Research Question: What learning experiences and educational interventions are used to change prejudicial attitudes, how are they implemented, and to what extent are they successful?

The research on reducing prejudice through educational interventions is plentiful but also diverse. Overall, education to reduce prejudice is found to be effective. In a meta-analysis of 73 studies of different techniques, Engberg (2004) found 52 were positive, 14 mixed, and 7 non-significant. Three main categories of teaching techniques emerge through a survey of the literature: teaching multicultural content, cooperative or collaborative learning methods, and anti-bias or anti-racist skills training. Multicultural content, when implemented in isolation of other techniques, has been minimally effective and could even be counter-productive (McGregor 1993; C.W. Stephan, L. Renfro, and W.G. Stephan 2004; Pfeifer, Brown, and Juvonen 2007). Both cooperative and anti-bias skills training have been found to be effective in reducing prejudice (McGregor 1993).

Anti-racist teaching addresses racism directly and targets the cognitive aspects of prejudice through discussions of past and present racism, prejudice, stereotyping, and discrimination in society and increasing awareness of the economic, structural, and historic roots of inequality (McGregor, 1993). This must also include a discussion about the perpetrators of discrimination and of minority group resistance and contributions despite the obstacles. This can be combined with role playing. Leonardo, Zeus, and Porter (2010) argue that too often in classes focused on race there is too much concern over creating a so-called ‘safe’ space that leads to shallowness and a counter-productive dialogue. They argue that the classroom should be redefined as a place of risk. The lecturer can begin with a dialogue about dialogue on the topic of race and encourage students to experiment with their self-understanding and promote the idea that they may change their minds during the term. The goal is not to encourage discomfort of the dominant group, but to have them take ownership of feelings of discomfort, inadequacy, and defensiveness. Violating the discourse on ‘safety’ will open up deeper engagements on race both intellectually and practically. (Leonardo, Zeus, and Porter 2010).

Cooperative or collaborative learning techniques have been found to benefit both interracial relationships and understanding as well as academic outcomes, which is often a concern of faculty as academic rigor in diversity courses can be lacking. (Pfiefer, Brown, and Juvonen 2007). One of the main cooperative learning techniques is role playing. Through this, prejudice and discrimination are demonstrated and/or experienced vicariously, allowing for identification with the minority group and encouraging students to take the perspective of another to produce dissonance (McGregor 1993). Heidi Norman (2004) developed a role play simulation for an Indigenous Studies course in Australia that had students take on the role of stakeholders in the Hindmarsh Island Bridge controversy, which dealt with Indigenous land claims. Role play as well as lecture and small groups enabled students to see the events and issues of race power as real rather than abstract, and it put them in a less defensive and more considered position by stepping outside themselves and understanding what it feels like to be marginalized.

Collaborative learning can include many other learning methods that emphasize small-group work, discussion, and intensive interaction among students, rather than the traditional lecture format. A quantitative study of 2050 second year students at 23 different institutions examined the effects of collaborative learning, which emphasized small groups and discussion surrounding complex issues, on student openness to diversity and found it to be effective by creating “the process and setting where learning is maximized and preconceptions are confronted through positive, productive interactions between students of different backgrounds,” (Cabrera, et al. 2002, 30).

Service learning has also been demonstrated to be effective for reducing prejudice. Service learning courses generally include a majority academic component with interdisciplinary readings as well as weekly lectures and discussion, but students also spend a set amount of hours each week (or term) at service placements in the community, about which there will likely be reflective assignments. Carolyn Dallinger (2015) conducted a qualitative study on primarily white, middle-class college students from small towns that had moderate to high levels of prejudice. Participants were partnered one-on-one with immigrant children for their service-learning project and were interviewed. At the end of the term, student prejudice was reduced through the recognition of their held racist beliefs and the discovery of similarities and positive differences with the immigrants that helped rid negative preconceived notions. Likewise, in a meta-analysis Engberg (2014) found 12 out of 13 studies reported that service learning programs had positive effects for reducing racial bias as they helped students overcome bias through direct contact with those who have been defined as the “other” and the chance to get to know one another on an equal footing. Dallinger (2015) recommends that service learning programs include equal status and cooperation as well as assignments to help students think deeply about the interactions and prejudice and discussions about feeling uncomfortable or afraid.

Enger and Lajimodiere (2011) sought to determine if the online learning space could be an effective space for transformative, collaborative multicultural learning by assessing attitude change in doctoral students following an online diversity course. The students watched video presentations from international students, read educational theorist texts, held online discussions, watched movies about racial crises, and kept a reflective journal. Students showed significant difference on knowledge regarding differences among economic classes and positive reaction to cultural differences and felt compelled to act on what they learned. The study found that the online discussion forum allowed for group examination of discrimination without personal confrontation, facilitating the discussion of sensitive topics free of the pressure of peer group norms.

