DOCSLIB.ORG

Intergroup Dialogue Overview.Pdf

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Intergroup Dialogue Overview.Pdf 80 Group UOrkApproachesandMethods IntergroupDialogue: Overview 81 personal experience, which can educate dominant culture listeners but exploit the communication and relationships, and promote social change (Alvarez & Cabbil, speakers. Social workers must insure that intergroup dialogue adheres to the two 200 I; Miller & Donner, 2000; Rodenborg & Huynh, 2006). Dialogue is a process core values outlined in the StandardsJOrSocialUOrk PracticewithGroups:rigorously of exploring one's own perceptions, values, and experiences, and communicating respect the autonomy, worth, and dignity of each group participant and remem- them without either forcing them on others or conforming, as a way to create ber that the goal of the group is to create a socially just society (Association for the Advancement of Social Work with Groups, 2006). meaning between people (Bohm, 1992). Intergroup dialogue is a facilitated group experience that is designed to provide a safe space for participants to address divi- Documenting the effectiveness of intergroup dialogue through rigorous sive social issues (Dessel, Rogge, & Garlington, 2006). Intergroup dialogue may research is a second challenge. Initial effectiveness data have been anecdotal or incorporate learning or experiential material, and engages participants in listen- case examination. Research rigor should be improved and should examine inter- ing, speaking, reflecting on one's own views, and learning about the perspectives group dialogue's effectiveness for dominant and non-dominant participants, its of others (Herzig & Chasin, 2006). Such dialogue involves processes of apprecia- flexibility across multiple settings, and its limitations (Dessel et aI., 2006). tion of difference, engaging self, critical self-reflection, and alliance building References (Nagda, 2006). It may also address cultural differences and power imbalances. Group work pays close attention to participants' personal, cultural, and social Allport,OriginallyG. W published(1979). Thein natwe1954. of prgudice(25th Anniversary ed.). Reading, IvIA: Addison-Wesley. identities and dialogues are often co-facilitated by trained facilitators who may represent the social or cultural identities of the groups involved (Brown & Mistry, Alvarez, A. R., & Cabbil, L. (2001). The MELD program: Promoting personal change and social 2005; Nagda, 2006). The development of group norms is also addressed through justice through a year-long multicultural group experience. Social UVrkwith Groups,24(1), 3-20. the use of established dialogue agreements (Alvarez & Cabbil, 200 I; Herzig & Association for the Advancement of Social work with Groups. (2006). StandardsjOr Social UVrkPractice with Groups.Retrieved August 14,2007 from http://www.aaswg.org/Standards/standards Chasin, 2006). Convening and facilitating intergroup dialogues combines the Bargal, D. (2004). Groups for reducing intergroup conflict. In C. 0. Garvin, 1. M. GUlierrez, & social work micro skills of critical self-analysis and relational engagement with M.J. Galinsky (Eds.), Handbook of socialwork withgroups (pp. 292-306). New York: Guilford Press. macro skillsof systemic and structural change (Dessel et aI., 2006). The practice of Brooks/Cole. Corey, M. S., & Corey, G. (2006). Processand practice with groups (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson intergroup dialogue builds upon both the interactional group work model that seeks common ground between individual and group needs (Gitterman & Shulman, Dessel, A., Rogge, M. E., & Garlington, S. B. (2006). Using group dialogue to promote social justice and change. SocialUbrk, 51(4), 303-315. 2005) and social action group work that promotes empowerment and social change (Breton, 1995). Nagda,ing toB. transgress.A, Kim, C.,Joumal& Truelove,tif Social/ssues,Y. (2004).60,195-214.Learning about difference, learning with others, learn- Social work with groups has a historical yet under recognized purpose of link- Nagda, B. A., Spearmon, M. L., Holley, 1. C., Harding, S., Balossone, M. 1., Moise-Swanson, D., & ing group work with social change (Alvarez & Cabbil, 2001). Intergroup dialogue De Mello, S. (1999). Intergroup dialogues: An innovative approach to teaching about diversity and justice in social work programs. JOllmaljOr HigherEducation,35(3), 433-449. is employed in academic, community, and international settings to address issues Pettigrew,T. E (1998).Intergroup contact theory.Annual&viewof Psychology,49, 65-86. such as racism, interethnic conflict, and civic participation (Dessel et aI., 2006). The National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation identified four primary Rodendialogue.borg, N.SocialA., &UVrkHuynh,witlz GroupJ;N. (2006).29(1), On27 44.overcoming segregation: Social work and intergroup intentions of dialogue: exploration, conflict transformation, decision making, and Schoem, D., Hurtado. S., Sevig, T., Chesler, 1\1.,& Sumida, S. H. (200]). Intergroup dialogue: Democracy collaborative action. The