Further, at-risk factors will incorporate both
socio-cultural characteristics and areas of functioning or dysfunctioning that limit access to
knowledge. Specifically, such factors include communication, linguistic, gender, cultural,
ethnic, physical, sensory, behavioral, affective, and cognitive differences. This view of
diversity embraces both individual characteristics and those that exist within and across
social-cultural groups, so that students will gain an appreciation of the fact that learners
who have a particular characteristic are not a homogeneous group.

Student characteristics are studied as culttually mediated and socially constructed identities.
The course focuses on diverse learners and the factors that influence their access to
learning»both internal to and external to schools. Such factors include in-class assessment
and intervention strategies, socialization practices, child rearing styles, linguistic patterns of
communication, and other cultural factors. Students will examine the relationships between
these cultural and social practices and learner characteristics.

192

The objectives are to I) examine the nature of diversity itself, 2) foster sensitivity and
respect for diverse learners, 3) analyze the role of cultural factors that mediate the
perceptions and treatment of diversity, 4) enable students to recognize similarities and
differences in patterns of development, communication, and learning in multi-cultural
settings for students who present diverse characteristics. Cutting across all objectives is the
question, How does culture act as a filter to impede or facilitate the effectiveness of
instructional strategies when working with diverse learners?

In addition to lectures based on material in the required readings, a series of guest speakers
will present material in their areas of expertise.

The course content is organized into three main blocks:

1 . Who are the diverse students?
The nomenclature and definitions of diversity must be studied for a common basis of
understanding. The many dimensions of diversity are conceptualized: gender,
ethnicity, ability, socio-economic status, etc.

2 . Nature of Diversity In its Multl-cultural context

Two macro variables are studied within the context of multi-cultural settings: 1) areas
of individual functioning as determined by linguistic, physical and other competencies
and 2) the impact of socio-cultural backgrounds such as ethnicity, nationality, socio-
economic status, and gender. Thus, diverse learners can be differentiated in terms of
individual areas of functioning and in terms of social-cultural backgrounds within an
area of functioning. The aim is to examine the ways in which the nature of diversity
affects access to learning.

3 . Practical Implications of Learner Diversity In Schooling
Practical applications of the study of diverse learner characteristics will be structured
around two macro variables: 1) the role of schooling in society--including aspects of
socialization, economic livelihood, community life, awareness of the world,
appreciation of aesthetic concerns, and 2) the operations of schooling as impacted by
learners with diverse characteristics. This focus on the implications of diversity for
schooling examines the principles that undergird schooling, its function in society,
and the ways schooling is operationalized that are the consequence of responses to
diverse learners. The focus is on broad schooling issues and not specific pedagogical
strategies. Thus, school policies, classroom structures, legal issues, economics of
schooling, preparation of teachers, social relations of schooling with the wider
engirqnment, are studied for an understanding of the implications of diversity for
so 00 mg.

W

Students will be expected to complete reading assignments prior to class sessions and to
engage in thoughtful participation in lab discussions in light of these assignments. In
addition, students will take an in-class midterm and an in-class final exam (objective short
answer and multiple choice). Course grades will be based upon a formula: 10%
attendance and participation (both lecture and lab sections), 10% lab group assignments,
10% written assignment, 30% mid-tenn, and 40 % final exam.

193

Lab Sections: Students must attend the lab to which they have been assigned. This is
essential because activities are planned based on numbers of students and because group
continuity is important to the learning process.

Explanation of written assiggment: A 3 page paper (typewritten, double-spaced) is due
April 19. The subject of the paper is to be a summary and analysis of a children's book

that focuses on the subject of disability. Not more than 1 page should be devoted to
summary of the story. The analysis should incorporate knowledge gained from class
readings, lectures, and lab activities, including but not limited to:

l. the extent to which the diversity characteristic is dealt with realistically;

2. treatment of social and/or educational issues surrounding the character and
his/her responses to the environment;
3. discussion of any myths, stereotypes, or prejudices that the story (in your

opinion) either perpetuates or helps to break down. [Be sure to give
evidence to support your conclusions]

4. suggestions for alternative ways of dealing with the subject matter or
reasons why the subject is dealt with adequately.

A list of children's books which focus on the issues of diversity is provided in your packet,
however, you are not limited to this list

CEP 240 - COURSE OUTLINE AND SYLLABUS

1/13/94 Orientation to Course, Introductions, Assignments
Human Diversity. A Problem And An Opportunity
Readings: Cushner, Chapter 1
Hardman, Chapter 1

1/18/94 LAB 1: WHO ARE THE MINORITIES

1/20/94 The History of Human Diversity
Readingg: Cushner, Chapter 6
Hardman, Chapter 2
Trent & Artiles, Perceived Changes . . . (Packet)

1/25/94 LAB 2: DISCUSSION: ROLE PLAYING

1/27/94 The Culture Learning Process
“Guest Speaker: Cyrus Stewart--recruit for Hawaii

Readings: Cushner, Chapter 2
2/1/94 LAB 3: TRUE COLORS
213/94 Analyzing Intercultural Interaction
Readings: Cushner, Chapter 3

Hardman, Chapter 7
Lake, An Indian Father’s Plea

2/8/94 LAB 4: MASKS

194

THE NATURE OF DIVERSITY IN A MULTI-CULTURAL CONTEXT

2/10/94

2/15/94
2/17/95

2/22/ 94
2/24/94

Communication Across Culture
“Guest Speaker: Dr. David Stewart, Assoc. Professor, CEPSE
Readings: Cushner, Chapter 4

Hardman, Chapters 10 & 11

LAB 5: WHAT DO YOU DO WHEN YOU SEEA BLIND MAN

Influences on Learning
Readings: Cushner, Chapter 5
Hardman, Chapter 6

LAB 6: HOW HARD COULD THIS BE?