In anti-racist, collaborative, and service learning discussion and reflection are key parts of the process. MacKinlay and Barney (2014) conducted a study on an educational intervention called “PEARL” – “Political, Embodied, Active and Reflective Learning” that includes small group work, a climate of openness, collaborative and experiential learning, and reflexive thinking where the instructor acts as a facilitator of discussions and learning. For the most part, the intervention led to a transformative process, enabled empathy for students, led students to ask more questions about their own identities and knowledge, and changed their understandings. However, they also noted that when courses concerned with race are compulsory student resistance increases and some students got angry about the situations being discussed.

While most educational techniques can be effective, successful attitude changes are dependent not on the intervention, but the manner in which program contents are conveyed (C.W. Stephan, L. Renfro, and W.G. Stephan 2004). As such, instructors must be vigilant of the atmosphere/environment they help create, how the topics are framed, and of their own non-neutral perspective. In Montana, where all levels of schooling are required to teach Indigenous history and culture, all teachers receive instruction on American Indian Studies. (Aveling 2012). Often, students have little experience with Indigenous peoples beyond media portrayal, have grown up in an environment where racism continues to be an issue, and can be resistant to learning about such a challenging topic (Aveling 2012, Page 2014). Combined with the cultural difference of an often-Indigenous instructor teaching non-indigenous students, these classes can have heightened ethnic tension. This will require teacher training and vigilance to successfully navigate.

As noted earlier, Phillips’ (2011) study of a mandatory Indigenous study course for pre-service teachers in Australia highlights the extreme difficulty students may have in changing their perspectives and attitudes surrounding knowledge of and racism towards Indigenous peoples. She concluded that careful course design and faculty facilitation was needed to create a space that would reduce the contaminating influence of pre-existing ideologies. As such, teaching content about Indigenous peoples and history students who do not have awareness of their own cultural privilege, standpoint, and dominant knowledge system will be unproductive and taint the ways they engage with this content. Instructors must first re-set this context and lead students to express and reflect on their resistance and standpoints. As such, in the first module of her developed course “students are guided to explore existing worldview assumptions using a range of triggers,” which “prepare students for deeper explorations of structural influences on the positions they take in relation to knowledge constructed about Australian cultures and the place of Indigenous peoples’ knowledge perspectives within those structures” (Phillips 2011) .

Research Question: How have diversity courses been implemented in majority white institutions, what challenges have been encountered, and how have/can these be mitigated for positive outcomes?

Recognizing and understanding the impact of racial difference is difficult for those students who have never lived with minority group members. The literature shows that when majority students are obliged to come face-to-face with issues of inequity and to consider their own culpability for such inequity and their capacity for social action, they experience discomfort that can lead to resistance (De Freitas and McAuley 2008). Davis (1992) identified three classroom responses to teaching about inequality to a predominantly white audience: resistance, paralysis and rage. Paralysis can happen when students are overwhelmed by the intractability of stratification and do not want to talk about it anymore. However, for students that have experienced inequality, the classes can become an avenue for anger. These reactions stem from misconceptions and deeply held ideologies that students bring with them upon entering university. Antonio (2006) found that students enter university with strongly held explanations for social phenomena that they take for granted. He found four common ideologies used to understand racial inequality: blaming the victim, justifications (argue for benefits of inequality), naturalization (inequality cannot be changed, what is done is done), and colorblind racism. Thus, he argues, “unless instructors employ strategies to deliberately discredit these misconceptions, students will likely continue to hold them after the leave college” (263).

Students must learn to problematize their comforting “truths” regarding difference and injustice. To design a diversity course that enables students to overcome or embrace this discomfort, examining resistance is crucial. De Freitas and McAuley (2008), in a study exploring strategies in a mandatory diversity course to help prepare pre-service teachers from a predominantly white community in P.E.I. to teach for diversity, argue that a ‘pedagogy of discomfort’ is necessary to instill a more ambiguous student identity that embraces difference and recognition of students’ own submission to dominant discursive practices. The key assignments required students to: “(1) Write a personal narrative about their own privilege; (2) Watch a foreign film and answer a series of questions about the dilemmas of empathizing with and representing ‘other’ cultures; (3) select a pop culture text and design a lesson that engenders a critical reading of the text; (4) write a paper in which they apply sociological and social psychological theoretical frameworks to their past teaching experiences” (433). Identity development was strongly triggered through these assignments, which made students struggle with their own power and privilege as majority group members and difficult theoretical models as interpretive tools. Many final papers indicated students were developing a more complex understanding of systemic inequity and to name and own the ways it impacted their own identity; however, some still resisted and continued to believe comforting justifications.

