ENGAGING DIVERSTY

Its Importance for 21st Century Education

Patricia GurinUniversity of Michigan

2013 Patricia Gurin | University of Michigan

GOALS FOR TODAY

• Setting the context: Engaging diversity difficult because it involves talking about race and other social divides •Make a case for the educational importance of engaging diversity – a case based in three major challenges the U.S. faces • Present intergroup dialogue as one educational approach that addresses these challenges•Discuss 21st education – cosmopolitan and outward oriented

THE CONTEXT: TALKING ACROSS DIFFERENCES

• Talking about race – talking across race.

• Talking about any social divide – across that social divide

INTERACTIONS INVOLVING RACE AND ETHNICITY

For whites

• concerns about being prejudiced

• anxiety

• depleted executive functioning

• increased cardiovascular reactivity

• nervous behaviors

(Blascovich, Mendes, Hunter, Lickel, & Kowai-Bell, 2001; Dovidio, Kawakami, Johnson, Johnson & Howard, 1997; Fazio, Jackson, Dunton, & Williams, 1995; McConnell & Liebold, 2001; Shelton, Richeson, & Salvatore, 2005; Richeson & Shelton, 2007; Stephan & Stephan, 1985; Vorauer & Kumhyrm, 2001; Vorauer, 2006; Word, Zanna, & Cooper, 1974)

For racial/ethnic minorities• concerns about being the

target of prejudice• Invoke compensatory

strategies• Negative emotions• Feeling inauthentic

AVOIDING TALKING ABOUT RACE AND OTHER SOCIAL DIVIDES

• Even though race and ethnicity pervade every aspect of our daily lives, many of us become deeply uncomfortable whenever the conversation turns to race. – Moya and Markus

• Eight conversation stoppers – such as:• We’re beyond race• Everyone’s a little bit racist• That’s just identity politics

YET PEOPLE CALL FOR A CONVERSATION ACROSS RACE

YO-YO MA: ENGAGING DIVERSITY IN THE SILK ROAD ENSEMBLE

• Music contributes to the solution of economic and political problems in the world by fostering – Imagination– Flexibility– Empathy– Collaboration– And thus innovation

• In the Silk Road Ensemble, the musicians say that innovation comes from learning what you don’t know from diverse music traditions and adding it to what you do know.

• That is what 2lst education must do – and diversity is crucial to its realization.

THREE CHALLENGES

• The Demographic Challenge – Changing Demographics in the U.S.

• The Democratic Challenge – Engagement of all in light of growing economic inequalities

• The Dispersion Challenge – “Rise of the Rest”

DEMOGRAPHIC CHALLENGE

White Babies No Longer Majority in the U.S.U.S. births in the year ending on July 2011 - the Census Bureau

2,019,176

1,988,824

Non-White Babies

White Babies

DEMOGRAPHIC CHALLENGE

DEMOGRAPHIC CHALLENGE

WEALTH DISTRIBUTION IN THE U.S

• The top 10% of households have 80% of the financial wealth

• The bottom 80% have 7% of the wealth (Domhoff, 2012)

WHERE THE U.S. STANDS IN THE WORLD RE INEQUALITY

Country/Overall Rank

Gini Coefficient

1. Sweden 23.0

4. Norway 25.0

7. Austria 26

11. Finland 26.8

12. Germany 27

19. Denmark 29

29. Netherlands 30.9

34. Spain 32

36. Canada 32.1

44. Switzerland 33.7

60. India 36.8

87. China 41.5

99. Iran 44.5

101. United States 45

118. Costa Rica 50.3

123. Mexico 51.7

(Central Intelligence Agency, 2008)

• The United States ranks 101st in the world in terms of income inequality

• Nine European countries have less inequality than the U.S.