Multicultural and Bilingual Education
"Guest Speaker: Dr. Margie Gallego, Asst. Professor, Dept. of TE
Readings: Cushner, Chapter7
Hardman, Chapter 8

3/1/94 LAB 7: VIGNE’I’I‘E' YOLANDA PIEDRA (Packet)
3/3/94 Exceptionality in the Context of Diversity
Presentation: The Zimbabwean Experience
Readings Cushner, Chapter 8
Hardman, Chapter 12
MID TERM EXAMINATION 3/3/94
3/15/94 LAB 8: REGULAR LIVES
3/17/94 The Experience of Gender: What It Means to Be Male and Female
in Society
“Guest Panel - Alliance of Lesbian-Bi-Gay Students
Readings: Cushner, Chapter 9
Weisstein, “Woman as Nigger” (Packet)
3/22/94 LAB 9 SEX ROLE ST EREOTY PING

BACTICAL IMPLICATIONS OF LEARNER DIVERSITY IN SCHOOLING

3/24/94

3/29/94
3/31/94

Expanding Educational Boundaries (Educating Peter)
“Guest Speaker: Don Hoyle, President, Wastenaw Association for
Community Advocacy
Readings: Cushner, Chapter 10
Hardman, Chapters 5 & 9
USNWR - Violence in Schools (Packet)
USNWR - Tragedy in Room 1(B (Packet)

LAB 10: COOPERATIVE LEARNING

The Emerging Educational Community

"Community Panel

Readings: Cushner, Chapter 11
Hardman, Chapter 14

4/5/94
4/7/94

4112/94
4/14/94

4/19/94
4/21/94

4/26/94
4/28/94
SIS/94

I95

LAB ll: VIGNEI'IE: VANESSA MATTISON (Packet)

Transforming the Curriculum and Behavioral Management
Readings: Cushner, Chapter 12

Hardman, Chapter 4

Review: Hardman Chapters 5 & 6

LAB 12: BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES

Transforming Pedagogy
"Guest Speaker: Dr. Patricia Edwards, Associate Professor
Department of Teacher Education, MSU
seams

Cushner, Chapter 13

Hardman, Chapter 13

Edwards, Before and After Desegregation (Packet)
Edwards, et al., Designing a Collaborative Model . . .

LAB 13: RISK TAKERS

Transformation of School Culture

Readings: Cushner, Chapter 14
Hardman, Chapter 13 (Review)

LAB 14: HATS SIMULATION

Study Groups for Final Examination

FINAL EXAMINATION - 7:45-9:45 a.m.

196

CEP 240 Reading List

Edwards, RA. (1993). Before and after school desegregation: African-American parents’
involvement in schools. Educational Policy, 7, 340-369.

Lake, R (1990). An Indian father’s plea. Teacher Magazine

McIntyre, L.D., & Pemell, E. (19xx). The impact of race on teacher recommendations for
special education placement Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development

Nieto, S. (1992). Afiirming diversity (pp. 60-68, 181-188). Longman.

Tragedy in Room 108. U.S. News & World Report, November 8, 1993, 41-46.

Trent, S. C. & Artiles, A. J. (1992) Perceived changes in college students who
participated in a multicultural education seminar. Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA,
April 1992.

Violence in schools. U.S. News & World Report, November 8, 1993, 31-36.

Weisstein, N. ( 1969). “Woman as Nigger” Psychology Today

Whose America? Time Magazine, July 8, I 991 , 12-17.

197

SAMPLE ROLE-PLAYING ACTIVITY

Directions:

1. Assign roles to group members by draw.

2. The key role-player whose card asks him/her to identify him/herself begins the
discussion. Each group member should have an opportunity to play out
their role. (About 15 minutes total).

3. The Recorder/Observer comments and gives feedback to the group. (About
5 minutes)

4. Each member shares their reactions regarding the role they played. (About
10 minutes)

5. After each small group has finished, discuss reactions/concerns as a whole

group.

BROWN VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION

The Supreme Court has just ruled that all schools must be desegregated (black/white). It is
the first day of classes in your high school, which Ins been integrated according to court
mandate. To clear the air, the teacher has asked you to speak openly about your feelings
regarding integration.

TEACHER (Identify yourself to the mp).

You are white, with private reservations about whether integration will work.

WHITE STUDflI #1
Your family has taught you that blacks are lazy and no good.

WHITE STUDENT #2
You believe black students will add to the school, especially in the sports program.

B CK STUD #1
Your mother is a Baptist minister. She has taught you to treat everyone with
respect and that integration is a right of all students.

B CK S ENI‘ #2
Your experience has taught you not to trust any White person. You are leery of
them and their hidden motives.

OBSfliVER/RECORDER (Identify yourself to the my)
Watch your group members for their reactions (both verbal and body language). At

the end of the roleplaying, tell them what you saw and how you interpret it

198

SAMPLE WHOLE CLASS ACTIVITY

WHO ARE THE MINORITIES?
Goal: To promote awareness in the class members that we are all minorities in some ways

Directions Each student will be given a sheet of paper and the following instructions:
Please write your ethnic origin(s) and begin a story about yourself, i.e.,--

Once upon a time my parents gave birth to a healthy baby. The mother’s ethnic
origin(s) is German/Polish/Russian, and the father’s ethnic orgin is Irish/Polish.
This child sees her/himself as Polish/Russian...etc. He is now 22 years old,
enrolled in a big university where he...

You will be asked to £99 and get up and move around and find someone whose name or
features or information will help you to determine if they are “like” you. They must have at
least two similar ethnic origins.

Exchange papers with that individual to continue writing each other’s story until the
directive “Stop” is given. You will be allowed two minutes to write an ending to the story.

ghen the stories are finished, each set of partners should construct and discuss the list
low:

Ethnic origin(s)

Racial identity

Religion

Number of siblings

Favorite sport

Favorite ethnic foods

Age or age group

Last experience of helping someone

Desired profession

10. Acquainted with someone of a difference race

PWHP‘MPPN!‘

As a class, discuss students’ reactions to the activity.

199

SAMPLE SMALL GROUP ACTIVITY

BEHAVIOR MANAGEMENT EXERCISE

Allow me to introduce you to Joey, who is an exceptional student. Because I have worked
with him, frustratingly at times, I thought that you would be interested in how I see him
and use information from class presentations to plan ways to ameliorate his disabilities.