Pence and Fields (1999) sought to create a teaching intervention that would help uncover white privilege for a white audience. They found a number of issues that can come up in teaching white privilege: resistance, ranging from overt hostility to a wall of silence; some students think they have nothing to add to discussions because they are white; discussions focus on experiences of persons of colour but omit whiteness from the discussion, thereby excluding the power imbalance; and as many students grew up in white communities and schools, inquiry remains intellectualized and problems are seen as out there. The teaching method used had upper-level students design a quantitative research project that uncovered racial discrimination and then present their findings to an introductory humanities course. A quantitative course was useful as students tend to “own” date they have generated even when it supports positions they may have resisted previously: “Personal discovery can help resistant white students acknowledge their own structural privilege.” The project helped students realize the problems were not just out there, they recognized their own privilege and ways they are actually prejudiced, and made many want to take action. They moved beyond a passive understanding of discrimination.

Similarly, Martinez (2014) found that students were less resistant to a statistics diversity course that focused on comparing trends in the experiences of racial groups. Students were less defensive or uncomfortable because there was always statistical evidence to support the realities of social inequalities.

Antonio (2006) found that teacher-centered instruction, as opposed to collaborative and problem-based learning, may heighten student resistance as students see it as just the teachers opinion that they are being forced to learn. In addition, pre-held misconceptions intensify white students’ resistance to knowledge and may lead to student-teacher confrontations that sour the classroom atmosphere. One such misconception is a “simple moral dichotomy” ideology, where students oversimplify inequality by blaming it individuals and treating all behavior as either normal and good or other and bad. With this belief, critiques of inequality create resistance because they are seen as attacks on the natural goodness of society. As such, Antonio argues, these misconceptions must first be addressed and discredited. In addition, problem-based learning and collaborative learning strategies can reduce resistance to the material by offering multiple challenges and information sources, rather than just the teacher’s. Employing a problem-based learning model, Antonio was able to help students unlearn ideological misconceptions and replace them with a sociological framework.

Dallinger (2015) studied the effects of a service learning course on students from a predominantly white college and towns with high levels of prejudice. Through interacting one-on-one with young immigrant children students came to recognize their own held prejudice or racist beliefs, learned they had similarities and positive differences with their immigrant partners, and got rid of stereotypes through interaction. In order for students to have a transformative experience, Dallinger recommended assignments to help them think deeply about the interactions and different perspectives and that faculty engage in discussions about discomfort and fearing differences.

While the above cases show that prejudice and racism can be lowered in students at predominantly white institutions, some researchers have found that it can in fact be increased (Cass 2007, Nelson 2010). In both these cases, white students had increased awareness but also increased feeling of guilt and responsibility as the resulted of being confronted with their own privilege. As such, the instructor must be aware of the possibility of increased white guilt and implement strategies to acknowledge students’ emotions, encourage open dialogue about reactions to course materials, and perhaps institute weekly journals to help students cope with their discomfort (Case 2007). Importantly, discomfort must not be avoided in the desire for ‘safety’, but white students must take ownership of feeling uncomfortable in a critical race dialogue and be encouraged to take responsibility for their feelings of inadequacy and defensiveness (Leonardo, Zeus, and Porter 2010). A lack of safety opens up space for empathy and discomfort can enable both white students and students of colour to remove masks (Leonardo et al. 2010).