Public Conversations Project has identified goals of at workin theory and practice. In D. Schoem,&S. Hurtado (Eds.),/ntngrollpdialogue:Deliberativedell/oc- intergroup dialogue that include thoughtful speaking and listening before respond- roryin school,college,tOll/mulliry,alldworkplace.Ann Arbor,MI: Universityof MichiganPress. Zuniga, x., Nagda, B. A., & Sevig, 1: D. (2002). Intergroup dialogues: An educational mode] for ing, mutual recognition of the authenticity of others, an inquiring stance, and cultivating engagement across differences.EquiryandErcetlencein Education,35( I), 7-17. a sense of safety, security and trust (Herzig & Chasin, 2006). The United Nations Development Programme's (UNDP) Democratic Dialogue Prqject described the goals of their international dialogues as dealing with critical sociopolitical events, addressing challenges of the times, and promoting long-term change. Intergroup Dialogue: OverView Groups are a social microcosm of the larger society and successful intergroup AdrienneDessei contact has been shown to improve intergroup relationships (Brown & Mistry, 2005). Stages of group process inform how a group functions and illuminate the powerful effects of addressing private issues in a public setting (Drumm, 2006). Allport's (1954/1979) contact hypothesis stated that intergroup contact results in positive effects when four conditions are present: (I) equal group status within the Intergroup dialogue is all innovative and versatile non-therapeutic group work group encounter, (2) common goals (3) cooperative interactions; and (4) support approach that social worl<ers can use to reduce prejudice and conflict, improve of those with social influence and power. Pettigrew and Tropp (2006) found that 83 IntergroupDialogue: Principles 82 GroupMiJrkApproachesandMethods change occurs through learning about outgroups, the opportunity for reappraisal References and re-categorization of outgroups, the generation of empathy and positive emo- tion, and the potential for friendships. Allport, G. (1979). Tht natureof prgudice(25th Anniversary ed.). Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. Originally published in 1954. Intergroup contact that provides opportunities for "self-revealing interactions" has Alvarez, A., & Cabbil, L. (200 I). The MELD program: Promoting personal change and social justice been shown to facilitate superordinate identity formation and reduce bias (Gaertner, through a year-long multicultural group experience. SocialWInkwith Groups,24(1),3-20. Dovidio, & Bachman, 1996, p. 271). Dasgupta and Rivera (2006) found that the Bohm,D. (1992). Changingconsciousness:Exploringthehiddensourceof thesocial,political, andenvironmental activation of conscious egalitarian beliefs and intention to control prejudicial crisesfacing our world. San Francisco: Harper. Breton,M. (1995).The potential for social action in groups. Social\o1l1rkwith Groups,18(2/3),5-13. behaviors can mediate the relationship between automatic prejudice and biased Brown, A., & Mistry, T. (2005). Group work with "mixed membership" groups: Issues of race and behavior. Furthermore, the provision of a safe and positive opportunity for inter- gender.SocialWorkwith GroupS,28(3/4), 133-148. actions between different groups may reduce the anxiety and negative attitudes Dasgupta, N., & Rivera, L. (2006). From automatic antigay prejudice to behavior: The moderating dominant groups have about marginalized groups. Members of non-dominant role of conscious beliefs about gender and behavioral control. }ournal of Personaliryand Social groups have also reported positive experiences from participating in intergroup Psychology,91(2), 268-280. Dessel, A., Rogge, M., & Garlington, S. (2006). Using intergroup dialogue to promote social justice education and dialogue. and change. Social Work,51(4), 303-315. Interventions that seek to educate and promote self-reflection and empathy, Diez-Pinto,E. (2004). VisionGuatnnala1998-2000: Building bridgesof trust.New York:United Nations manipulate ingroup and outgroup perceptions, and facilitate intergroup contact Development Programme. RetrievedJuly 31,2006 from http:/ 1democraticdialoguenetwork.orgl and its impact on social identity roles and potential for cross-group friendships have documents/view.pl?s= 13;ss=;t=;Lid=263 been shown to achieve prejudice reduction through attitude change. Studies in aca- Drumm, K. (2006).The essentialpower of group work. SocialWorkwith Groups,29(2/3), 17-31. Gaertner, S., Dovidio, j., & Bachman, B. (1996). Revisitingthe contact hypothesis:The induction of demic settings have shown that dialogue participation has
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Contact Hypothesis Reevaluated1