He is a boy who is essentially normal; that is, his hearing is normal, his vision is normal,
and his intelligence is well within normal range. Yet he does not learn well, and what he
learns is labored and often soon forgotten. But, Joey is “normal.” He is 10 years old
assigned to the 4th grade. He has visual, auditory, motor, and behavior difficulties.
Symptoms are listed below. [I am omitting this half-page list of symptoms from my
description of this activity]

. . . . What is important is that I have to live and work with this boy six hours a day, five
days a week, knowing that in his present learning state he has every guarantee of being a
16-year-old drop out Joey is not in a self contained classroom with a maximum of eight
children and he does not have access to a resource room with a specially trained teacher.
Joey’s background provided us with information that his parents are Hmong and came to
this country at the end of the Vietnam war.

You and I are faced with his educational salvation. You are a special educator or my
consultant With your small group, respond to each of the following questions:

1. As special educator/consultants, what are some factors within the classroom that Joey’s
teacher needs to consider other than his deficits?

2. In order to plan anything for Joey, what other questions would you ask? Wlurt other
information would you need? Identify at least three questions.

3. In Joey’s community, we know that there is a) a community center which focuses on
meeting the needs of Hmong and other immigrant families, b) several churches,
synagogues, and mosques, c) social organizations (i.e., Lion’s Club, Boy Scouts), d)
community recreation facilities, e) public library, 1) a zoo, g) several restaurants, h) light
industry, and 1) several others.

As teachers involved in developing an educational plan for Joey, how would you
attempt to create linkages between at least four of these agencies and organizations that
might result in improved educational outcomes for Joey?

4. Several of Joey’s peers call attention to his facial features (slanted eyes). List at least
three things you would suggest to alter this behavior in the classroom.

5. There is a rumor that we may have mildly impaired classrooms next year. If you
believe a referral for evaluation is need:
a) Which category would you suggest Joey be assigned to?
b) Why would you choose this category? If no choice is made by your group
at this time, support your reason for not labeling him.

APPENDIX B

ABCD QUESTIONNAIRE

 

200

Name:

 

School:

 

(3mm
vmammm

01min wmmumaummymumd
mmlmmflflwe-r Emammmumd
mum Will] dammmtnlflpmwlm

filflkmmflfluflsmgfls

Yumhlflsqfllauflrewm hmdylrytlcmdlfla
m Yul Wuhan-yam rill-em Wewlllnrlshaethe
MmythImywnflymafldlnMfldbymmym
sin! \Veulll uhMmdhmflnmlfls
Wm

flpnmmbmflkmwdpaflflflem
Ills-z

'Ihavereadadesaipuonofthethequesuonnaircandlunderstandwhatwillberequiredofme. I
understand thatmy participation is strictly voltmtary arrdthatany informationl supply will notbe
usedinways thatlcanbeidentified witlroutmy prior permission. "

 

 

Signature Date

I’mmfldmbMamdflcn-ibdflumymnmdh
mhflsfladflnufldflem.

 

 

 

 

201

1. If you are a regular classroom teacher or planning to become one, please indicate the
grade level(s) you currently teach or plan to teach. If you are a secondary teacher or
planning to become one, please indicate the subject matter(s) and grade level(s) you
currently teach or plan to teach.

Elementary grade level:

 

 

Secondary subject matter & grade level:

If you are a special education teacher or planning to become one, please indicate the
grade level(s) and areas of disability you currently teach or plan to teach.

Grade level(s):

 

Disability area(s):

 

2. Which of the following best describes the community in which the high school you
attended is located?

1. Small town/Rural (pop. less than 25,000)
2. Town (pop. 25,000 to 100,000)

3. City (pop. 100,000 to 500,000)

4. Urban (pop. more than 500,000)

3. Which of the following best describes the size of the high school you attended?

1-250 students

251-500 students
501-750 students
751-1000 students
1001-1250 students
1251- 1500 students
1500-2000 students
More than 2001 students

@9991?pr

4. How would you describe your ethnic and/or racial heritage (for example, "African-
American," ”Asian-American," "American Indian,” " Latino," ”Scotch-Irish,"
"Scandinavian,” "European-American," "African-American and Asian,” etc. ). We
ask this because we are interested in the role that ethnic backgmmd plays in people's
experiences and beliefs.

 

5. What is your gender? Male_ Female
6. What is your date of birth:

 

 

mon. day year

Views of Teaching and Learning

For the statements below, indicate your agreement or disagreement by circling the
number that best expresses what you think about the statement. Your replies to these

statements can range from strongly agree (SA or 1) to strongly disagree (SD or 7).

O

 

o n o n o n

Strongly Agree Not Sure Strongly Disagree
1 = strongly agree 5 = slightly disagree
2 = moderately agree 6 = moderately disagree
3 = slightly agree 7 = strongly disagree
4 = not sure
SA SD

1. Teachers should avoid grouping students
by ability or level of performance.

2. A lot of my ideas about teaching and learning
come from my own experience as a student.

3. Teachers should use the same standards in
evaluating the work of all students in the class.

4. It is impractical for teachers to tailor instruction to
the unique interests and abilities of different students.

5. Students learn best if they have to figure things out
for themselves instead of being told or shown.

6. When working with slow learners, teachers should
focus nearly all their instruction on "minimum competency”
objectives.

7. Required high school courses should have separate
classes for low-achieving and hi gh-achieving students.

8. The main job of the teacher is to transmit
the values of the mainstream American culture.

9. The main job of the teacher is to encourage students
to think and question the world around them.

10. The main job of the teacher is to teach subject matter.

11. All students should be taught in English.

1

234567
234567

203

SA SD
12. There are some students who can simply never
be good at writing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
13. Some people are naturally able to organize
their thoughts for writing. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
14. To be good at mathematics, you need to have a
kind of "mathematical mind.” 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

15. When students are successful in achieving intended goals or objectives, that success
is often attributed to one of the following sources. Which do you believe is the most
frequent source of success? (Choose one.)

 

l. Student's home background

2. Student's intellectual ability

3. Student's enthusiasm or perseverance

4. Teacher's attention to the unique interests and abilities of students
5. Teacher's use of effective methods of teaching

6. Teacher's enthusiasm or perseverance

Briefly, can you tell us why you believe this?

 

 

 

 

204

16. When students fail to achieve intended goals or objectives, that failure is often attributed
to one of the following sources. Which do you believe is the most frequent source of
failure? (Choose mg.)

