Taking a “Hands On” Approach to Diversity in Higher Education: A Critical‐Dialogic Model for Effective Intergroup Interaction

Abstract

This article reviews divergent empirical evidence on interracial contact. While research on diversity in higher education provides ample evidence for the educational benefits of engaging with diversity in informal interactions or courses, experimental and naturalistic studies in social psychology on interracial interactions reveal a complicated picture, showing what appear to be both positive and negative effects. Rather than addressing the question of whether or not to promote interracial interactions on campus, we present a critical-dialogic model of intergroup dialogue that centers on communication processes as an avenue toward intergroup relationships, understanding, and collaboration. Prior research and preliminary results from a nine-university research collaboration provide strong empirical support for the proposed model. We conclude with program and policy considerations for higher education institutions interested in promoting meaningful intergroup interaction. 4 Sorensen et al.The value of diversity in higher education is widely accepted among educators (Flores Neimann & Maruyama, 2005) and was affirmed by the Supreme Court in the 2003 cases surrounding the University of Michigan's use of affirmative action in their admission policies. On behalf of the majority opinion in Grutter v. Bollinger (539 U.S. 306, 2003), Justice O'Connor wrote:The [University of Michigan] Law School's claim is further bolstered by numerous expert studies and reports showing that such diversity promotes learning outcomes and prepares students better for an increasingly diverse workforce, for society, and for the legal profession. Major American businesses have made clear that the skills needed in today's increasingly global marketplace can only be developed through exposure to widely diverse people, cultures, ideas, and viewpoints.More than 75 amicus briefs were submitted on behalf of the University of Michigan to affirm the educational value of diversity, representing hundreds of colleges and universities, more than 50 higher education associations, 68 Fortune 500 corporations, 29 former high-ranking military leaders, and numerous social science organizations (Gurin, Dey, Gurin, & Hurtado, 2004). The challenge facing educators, particularly in higher education, is how to create educational experiences that optimally foster the development of skills necessary to participate in an increasingly diverse and global society.To address this challenge, in this article we first briefly highlight the evidence presented to the Supreme Court and conducted since, showing that interactions between diverse peers are important for diversity to have educational benefits. We turn then to recent social psychological research on interracial interaction and cross-racial roommate experiences, which challenges the notion that interracial (and perhaps other kinds of intergroup) contact will necessarily produce positive outcomes for students. Because the experimental research on interracial interaction does not assess sustained interactions, and the r...

Intergroup dialogue and democratic practice in higher education

“…They are also consistent with previous studies on motivation to bridge difference and studies examining a broader set of democratic outcomes (Gurin, Nagda, and Lopez, 2004;Nagda, 2006;Nagda and Zúñiga, 2003). Further results demonstrate that a number of dialogue effects, based on longitudinal survey data, persist up to one year later (Sorensen, Nagda, Gurin, and Maxwell, 2009). …”

Beyond Ethnic Tidbits: Toward a Critical and Dialogical Model in Multicultural Social Justice Teacher Preparation

“…Sociocultural theory (Bakhtin, 1986;Vygotsky, 1978;Wells, 1999aWells, , 1999bWells, , 2007Wells, , 2009, intergroup dialogue 3 (Nagda & Gurin, 2007;Sorensen, Nagda, Gurin, & Maxwell, 2009), and critical consciousness (Freire, 1999) are complementary views of learning that inform my understanding and use of CDM. Although they are theoretically and methodologically distinct, each lens emphasizes dialogical meaning-making that attends to the role of power in knowledge production and social life.…”

“…What this means is that I use CDM as a pedagogical framework to facilitate shared meaning-making wherein "dialogue as a process of learning and knowing must always involve a political project with the objective of dismantling oppressive structures and mechanisms prevalent both in education and society" (Freire & Macedo, 1995, p. 380). In total, I draw on views of learning from sociocultural theory, intergroup dialogue, and critical consciousness to facilitate content learning and structured interaction that encourages students to understand content through guided self-reflection, critical communication and alliance building (Sorensen et al, 2009). …”

Diversity, Difference, and Contact in Educational Settings: Understanding the Ecological Factors Contributing to Positive Intergroup Relations

“…One way to leverage the power of interpersonal interaction to help develop multicultural competence would be to better recruit PSTs with more diverse experiences and viewpoints (Sleeter, 2001;Villegas & Lucas, 2004). While impossible to ensure, creating a more racially, ethnically, culturally, gender, and regionally diverse student body and crafting opportunities for true interpersonal interaction and cooperation can give education schools a better probability of having students develop first-hand the skills and dispositions to embrace diversity and understand and value inclusive environments (Sorensen et al, 2009). Lastly, providing varied, diverse, and immersive teacher field experiences may lead to better multicultural outcomes building upon principles mentioned earlier (Pohan, Ward, Kouzekanani, & Boatright, 2009;.…”

“…Research using the contact hypothesis has found that settings that provide optimal conditions for intergroup interaction (i.e., interdependence and cooperation between groups, institutional support, and common goals across groups) will result in reduced prejudice, more positive attitudes, and increased confidence and comfort to have interactions with others from different groups (Hurtado, 2005;Sorensen, Nagda, Gurin, & Maxwell, 2009). Having actual history and familiarity with cross-racial/ethnic interaction can allow PSTs to structure their diverse classrooms and prepare their students for intergroup contact, rather than relying on lay theory and curricular platitudes (Fitchett et al, 2012;Keengwe, 2010).…”