    The Contact Hypothesis Reevaluated1 Elizabeth Levy Paluck2, Seth A. Green3, and Donald P. Green4 Abstract This paper evaluates the state of contact hypothesis research from a policy perspective. Building on Pettigrew and Tropp’s (2006) influential meta-analysis, we assemble all intergroup contact studies that feature random assignment and delayed outcome measures, of which there are 27 in total, nearly two-thirds of which were published following the original review. We find the evidence from this updated dataset to be consistent with Pettigrew and Tropp’s (2006) conclusion that contact “typically reduces prejudice." At the same time, our meta-analysis suggests that contact’s effects vary, with interventions directed at ethnic or racial prejudice generating substantially weaker effects. Moreover, our inventory of relevant studies reveals important gaps, most notably the absence of studies addressing adults’ racial or ethnic prejudice, an important limitation for both theory and policy. We also call attention to the lack of research that systematically investigates the scope conditions suggested by Allport (1954) under which contact is most influential. We conclude that these gaps in contact research must be addressed empirically before this hypothesis can reliably guide policy. What we have learned since Pettigrew and Tropp: A 10-year retrospective and update For more than a century, researchers have sought to understand what causes people to harbor and express prejudice against outgroups. Sustained attention to the topic of prejudice reflects the fact that in every era and region, stereotyping, discrimination, and 1 For invaluable research contributions, the authors thank Jason Chin and Kulani Dias. For detailed comments on their meta-analyses, we thank Linda Tropp, Thomas Pettigrew, Gunnar Lemmer, and Ulrich Wagner.
    [Show full text]
  • Exploring Intergroup Dialogue As a Sociocritical Pedagogy in Preservice Early Childhood Education
    Teacher EducationAndrea Quarterly, C. Minkoff Summer 2020 Exploring Intergroup Dialogue as a Sociocritical Pedagogy in Preservice Early Childhood Education Andrea C. Minkoff Abstract This study examined the impact of intergroup dialogue on a cohort of preservice early childhood educators. Specific attention was paid to the ways in which par- ticipation in intergroup dialogue shaped participants’ sense of identity, the ways in which they “saw” multiple and intersecting identities in schools and classrooms, and how participants envisioned dialogue impacting their future early childhood classrooms. Data collection methods included qualitative analysis of written reflections from participants during and after intergroup dialogue as well as interviews with participants 6 months after participating in intergroup dialogue. Results suggest that intergroup dialogue contributed to participants’ sense of self as related to their praxis by expanding their sense of identity to be more inclusive and aware of dimensions of power and privilege. Additionally, participants came to see issues of identity with young learners in more complex ways. Furthermore, participants experienced a sense of empowerment around navigating and engaging Andrea C. Minkoff is an assistant professor in the Child and Adolescent Development Master’s Program of the LaFetra College of Education at the University of La Verne, La Verne, California. Email address: [email protected] © 2020 by Caddo Gap Press 55 Exploring Intergroup Dialogue as a Sociocritical Pedagogy this complexity
    [Show full text]
  • The Psychology of Cultural Contact
    1 THE PSYCHOLOGY OF CULTURAL CONTACT Deborah A. Prentice and Dale T. Miller thnic diversity currently preoccupies a sizable segment of U.S. society, from employers and school administrators, who must E manage diversity within institutional settings, to politicians and social scientists, who must formulate policies for addressing the com- peting claims of different ethnic groups. The issue of diversity is fraught with anxiety. Ethnic conflicts in many countries around the world attest to the potential for relations across cultural boundaries to go seriously and destructively awry. Moreover, Americans' own struggles with race have left many pessimistic about the prospects for achieving positive, stable relations between ethnic groups. With new waves of immigrants coming from Asia and Latin America and higher birth rates among mi- nority than majority groups, the U.S. population is becoming, and will continue to become, ethnically and culturally more diverse. Thus, how to promote positive relations across group boundaries is a question of paramount importance. Thirty or forty years ago, psychologists thought they had an answer to this question. The contact hypothesis posited that if members of dif- ferent ethnic groups interact with each other on an equal-status basis in pursuit of common goals, positive intergroup relations will result (Allport 1954). This hypothesis was so appealing that it spawned hun- dreds of studies designed to test and refine its claims. The results have been less than encouraging. Yes, equal-status contact can have positive results, but only if many conditions obtain: the contact should be mean- ingful and have the potential to extend beyond the immediate situation; the individuals should be as similar as possible on all dimensions be- sides group membership; the contact should be voluntary, extended in duration, and varied across contexts; and so on (for a more complete list, see Stephan 1985).