• So does Canada• And India, China, and Iran

THE MYTH OF EXCEPTIONAL SOCIAL MOBILITY

– Canada

– Norway

– Finland

– Sweden

–Germany

–France

–And even Great Britain

It is harder for Americans to rise from lower economic rungs than people in:

DeParle, J. “Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs,” The New York Times, January 4, 2012; Jäntti, J., Røed, K., Naylor, R., et al., “American Exceptionalism in a New Light: A Comparison of Intergenerational Earnings Mobility in the Nordic Countries, the United Kingdom and the United States,” Discussion Paper No. 1938, IZA, January 2006

WHITE, LATINO, AFRICAN AMERICAN HOUSEHOLD NET WORTH

• Median net worth of white households is:– 18 times that of Latino households– 20 times that of African American households

• Between 2005 and 2009, median net worth went down:– 16% for white households– 66% for Latino households– 53% for African American households

Kochhar, R., Fry, R. & Taylor, R. Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks, Hispanics Twenty-to-One, Pew Research Social & Demographic Trends, Pew Research Center, released July 26, 2011

THE DISPERSION CHALLENGE

At the politico-military level we will remain in a single-superworld world. But in every other dimension – industrial, financial, educational, social, cultural – the distribution of power is shifting, moving away from American dominance.

KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS FOR 21ST CENTURY LEADERSHIP

• Broad knowledge across many disciplines

• Communication, problem solving, collaboration across differences

• Critical, creative, adaptive, flexible thinking • ENGAGING DIVERSITY

American Association of Colleges and Universities; Partnership for 21st Century Skills

INTERGROUP DIALOGUE

ONE APPROACH TO 21ST CENTURY EDUCATION AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

•The goals of intergroup dialogue:– Intergroup Understanding – Positive Intergroup Relationships – Intergroup Collaboration

•Engaging diversity through:– A distinctive pedagogy– And communication processes

WHAT IS INTERGROUP DIALOGUE?

• Two social identity groups

• Two facilitators • 10-12 week course • 4-module curriculum

ASYMMETRIES: POWER DIFFERENCES AMONG PARTICIPANTS

HIGH POWER GROUPS LOW POWER GROUPS

– FOCUS ON INDIVIDUALS FOCUS ON GROUPS

– PERSONAL SHARING EXPLORE GROUP EXPERIENCES

– STORYTELLING FOR STORYTELLING FOR ILLUMINATING ILLUMINATING COMMONALITIES POWER DIFFERENTIALS

– INDIVIDUAL ACTION COLLECTIVE ACTION

Saguy, Tamar, John F. Dovidio, and Felicia Pratto. 2008. “Beyond Contact: Intergroup Contact in the Context of Power Relations.” Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 34(3): 432–45. doi:10.1177/0146167207311200; Saguy, ar, Nicole Tausch, John F. Dovidio, and Felicia Pratto. 2009. “The Irony of Harmony: Intergroup Contact Can Produce False Expectations for Equality.” Psychological Science 20(1): 114–21. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02261.x.; Saguy, Tamar, Linda R. Tropp, and Diala Hawi. 2013. “The Role of Group Power in Intergroup Contact.” In Advances in Intergroup Contact, edited by Gordon Hodson and Miles Hewstone. New York: Psychology Press.

FOUR-MODULE CURRICULUM

Module 1 Module 2 Module 3 Module 4Learning how to

dialogue

Learning about

identity, inequalities

& power

Dialoguing about “hot

topics”

Alliance building for

collaboration

PEDAGOGY

• Content: Readings, Written Assignments • Structured Interaction, Equal numbers of

statuses, Active learning exercises • Facilitative Guidance

WEB OF OPPRESSION

WHAT MAKES IT WORK?