1. Student's home background

2. Students' lack of intellectual ability

3. Students' indifference or lack of perseverance

4. Teacher's failure to consider the unique interests and abilities of students

5. Teacher's failure to use effective methods of teaching

6. Teacher's indifference or lack of perseverance

Briefly, can you tell us why you believe this?

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you are neither an elementary teacher nor a secondary teacher of math or
English, please SKIP questions 17-20 and proceed to question 21.

If you are an elementary teacher, please answer questions 17-20.
If you are a secondary teacher of mathematics, please answer questions 17-18.

It you are a secondary teacher of English, please answer questions 19-20

 

 

205

17. If you were working with low achievers in mathematics which one of the following would
you emphasize most? (Choose gn_e.)

MPP’Nr‘

Basic computational skills

Non-traditional topics, such as statistics and probability.
Problem solving

Helping students understand the theories behind the topics
Making math class fun for students

Other (specify):

 

Briefly, can you tell us why you would do this?

 

 

 

 

18. If you are working with high achievers in mathematics which one of the following would
you emphasize most? (Choose w.)

l
2
3.
4.
5
6

Basic computational skills

Non-traditional topics, such as statistics and probability
Problem solving

Helping students understand the theories behind the topics
Making math class fun for students

Other (specify):

 

Briefly, can you tell us why you would do this?

 

 

 

 

206

19. If you were working with low achievers on learning to write which _on_e of the following
would you emphasize most? (Choose org.)

1.

9MPP°E°

Basic spelling and grammatical skills

Non-traditional types of writing, like sonnets and editorials

Developing and refining an argument in writing

Helping students understand the role of audience and purpose in writing
Having fun through composing things like haiku poems

Other (specify):

 

Briefly, can you tell us why you would do this?

 

 

 

 

20. If you were working with high achievers on learning to write which one of the following
would you emphasize most? (Choose o_ne.)

l.
2.
3.
4
S

6.

Basic spelling and grammatical skills

Non-traditional types of writing, like sonnets and editorials

Developing and refining their ideas in writing

Helping students understand the role of audience and purpose in writing
Having fun through composing things like haiku poems

Other (specify):

 

Briefly, can you tell us why you would do this?

 

 

 

 

21.

207

Many teachers work in classrooms that include students from a variety of ethnic and
social backgrounds. Below is a list of things that teachers might try to do in such
classrooms. Circle the number beside the three things that you would be most likely to
do if you were to teach in such a classroom. Then, rank these three things from 1 to 3 in
order of their importance to you.

Rank order things teachers might try to do
(Circle the three you'd be most likely to do and then write 1, 2, or 3 next to each to indicate
which you would be most likely [I], second most likely [2], and third [3] most likely to do.)

 

1. To make sure that all students have the opportunity to understand the
subject matter in ways that increase their capacity to fr gure things out for
themselves.

2. To honor and celebrate diversity by having students from different

 

backgrounds share their foods, customs, language, and values with their
classmates.

3. To teach the common core of values that all Americans, regardless of
their background, share and on which our political and social institutions
are built.

4. To teach students about the discrimination and injustice that various
ethnic groups have encountered.

5. To make sure that, above all else, Q the students feel good about

 

themselves even if they aren't learning what is in the curriculum.

6. To teach students that American society offers opportunities to
everyone and that anyone who wants to improve his or her economic
situation can do so if they work hard enough.

Briefly, could you tell us why you chose the activity you ranked #1?

 

 

 

 

208

22. In recent years, school celebrations of Christmas have been banned by many school
boards around the country--to the consternation of some parents. Which of the following
is closest to you view of this situation? (Circle the number before the statement that is
CLOSEST to what you believe.)

1. I think that in public schools there should not be any celebration of any religious
holiday.

2. If we celebrate Christian holidays, we also need to observe and celebrate, in a
similar fashion, Jewish, Moslem, Buddhist, etc., holidays.

3. I think too much emphasis is put on holidays in school; we need to put the time and
energy that goes onto holiday celebration into school work.

4. Our culture is predominantly Christian and our children should learn these values.

5. I think that the argument that children who don't celebrate Christmas will feel
excluded is unsound.

6. I think that the majority of parents support such Observances and their wishes should
be respected.

7. Other (please explain):

Briefly, could you tell us why you feel as you do?

 

 

 

 

209

23. As you know, there's a lot of discussion about students' use of various regional dialects in
the classroom. Which of the views below is closest to your own? (Circle the number before
the statement that is CLOSEST to what you believe.)

1. Because the purpose of schooling is to get all students to speak the same
language, dialects such as black English have no place in the classroom.

 

2. While students may use various dialects among themselves and in classroom
discussions, they need to use standard English whenever they write.

3. Dialects like black English are fully legitimate languages and appropriate for
classroom discussion and for expressive writing like poetry, but students must
use standard English in writing expository prose and formal speech.

4. Regional dialects (such as black English) are fully legitimate languages and
should be accepted in classroom discussions, speeches and compositions on a
par with standard English.

Briefly, could you tell us why you chose the activity you ranked #1?

 

 

 

 

24. How would you rate the opportunities to learn that minority, special needs, and
impoverished students experience in your school? (Circle one)

1. Excellent-minority, special nwds, and impoverished students consistently
experience opportunities to learn equal to the opportunities other students experience.

2. Good-most of the time, minority, special needs, and impoverished students
experience opportunities to learn equal to the opportunities other students experience.

3. Fair--sometimes, minority, special needs, and impoverished students experience
opportunities to learn that are not equal to the opportunities other students experience.

 

4. Poor--minority, special needs, and impoverished students consistently experience
opportunities to learn that are inferior to those other students experience.

Comment:

 

 

 

 

210

25. A number of people feel that minority, special needs, and impoverished students--as
well as girls in subjects like mathematics and science-continue to face unequal opportunities to
learn. Do you think this is true? What makes you think that?

 

 

 

 

 

 

If you believe that these students do face unequal opportunities to learn, what do you think
ought to be done about it?

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thank you for your assistance.

APPENDIX C

ATTITUDE SURVEYS

211

Social Attitude Survey
Name

For the statements below, indicate your agreement or disagreement by circling the
number that M expresses what you think about the statement. Your replies to these
statements can range from strongly agree (SA or 1) to strongly disagree (SD or 7).
Your responses will be seen only by the principal researcher and will not be shared in any
way that you could be identified. You may refuse to answer any or all of the questions;
however, your honest responses would be greatly appreciated and most helpful to my
research. Thank you.