• Aveling, Nado. “Indigenous Studies: A Matter of Social Justice; A Matter of Urgency,.” Diaspora, Indigenous, and Minority Education 6 (2012): 99-114.
• Bowman, N. A. “Disequilibrium and Resolution: The Non-linear Effects of Diversity Courses on Well-being and Orientations Toward Diversity.” Review of Higher Education 33 (2010): 543– 568.
• Cabrera, A. F., Nora, A., Crissman, J. L., Terenzini, P. T., Beral, E. M., & Pascarella, E. T. “Collaborative Learning: Its Impact on College Students' Development and Diversity.” Journal of College Student Development 43 1 (2002): 20-34.
• Case, K.A. "Raising White Privilege Awareness and Reducing Racial Prejudice: Assessing Diversity Course Effectiveness.” Teaching of Psychology 34 (2007): 231-5.
• Change, Mitchell J. “The Impact of an Undergraduate Diversity Course Requirement on Students’ Racial Views and Attitudes.” The Journal of General Education 51, 1 (2002): 21-42.
• Dallinger, Carolyn. “An Integrated Theory of Prejudice Reduction Through Service Learning: College Students’ Interactions with Immigrant Children.” Ph.D. dissertation, Iowa State University, 2015.
• Davis, Nancy. “Teaching About Inequality: Student Resistance, Paralysis, and Rage.” Teaching Sociology 20 (1992): 232-38.
• De Freitas, Elizabeth, and Alexander McAuley. “Teaching for Diversity by Troubling Whiteness: Strategies for Classrooms in Isolated White Communities.” Race Ethnicity and Education 11, 4 (2008): 429-442.
• Engberg, M. E. “Improving Intergroup Relations in Higher Education: A Critical Examination of the Influence of Educational Interventions on Racial Bias.” Review of Educational Research 74 (2004): 473–524.
• Enger, K., & Lajimodiere, D. “A Multi-cultural Transformative Approach to Learning: Assessing Attitude Change in Doctoral Students Following an Online Diversity Course.” Multicultural Education & Technology Journal 5 (2011): 176-193.
• Fedynich, La Vonne. “Teaching Beyond the Classroom Walls: The Pros and Cons of Cyber Learning.” Journal of Instructional Pedagogies 13 (2013): 1-6.
• Henderson-King, D., & Kaleta, A. “Learning about social diversity: The undergraduate experience and intergroup tolerance.” The Journal of Higher Education, 71, 2 (2000): 142-164.
• Hogan, D. E., & Mallott, M. Changing racial prejudice through diversity education. Journal of College Student Development 46 (2005): 115–125.
• Jones, Sally. “Benefits and Challenges of Online Education for Clinical Social Work: Three Examples.” Clinical Social Work Journal 43, 2 (2015): 225-235.
• Leonardo, Zeus, and Ronald K. Porter. “Pedagogy of Fear: Toward a Fanonian Theory of ‘Safety’ in Race Dialogue’. Race Ethnicity and Education 13, 2 (2010): 139-157.
• Grant, Kristine S. Lewis and Vera J. Lee. “Wrestling with Issues of Diversity in Online Courses.” The Qualitative Report 19, 12 (2014): 1-25.
• Mackinlay, Elizabeth, and Katelyn Barney. “PEARLs, Problems and Politics: Exploring Findings From Two Teaching and Learning Projects in Indigenous Australian Studies at The University of Queensland.” The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education 43, 1 (2014): 31-41.
• Martinez, Sylvia. “Teaching a Diversity Course at a Predominantly White Institution: Success With Statistics.” Journal of College Student Development 55, 1 (2014): 75-78.
• McGregor, Josette. “Effectiveness of Role Playing and Antiracist Teaching in Reducing Student Prejudice.” Journal of Educational Research 86, 4 (1993): 215-226.
• Means, Barbara, et al. “The Effectiveness of Online and Blended Learning: A Meta-Analysis of the Empirical Literature.” Teachers College Record 115 (2013): 1-46.
• Nelson, Matthew. “Assessing the Impact of Diversity Courses on Students’ Values, Attitudes and Beliefs.” Ph.D. dissertation, USC Rossier School of Education, 2010.
• Norman, Heidi. “Exploring Effective Teaching Strategies: Simulation Case Studies and Indigenous Studies at the University Level.” The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education 33 (2004): 15-22.
• Page, Susan. “Exploring New Conceptualisations of Old Problems: Researching and Reorienting Teaching in Indigenous Studies to Transform Student Learning.” The Australian Journal of Indigenous Education 43, 1 (2014): 21-30.
• Palmer, B. “The Impact of Diversity Courses: Research from Pennsylvania State University.” Diversity Digest (2000). Accessed February 27, www.diversityweb.org/digest/W00/research.html.
• Pat, Antonio. “Learning to Understand Inequality and Diversity: Getting Students Past Ideologies.” Teaching Sociology 34, 3 (2006): 263-277.
• Pence, Dan J., and J. Arthur Fields. “Teaching about Race and Ethnicity: Trying to Uncover White Privilege for a White Audience.” Teaching Sociology 27, 2 (1999): 150-158.
• Pfeifer, Jennifer H., Christia Spears Brown, and Jaana Juvonen. “Teaching Tolerance in Schools: Lessons Learned Since Brown v. Board of Education About the Development and Reduction of Children’s Prejudice.” Social Policy Report 21, 2 (2007): 3-23.
• Phillips, Donna. “Resisting Contradictions: Non-Indigenous Pre-Service Teacher Responses to Critical Indigenous Studies.” Ph.D. thesis, Queensland University of Technology, 2011.
• Spencer, Lindsay. “The Ethnic Studies Requirement Should Go.” University Wire (Carlsbad), March 24, 2014.
• Stephan, Cookie W., Lausanne Renfro, and W.G. Stephan. “The Evaluation of Multicultural Education Programs: Techniques and a Meta-Analysis.” In Education Programs for Improving Intergroup Relations, edited by W. G. Stephan and W. P. Vogt, 227-242. New York: Teachers College Press, 2004.
• Stewart, Wendy. “Exploring Student Perceptions and Experience Regarding the Role of Diversity Courses and Service-Learning on Cross-Racial Interactions.” Ph.D. dissertation, USC Rossier School of Education, 2010.
• University of Wisconsin-Madison, University Academic Planning Council. Report of the Ethnic Studies Requirement Committee, July 18, 2002.