    [Show full text]
  • Remixing Intergroup Dialogue Pedagogy Through Hip-Hop Feminism
    “WHO’S GOT BARS?”: REMIXING INTERGROUP DIALOGUE PEDAGOGY THROUGH HIP-HOP FEMINISM Wilson Okello University of North Carolina - Wilmington Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity Volume 6, Issue 2 | 2020 Copyright and Open Access © 2020 Wilson Okello This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Permission of the authors is required for distribution and for all derivative works, includinG compilations and translations. Quoting small sections of text is allowed as lonG as there is appropriate attribution and the article is used for non-commercial purposes. The Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity (ISSN 2642-2387) is published by the National Conference on Race and Ethnicity (NCORE), a production of the University of Oklahoma, in partnership with the University of Oklahoma Libraries. Journal Committed to Social Change on Race and Ethnicity | Volume 6, Issue 2 | 2020 “Who’s got bars?”: Remixing Intergroup Dialogue Pedagogy through Hip-Hop Feminism Wilson Okello University of North Carolina - Wilmington Hip-hop culture serves as a space to correct, prescribe, make known, and show up. Additionally, it offers its users opportunities to do what other spaces cannot, and that is to present a remix of a previously accepted script. Reintroduction can help Black lives, survive, dismantle, and escape systems of thinking that render them invisible and unheard. In this conceptually grounded manuscript, I discuss intergroup dialogue (IGD), with particular attention to IGD pedagogy. Though an important pedagogical strategy in and outside of higher education, IGD pedagogy may be operating to stifle the full expression of Black participants.
    [Show full text]
  • Intergroup Dialogue in Higher Education: Definition, Origins, and Practices
    Published online in Wiley InterScience (www.interscience.wiley.com) • DOI: 10.1002/aehe.3204 Intergroup Dialogue in Higher Education: Definition, Origins, and Practices NTERGROUP DIALOGUE IS AN INNOVATIVE PRACTICE IN Ihigher education that promotes student engagement across cultural and social divides, fostering learning about social diversity and inequali- ties and cultivating an ethos of social responsibility. This approach to diver- sity education on college and university campuses responds to a growing need for educational practices that prepares students to live, work, and lead in a complex, diverse, and stratified society (Banks, 2002; Chesler, Lewis, and Crowfoot, 2005; Guarasci and Cornwell, 1997; Gurin, 1999; hooks, 1994; Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, and Allen, 1999; Sleeter and McLaren, 1995; Stephan and Stephan, 2001; Schoem, Frankel, Zúñiga, and Lewis, 1993; Tatum, 1997). Intergroup dialogue (IGD), the focus of this monograph, is one of several dialogue and deliberation practices currently being used on college and uni- versity campuses in the United States. Many of these practices seek to foster conversation about contentious issues in collaborative ways (Schoem and others, 2001; Zúñiga and Nagda, 2001). One model, Study Circles (Flavin-McDonald and Barrett, 1999; McCoy and Sherman, 1994; McCoy and McCormick, 2001), emphasizes community building and social action. Study Circles bring community members together in small groups to build rela- tionships, deliberate about community issues, and explore actions to effect change in their communities (also see http://www.studycircles.org). Another model, Sustained Dialogue (Parker, 2006; Saunders, 1999, 2003), draws from work in international conflict resolution and peace building. In Sustained Dialogue, stu- dents of diverse backgrounds come together to build mutual respect, identify Intergroup Dialogue in Higher Education 1 issues of conflict, and generate action plans, including workable agreements to conflicts or disputes (also see http://www.sustaineddialogue.org).