 

o n o n o A o

Strongly A gre: Not Sure Strongly Disagree
1=stronglyagree 2=modcratclyagree 3=slightlyagree 4=notsure
5 = slightly disagree 6 = moderately disagree 7 = strongly disagree

§A Q

1. My friendship network is very racially mixed. 7 6 5 4 3 2
7 6

2. Affirmative action programs in business and
education constitute reverse discrimination.

3. I would feel O.K about my son or daughter 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
dating someone from a different race.

4. It bothers me that a racial minority person has 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
never been President of the United States.

5. Some racial minorities are more of a liability 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
than an asset to our country.

6. My closest friends are from my own racial 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
group.

7. Overall,1 think racial minorities complain too 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
much about racial discrimination.

8. It is better if people marry within their own 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
race.

9. Schools should promote traditional American 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
values as well as the values representative of
the culturally diverse students in the class.

10. Schools should require all students to learn 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
about the contributions of various minority
groups to our society.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

212

More minorities would be successful in this
country if they were willing to work hard.

White people's racism toward racial minority
groups still constitutes a major problem in
America.

I am not prejudiced toward any minority
groups.

I would enjoy living in a neighborhood
consisting of a racially diverse population
(i.e., whites, Blacks, Hispanics, Native
Americans, Asians).

I would enjoy teaching in a school consisting
of a racially diverse population.

213

 

Social Distance Scale

0 G G O O O O
7=Strong1yAgree 6=Mostlyagree 5=Slightly Agree 4=NotSme
3 = Slightly disagree 2 = Mostly Disagree 1 = Strongly Disagree
I would have as regular friends

Whites Blaclg Him Native Americans Asjgg
7654321 7654321 7654321 7654321 765432
I would have as close friends

IM'M E! ! ll' .08 N .v E . 3'
7654321 7654321 7654321 7654321 765432
I would marry or maintain an intimate relationship with

ELM M listings; W Ariana
7654321 7654321 7654321 7654321 765432
I would have several families live in my neighborhood
7654321 7654321 7654321 7654321 765432
I would teach in a school with a minority (10% or less)

Efl' Ell 11' .m I! .v E . 5'
7654321 7654321 7654321 7654321 765432
Iwould teach inaschool with amajority (50% or more)

20.8 Ell If . ”.v! . 5'
7654321 7654321 7654321 7654321 7654321

1

APPENDIX D

STRUCTURED INTERVIEWS

214

Structured Interview, Part I

. What can you tell me about your personal background (family, hometown,
personality, school experiences, other significant experiences, etc.)?

«What is your father's occupation? mother's occupation? f ather's education?
mother's education?

--Where did you grow up? What was this community like?

«What kinds of activities were you involved in during junior high and high school?

«To what extent have you been involved in a church? Which church? Any
community activities?

. Why are you taking this course? (Why not TB 250?) What are you expecting to learn
from this course?
«Are these things that you need or want to learn? Why or why not?

. Do you think that what you learn in this course will help you as a teacher? Why or
why not? If yes, how? If you're not planning to be a teacher, how do you think
this course might help you?

. Please explain your answers to Question #21 on the questionnaire. Why is #-- your
first choice?

a) What makes you think this is a worthwhile and an attainable goal?

b) Why would you want to honor and celebrate diversity? What makes you think
that this would be a good idea?

c) What are some of the ”common core of values” that should be taught? Why?
What makes you think that this needs to be done?

d) What is something you'd want to teach about discrimination and injustice? Why?

What makes you think that this should be done?

e) What makes you think that this is a worthwhile and attainable goal?

1) Why do you believe that anyone in American society can improve his or her
economic situation if he or she works hard enough? What makes you think that
this is something that should be taught?

. For Question #22 on the questionnaire, please tell me more about why you feel as you
do. What makes you believe this? (How do you justify this belief?)

. For Question #23 on the questionnaire, please tell me more about why you believe as
you do. How do you justify this belief? (What is the basis for this belief?)

. For Question #25 on the questionnaire, please tell me more about why you believe this
statement is or is not true. What evidence is there that this statement is either true
or untrue?
--Do you believe that students in other schools and other cities face unequal
opportunities to learn? If so, what makes you think so? If not, why don't you
think so

. Why do most poor and minority students not perform as well in school as do most
white students? What makes you think so?

«How would you feel about teaching poor and minority students? Why? What if the
school population was predominantly poor and minority students? Why would
that matter?

--In what important ways would teaching poor and minority students be different from
teaching majority students? Why?

215

«Do you believe that the knowledge and skills necessary for effective teaching of poor
and minority students are different from those necessary for teaching majority
students? Why or why not? If so, how?

9. Vignette:

Imagine that you have been hired midway through the school year to take over for
a teacher who is going on maternity leave. During the first day, you notice a
group of Native American students sitting together at the back of the class, while
White and Asian-American students are sitting in front. The Native American
students don't raise their hands to answer questions or to participate in
discussions. Later, when you mention this to colleagues in the teachers' lounge,
they tell you that the Native Americans are naturally shy and that asking them
questions embarrasses them, so it's best not to call on them.

What do you think of the teachers' explanation of the Native American students'
behavior?
How would you deal with the Native American students in this class?

10. What experiences have you had with people different than yourself? (in terms of

ethnicity, disability, social class, religion, nationality, etc.)

«What is the racial makeup of your hometown and your high school?

«Do you have or had you had close friends from a different racial group? (Category 1,
2, & 3)

«Have you had any minority teachers before this semester?

«Since beginning college, what experiences have you had with minority students?

«Do you feel (or have you ever felt) uncomfortable with members of a particular
minority group? Why or why not?

1.

2.

3.

4.

9.

216

Structured Interview, Part II

What were the most important things you learned in this course? Why do you think
so?

Do you feel that you have been changed in any important ways as a result of taking
this course? If so, how? Why do you think so?

What were the most valuable and least valuable lab/lecture sessions? Why do you
think so?