TRAINED FACILITATORSDISTINCTIVE COMMUNICATION PROCESSES

•Dialogic Processes– Active Listening – Asking questions, follow-up, inquiry– Sharing

• Critical Processes– Identifying assumptions – Critical analysis of inequalities – Personal and collective critical reflection

RESEARCH QUESTIONS

• Does Intergroup Dialogue work?– Evidence of Effects

• How does it work? – Evidence of processes that account for effects

MULTIVERSITY RESEARCH PROJECT

• Arizona State University • Occidental College• Syracuse University • University of California (San Diego)• University of Maryland • University of Massachusetts• University of Michigan• University of Texas• University of Washington

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH DESIGN

Application Randomized

DIALOGUE GROUP

WAITLIST CONTROL GROUP

Pretest

Pretest

Intergroup Dialogue

Posttest

Posttest

1-Year Follow-Up

Survey

1-Year Follow-Up

Survey

PARTICIPANTS

52 Dialogue Experiments (26 race, 26 gender)

DIALOGUE GROUP n = 726

Within People of Color:38% African American

36% Asian/Asian American21% Latino/a

5% Other

WAITLIST CONTROL GROUP n = 721

QUALITATIVE METHODS• Videotaping early, mid, and late session of 10 race

and 10 gender dialogues • Interviewing all students in the dialogues that were

videotaped – 248 students• Content Analysis of the final papers of students in all

52 dialogues – 720 papers

INTERGROUP EMPATHY

Months

UNDERSTANDING OF STRUCTURAL CAUSES OF INEQUALITY

Months

INTERGROUP COLLABORATION AND ACTION

Months

SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS OF DIALOGUE

ON:•20 of 24 measures of psychological processes, intergroup understanding, relationships, and action •In both race and gender dialogues•For all 4 groups of students•Still evident a year later, time 1-3, on 21

Pedagogical Features

Communication Processes

Cognitive Involvement

Affective Positivity

Intergroup Empathy

Structural Understand

ing

Intergroup Action

One-Year LaterPre-Post ChangeΧ2/DF = 2.75, RMSEA < .05 CFI = .90, TLI = .89, GFI = .87Only significant pathways presented.Coefficients are standardized.

.20

.75

.27

.35

.10*

.24

.24*

.40

.37

.43

.20

.29

.31

Intergroup Empathy

Structural Understanding

Intergroup Action

.29

.39

.24.36

.52

.39

WHAT ACCOUNTS FOR EFFECTS? STRUCTURAL EQUATION MODEL

BACK TO THE CHALLENGES

• A cosmopolitan education – Appiah & Nussbaum

• Comprised of:

– Pluralistic perspective

– Critical thinking, often outside one’s comfort zone

– Empathy

– Integration of specific group-based identities with

broader identifications

HOW DO WE DO THIS?

• Deliberate use of diversity to foster communication, problem solving, collaboration across differences

• Pedagogy that creates active learning and communication processes, especially listening and inquiry

• Collective and private reflection • Connecting substantive & disciplinary

knowledge to intercultural competencies

A BROAD APPLICATION OF DIALOGUE TO ENGAGE DIVERSITY

• Groups and Teams – The Special Opportunity in STEM• Community Based Youth Dialogues – Connections with K-12• Faculty Workshops• Academic and Student Affairs Collaborations• Dialogue Training for Students Involved in Community Based Learning and

Research• International Collaborations• National Institute – over 150 institutions

ALL ENGAGING DIVERSITY IN EXPLICIT WAYS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

• W.T. Grant Foundation• Ford Foundation• Russell Sage Foundation• National Center for Institutional Diversity,

University of Michigan

COLLABORATORS• Co-Investigators

– Ratnesh Nagda, University of Washington– Ximena Zúñiga, University of Massachusetts

• Collaborators at Nine Institutions– Martha Stassen, University of Massachusetts– Delia Saenz, Arizona State University– Teresa Britt, University of Texas– Kelly Maxwell, University of Michigan– Jaclyn Rodriguez, Occidental College– Gretchen Lopez, Syracuse University– Gloria Bouis, University of Maryland– Ratnesh Nagda, University of Washington– Gary Anderson, University of California, San Diego

A FULLER ACCOUNT

AVAILABLE AT RUSSELL SAGE FOUNDATION