|
Experience and evidence now confirm that, when present, material that
highlights differences does have positive effects on a number of
learning outcomes. Control of the curriculum remains in faculty hands –
both collectively, in terms of course and program approval processes,
and individually, in terms of daily decisions about what to teach. As a
result, the success of efforts to make curricula more diverse depends to
a large degree on faculty willingness to incorporate these materials.
One study of faculty at Research I institutions
(cited in the article referenced below) found that the majority of
faculty endorsed diversity, seeing it as helping students achieve the
goals of a college education, but the majority of this group also
reported making no changes in their classroom practices.
It would be helpful to know why faculties aren’t
changing what they teach, which was the purpose of the study. These
researches studied faculty at one, predominantly white, public
university located in the Midwest – a university that “has struggled
with creating an environment that welcomes and appreciates diversity.”
(p. 152) The study’s dependent variable was determined by a yes or no
response to this question: “In the past year, have you incorporated
content designed to promote sensitivity toward diversity issues in your
courses?” (p. 155) Sixty-nine percent of the sample said yes; 31 percent
responded no.
Some demographic and professional characteristics of
those faculty who did and did not make changes in course content were
predictable. Faculty of color, both males and females, as well as other
marginalized groups such as gays, were more likely than white faculty of
both genders to include diversity-related content. More surprising,
faculty in education were less likely to include diversity content than
faculty from the arts and sciences, business, and fine arts, and faculty
from engineering were more likely to teach diversity than faculty in
these other fields. Tenure status and time at the institution did not
reliably predict who made curricular changes.
Also interesting was the fact that in this study
faculty decisions about diversity content were more significantly
influenced by climate for diversity in their department than the broader
institutional environment.
As for beliefs that predict which faculty will and
will not incorporate diversity, one of the three variables tested was
significant. On average, if faculty were more likely to agree that
“affirmative action leads to hiring of less qualified faculty and staff”
(p.161), then those faculty were less likely to incorporate
diversity-related content in course materials. It turned out that for
these faculty, some experiences, such as participation in activities
(such as workshops) that aimed to increase faculty sensitivity toward
diversity, did powerfully predict those who reported making changes.
Based on this finding, the researchers recommend that administrators
consider inducements like release time and stipends to encourage more
faculty to participate in these kinds of events.
This research has implications for those in
institutions charged with growing curricular diversity, but it also
ought to be considered by individual faculty. These findings should
encourage us to examine the reasons that do and do not motivate us to
include diversity-related content in the course we teach. They raise
those persistent questions about what content and how much of it is
needed to advance the learning goals of our disciplines and of the
larger college experience.
|