(Participants will be shown a list of topics from labs and lectures to jog their memories, if necessary)

Have any of your ideas/beliefs about minorities changed as a result of taking this
course? If so, what, how and why?

Why do most poor and minority students not perform as well in school as most white
students? What makes you think so?

To be effective in teaching poor and minority students, will you have to teach any
differently than you would with majority students? Why or why not?

What have you Ieamed in this class about how policies and practices at the national,
state, and district levels affect the education of diverse learners?

Scenario:

Imagine that you have been hired midway through the school year to take over for
a teacher who is going on maternity leave. During the first day, you notice a
group of Native American students sitting together at the back of the class, while
White and Asian-American students are sitting in front. The Native American
students don't raise their hands to answer questions or to participate in
discussions. Later, when you mention this to colleagues in the teachers' lounge,
they tell you that the Native Americans are naturally shy and that asking them
questions embarrasses them, so it's best not to call on them.

What do you think of the teachers' explanation of the Native American students'
behavior?
How would you deal with the Native American students in this class?

Do you think that racism and discrimination are still major problems in our society?
Why or why not?

10. Has talking with me this semester affected either your perceptions of the course or

the way you think about any of the issues covered in the course? If so, how?
Why do you think so?

11. Did it ever make any difference to you that you were being interviewed by a black

person? If so, how and why? If not, why not? What about when racial issues
were being discussed?

REFERENCES

REFERENCES

Anderson, LM., & Holt-Reynolds, D. ( 1995). Prospective teachers' beliefs and teacher
education pedagogy: Research based on a teacher educator's practical theory.
(Research Report 95-6). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, National
Center for Research on Teacher Learning.

Au, K.H. (1980). Participation structures in a reading lesson with Hawaiian children:
Analysis of a culturally appropriate instructional event. Anthropology and
Education Quarterly, 11(2), 91-115.

Au, K.H., & Kawakami, A.J. (1994). Cultural congruence in instruction. In E.R.
Hollins, J.E. King, & W.C. Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse populations:
Formulating a knowledge base (pp. 5-23). Albany, NY: State University of New
York.

Ball, D.L (1989). Breaking with experience in teaming to teach mathematics: The role of
a preservice methods course. (Issue Paper 89-10). East Lansing: Michigan State
University, National Center for Teacher Education.

Banks, J.A. (1994). Multiethnic education: Theory and practice. Boston: Allyn &
Bacon.

Bar-Tal, D. (1990). Group beliefs. New York: Springer-Verlag.

Bamdt, J. (1991). Dismantling racism: The continuing challenge to White America.
Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress.

Barry, N.H., & Lechner, J.V. (1995). Preservice teachers' attitudes about and awareness
of multicultural teaching and learning. Teaching & Teacher Education, 11, 149-
161.

Bern, DJ. (1970). Beliefs, attitudes, and human afiairs. Belmont, CA: Brooks/Cole.

Bennett, C., Niggle, T., & Stage, F. (1990). Preservice multicultural teacher education:
Predictors of student readiness. Teaching & Teacher Education, 6, 243-254.

Bennett, L. (1987). Before the Mayflower: A history of Black America. Chicago:
Johnson.

Bethlehem, D.W. (1985). A social psychology of prejudice. New York: St. Martin's.
Bogardus, E. (1925). Measuring social distance. Journal of Applied Sociology, 9, 299-
308.

217

218

Bondy, E., Schmitz, S., & Johnson, M. (1993). The impact of coursework and
fieldwork on student teachers' reported beliefs about teaching poor and minority
students. Action in Teacher Education, 15(2), 55-62.

Borko, H., & Putnam, R.T. (in press). Learning to teach. In R.C. Calfee & D.C.
Berliner (Eds.), Handbook of Educational Psychology.

Boyle-Baise, M., & Grant, C. A. (1991). Multicultural teacher education: A proposal for
change. In H. C. Waxman, J. W. de Felix, J. B. Anderson, & H. P. Baptiste, Jr.
(Eds.), Students at risk in at-risk schools: Improving environments for learning.
Newbury Park, CA: Corwin.

Bullough, R. V., Jr. (1991). Exploring personal teaching metaphors in preservice teacher
education. Journal of Teacher Education, 42, 43-51.

Burstein, N. D., & Cabello, B. (1989). Preparing teachers to work with culturally diverse
students: A teacher education model. Journal of Teacher Education, 40(5), 9-16.

Bymes, D. A., & Kiger, G. (1988). Racial attitudes and discrimination: University
teacher education students compared to the general student population. College
Student Journal, 22, 176-184.

Cazden, C. , & Mehan, H. (1990). Principles from sociology and anthropology.
Context, code, classroom, and culture. In M. Reynolds (Ed.), Knowledge base for
the beginning teacher (pp. 47—57). Washington, DC: American Association of
Colleges for Teacher Education.

Chinn, P. C., & Plata, M. (1987/88). Multicultural education: Beyond ethnic studies.
Teacher Education and Practice, 4(2), 7-10.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1992). Interrogating cultural diversity: Inquiry and
action. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(2), 104-115.

Cushner, K., McClelland, A., & Saf ford, P. (1992). Human diversity in education: An
integrative approach. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Davidman, RT. (1990). Multicultural teacher education and supervision: A new
approach to professional development. Teacher Education Quarterly, 1 7(3), 37-52

Dilworth, M. (Ed). (1993). Diversity in teacher education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dovido, J. F., & Gaertner, S. L. (1991). Changes in the expression and assessment of
racial prejudice. In H. J. Knopke, R. J. Norrell, & R. W. Rogers (Eds.), Opening
doors: Perspectives on race relations in contemporary America (pp. 119-148).
Tuscaloosa, AL: University of Alabama.

Duckitt, J. (1992). The social psychology of prejudice. New York: Praeger.
Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1985). The first year of teacher preparation:

Transition to pedagogical thinking? (Research Series No. 156). East Lansing, MI:
Michigan State University, Institute for Research on Teaching.

219

Feiman-Nemser, S., & Buchmann, M. (1989). Describing teacher education: A
framework and illustrative findings from a longitudinal study of six students.
Elementary School Journal, 89, 365-377.

Florio-Ruane, S. (1994). The future teachers' autobiography club: Preparing educators to
support literacy learning in culturally diverse classrooms. English Education,
26(1), 52-66.

Garibaldi, A. M. (1993). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse classrooms. In M.
Dilworth (Ed), Diversity in teacher education (pp. 23-39). San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass.

Gay, G. (1983). Multiethnic education: Historical developments and future prospects.
Phi
Delta Kappan, 64, 560-563.

Gibson, M. A. (1984). Approaches to multicultural education in the United States: Some
concepts and assumptions. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 15(1), 94-119.

Gillette, M. D., & Grant, C. A. (1991). Discontent, multicultural education and some
implications for the education of students. Teaching Education, 4(1), 79-88

Gollnick, D. M. (1992). Multicultural education: Policies and practices in teacher
education. In C.A. Grant (Ed), Research and multicultural education: From the
margins to the
mainstream. (pp. 218-239). London: Falmer.

Gomez, M.I... (1994). Teacher education reform and prospective teachers' perspectives on
teaching "other people's” children. Teaching & Teacher Education, 10, 319-334.

Goodman, J. (1988). Constructing a practical philosophy of teaching: A study of
preservice teachers' professional perspectives. Teaching & Teacher Education, 4,
121-137.

Grant, C. A. (Ed). (1992). Research and multicultural education: From the margins to
the mainstream. London: Falmer.

Grant, c. A., & Koskela, R. A. (1986). Education that is multicultural and the
relationship between preservice campus learning and field experiences. Journal of
Educational Research, 79, 197-204.

Grant, C. A., & Secada, W.G. (1990). Preparing teachers for diversity. In W.R.
Houston (Ed), Handbook of research on teacher education (pp. 403-422). New
York: Macmillan.

Grant, C. A., & Sleeter, C. E. (1986). Race, class, and gender in education research: An
argument for integrative analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56, 195-211.

Haberman, M. (1991). Can cultural awareness be taught in teacher education programs?
Teaching Education, 4(1), 25-31.

Hadaway, N. L., & Florez, V. (1987/88). Diversity in the classroom: Are our teachers
prepared? Teacher Education and Practice, 4(2), 25-29.

220

Hale, J. E. (1982). Black children: Their roots, culture, and learning styles. Provo, UT:
Brigham Young University.

Heath, SB. (1982). Questioning at home and at school: A comparative study. In G.
Spindler (Ed), Doing the ethnography of schooling (pp. 102-131). New York:
Cambridge University.

Hilliard, A. G. (1974). Restructuring teacher education for multicultural imperatives. In
W. A. Hunter (Ed), Multicultural education through competency-based teacher
education (pp. 40-55). Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges for
Teacher Education.

Holland, R. P. (1989). Learner characteristics and learner performance: Implications for
instructional placement decisions. In B. J. Shade (Ed), Culture, style and the
educative process (pp. 167-183). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Hollingsworth, S. (1989). Prior beliefs and cognitive change in learning to teach.
American Educational Research Journal, 26, 160-189.

Holmes Group. (1990). Tomorrow's schools. East Lansing: Author.

Holt-Reynolds, D. (1991a). The dialogues of teacher education: Entering and influencing
preservice teachers' internal conversations. (Research Report 91-4). East
Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education, Michigan State
University.

Holt-Reynolds, D. (1991b). Practicing what we teach. (Research Report 91-5). East
Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Education, Michigan State
University.

Irvine, J. J. (1993). Making teacher education culturally responsive. In M. Dilworth
(Ed), Diversity in teacher education (pp. 79-92. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Jaynes, G. D., & Williams, R. M., Jr. (Eds). (1989). A common destiny: Blacks and
American society. Washington, DC: National Academy.

Jones, J. M. (1972). Prejudice and racism. Menlo Park, CA: Addison-Wesley.

Kagan, D.M. (1992). Professional growth among preservice and beginning teachers.
Review of Educational Research, 62, 129-169.

Kleg, M. (1993). Hate, prejudice, and racism. Albany: State University of New York.

Koehler, V. (1985). Research on preservice teacher education. Journal of Teacher
Education, 36(1), 23-30.

Ladson—Billings, G. (1991). Beyond multicultural illiteracy. Journal of Negro Education,
60(2), 147-157.

Ladson- Billings, G. (1993). Culturally relevant teaching: The key to making
multicultural education work. In M. Dilworth (Ed), Diversity in teacher education
(pp. 106-121). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

221

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). Who will teach our children? Preparing teachers to
successfully teach African American students. In E.R. Hollins, J.E. King, &
W.C. Hayman (Eds.), Teaching diverse populations: Formulating a knowledge
base (pp. 129-142). Albany, NY: State University of New York.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American
Educational Research Journal, 32, 465-491.

Larke, P. J. (1990). Cultural diversity awareness inventory: Assessing the sensitivity of
preservice teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 12(3), 23-29.

Law, S. G., & Lane, D. 8., Jr. (1987). Multicultural acceptance by teacher education
students: A survey of attitudes toward 32 ethnic and national groups and a
comparison with 60 years of data. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 14(1), 3-9.

Lortie, DC. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: The University of
Chicago.

Lott, B. (1995). Distancing from women: Interpersonal sexist discrimination. In B. Lott
& D. Maluso (Eds.), The social psychology of interpersonal discrimination (pp.
12-49). New York: Guilford.

Lynch, J. (1987). Prejudice reduction and the schools. London: Cassell.

Maluso, D. (1995). Shaking hands with a clenched fist: Interpersonal racism. In B. Lott
& D. Maluso (Eds.), The social psychology of interpersonal discrimination (pp.
50-79). New York: Guilford.

McDaniel, E. (1994). Understanding educational measurement. Madison, WI: Wm. C.
Brown & Benchmark.

McDiarmid, G. W. (1992). What to do about differences? A study of multicultural
education for teacher trainees in the Los Angeles Unified School District. Journal
of Teacher Education, 43(2), 83-93.

McDiarmid, G. W., & Price, J. (1990). Prospective teachers' views of diverse learners:
A study of the participants in the ABCD Project (Research Report 90-6). East
Lansing: Michigan State University, National Center for Research on Teacher
Learning.

McGeehan, R. (1982). The relationship of selected antecedents to outcomes to training in
multicultural education for preservice teachers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.
Bloomington, IN: Indiana University.

McGuire, W.J. (1986). Attitudes and attitude change. In G. Lindzey & E Aronson
(Eds.), The handbook of social psychology, Vol. II (pp. 233-336). New York:
Random House.

Moore, R. B. ( 1984). School systems perpetuate racism and don't know it--Can we deal
with it? In Multiculturalism, racism, and the school system: Addresses given at a
CEA seminar (pp. 35-49). Toronto: Canadian Education Association.

222

More, A. J. (1989). Native Indian students and their learning styles: Research results and
classroom applications. In B. J. Shade (Ed), Culture, style and the educative
process (pp. 150-166). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Myers, D. G. (1990). Social psychology (3rd ed). New York: McGraw-Hill.

National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. (1968). Report of the National
Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. New York: New York Times.

National Center for Research on Teacher Education. (1991). Final report. East Lansing,
MI: Michigan State University, National Center for Research on Teacher
Education.

Noordhoff, K., & Kleinfeld, J. (1993). Preparing teachers for multicultural classrooms.
Teaching and Teacher Education, 9(1), 27-39.

Oskamp, S. (1991). Attitudes and opinions (2nd ed). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-
Hall.

Paine, L. (1990) Orientation towards diversity: What do prospective teachers bring?
(Research Report 89-9). East Lansing, MI: Michigan State University, National
Center for Research on Teacher Learning.

Pajares, ME (1992). Teachers' beliefs and educational research: Cleaning up a messy
construct. Review of Educational Research, 62, 307-332.

Pallas, A. M., Natriello, G., & McDill, EL (1989). The changing nature of the
disadvantaged population: Current dimensions and future trends. Educational
Researcher, 18(5), 16-22

Pate, G. S. (1988). Research on reducing prejudice. Social Education, 52, 287-289.

Pepper, F. C., & Henry, S. I. (1989). Social and cultural effects on Indian learning style:
Classroom implications. In B. J. Shade (Ed), Culture, style and the educative
process (pp. 3342). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Petty, R.E., & Cacioppo, J.T. (1981). Attitudes and persuasion: Classic and
contemporary approaches. Dubuque, IA: Wm. C. Brown.

Ponterotto, J. G., & Pedersen, P. B. (1993). Preventing prejudice: A guide for
counselors and educators. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Reed, DE (1993). Multicultural education for preservice students. Action in Teacher
Education, 15(3), 27-34.

Richardson, V. (1996). The role of attitudes and beliefs in learning to teach. In J. Sikula
(Ed), The handbook of research on teacher education (2nd ed). New York:
Macmillan.

Rokeach, M. (1976). Beliefs, attitudes, and values: A theory of organization and change.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ross, D. D., & Smith, W. (1992). Understanding preservice teachers' perspectives on
diversity. Journal of Teacher Education, 43(2), 94-1(B.

223

Sampson, E. E. (1991). Social worlds, personal lives: An introduction to social
psychology. San Diego: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.

Saracho, O. (1989). Cultural differences in the cognitive style of Mexican American
students. In B. J. Shade (Ed. ), Culture, style and the educative process (pp. 129-
136). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Saracho, O. N., & Gerstl, C. K. (1991). Learning differences among at-risk minority
students. In H.C. Waxman, J. W. de Felix, J. E. Anderson, & H. P. Baptiste, Jr.
(Eds.), Students at risk in at-risk schools (pp. 105- 135). Newbury Park, CA:
Corwin.

Sarap, Madan. (1991). Education and the ideologies of racism. Stoke-on-Trent, England:
Trentlram.

Sarason, SB, Davidson, K.S., & Blatt, B. (1986). The preparation of teachers: An
unstudied problem in education (Rev. ed). Cambridge, MA: Brookline.

Scheibe, KE. (1970). Beliefs and values. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Schwartz, B. N., & Disch, R. (1970). White racism: Its history, pathology, and practice.
New York: Dell.

Shade, B. J. (1989a). Cognitive style: What is it? In B. J. Shade (Ed), Culture, style
and the educative process (pp. 87-93). Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Shade, B. J. (1989b). Culture and learning style within the Afro-American community.
In B. J. Shade (Ed), Culture, style and the educative process (pp. 16-32).
Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.

Shade, B. J. (Ed). (1989c). Culture, style and the educative process. Springfield, IL:
Charles C. Thomas.

Shuell, T. J. (1986). Cognitive conceptions of learning. Review of Educational
Research, 56, 411-436.

Smylie, MA. (1989). Teachers' views of the effectiveness of sources of learning to
teach. Elementary School Journal, 89, 543-558.

Sniderrnan, P.M., & Tetlock, PE. (1986). Symbolic racism: Problems of motive
attribution in political analysis. Journal of Social Issues, 42(2), 129-150.

Stephan, W.G. (1986). Integroup relations. In G. Lindzey & E Aronson (Eds.), The
handbook of social psychology, Vol. II (pp. 599-658). New York: Random
House. ,

Stone, BA. (1987). Learning to teach: Improving teacher education. Childhood
Education, 63, 370-376.

Tran, M.T., Young, R.L., & Di Leila, JD. (1994). Multicultural education courses and
the student teacher. Elinrinating stereotypical attitudes in our ethnically diverse
classroom. Journal of Teacher Education, 45(2), 183-189.

224

Trent, W. (1990). Race and ethnicity in the teacher education curriculum. Teachers
College Record, 91, 361-369.

Triandis, H.C. (1971). Attitude and attitude change. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Villegas, A. M. (1988). School failure and cultural mismatch: Another view. Urban
Review, 20, 253-265.

Weinstein, C. (1990). Prospective elementary teachers' beliefs about teaching:
Implications for teacher education. Teaching & Teacher Education, 6, 279-290.

Zeichner, K. M. (1993). Educating teachers for cultural diversity. (NCRTL Special
Report). East Lansing, MI: National Center for Research on Teacher Learning,
Michigan State University.

Zimbardo, P.G., & Leippe, MR. (1991). The psychology of attitude change and social
influence. Philadelphia: Temple University.

Zimpher, N. L., & Ashbum, E A. (1993). Countering parochialism in teacher candidates.

In M. Dilworth (Ed), Diversity in teacher education (pp. 40-62). San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.