    [Show full text]
  • Mckeown, S., & Dixon, J. (2017). the 'Contact Hypothesis': Critical
    McKeown, S., & Dixon, J. (2017). The ‘contact hypothesis’: Critical reflections and future directions. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 11(1), [e12295]. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12295 Peer reviewed version Link to published version (if available): 10.1111/spc3.12295 Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the accepted author manuscript (AAM). The final published version (version of record) is available online via Wiley at http://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12295. Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ 1 The ‘contact hypothesis’: Critical reflections and future directions Research on intergroup contact has grown exponentially over the past decade. Such research has typically extolled the benefits of positive interaction between members of historically divided communities, particularly on outcomes related to prejudice reduction. Emerging work in the field, however, has qualified this optimistic picture by identifying three gaps in the existing literature. First, in everyday life, contact may be construed as a negative experience that increases rather than decreases responses such as prejudice, anxiety, and avoidance. Second, in real life settings, contact is often circumscribed by informal practices of (re)segregation that are easily overlooked if researchers rely primarily on examining structured contact and explicit processes using primarily laboratory and questionnaire methods. Third, positive contact may have ‘ironic’ effects on the political attitudes and behaviours of the historically disadvantaged, undermining their recognition of social injustice and decreasing their willingness to engage in collective action to challenge the status quo.
    [Show full text]
  • Voices of Discovery: Facilitating Dialogues for Greater Intergroup Understanding
    Voices of Discovery: Facilitating Dialogues for Greater Intergroup Understanding El Camino College Intergroup Dialogue Training Facilitation Handbook 2019 Copyrighted© The Leadership in Diversity Group, LLC 2019 CONTENTS Part I: Overview of the Voices of Discovery Program ...................... pages 3-11 What is the Voices of Discovery Program? ........................................... page 3 What are Intergroup Dialogues? ......................................................... pages 3-5 The Need For Creating Intergroup Dialogues ....................................... pages 5-6 The Challenge of Diversity ............................................................ page 5 The Prospects of Diversity ............................................................. page 6 Assumptions about Diversity and Its Concomitant Issues ..................... pages 6-9 Creating the Dialogues: The Curriculum .............................................. pages 9-10 Learning Outcomes ........................................................................... pages 10-11 Part II: Group Processes .................................................................... pages 12-16 Stages of Group Development ............................................................ pages 12-12 Support and Challenge ...................................................................... pages 12-13 Role of the Facilitator ........................................................................ pages 13-14 Facilitator Tasks ...............................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Toward Muslims Before and After The
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Lincoln Institutional Repository TERRORISM, INTERGROUP CONTACT AND PREJUDICE 1 Does Terror Defeat Contact? Intergroup Contact and Prejudice Toward Muslims Before and After the London Bombings Dominic Abramsa, Julie Van de Vyvera, b, Diane M. Houstona, & Milica Vasiljevica, c aCentre for the Study of Group Processes, School of Psychology, University of Kent, UK bSchool of Psychology, University of Lincoln, UK cBehaviour and Health Research Unit, University of Cambridge, UK Corresponding Author: Dominic Abrams, Centre for the Study of Group Processes (CSGP), School of Psychology, University of Kent, UK. Email: [email protected]. Tel: +44 1227 827475. Author Notes: This research was funded by the UK Government Women and Equality Unit, and analyses were further funded by ESRC grant ES/J500148/1. This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record. http://www.apa.org. TERRORISM, INTERGROUP CONTACT AND PREJUDICE 2 Abstract Allport (1954) proposed a series of preconditions that have subsequently been shown to facilitate effects of intergroup contact on attitudes toward outgroups (Pettigrew & Tropp, 2006). The present study examines whether objective threat, in the form of the 2005 London 7/7 terror attack, can inhibit the positive effects of contact. We tested hypotheses that contact would affect prejudice toward Muslims regardless of the bombings (contact prevails), or that the bombings would reduce or inhibit the effects of contact on prejudice (threat inhibits). Data were collected through representative national surveys one month before and again one month after the attacks in London on 7th July 2005 (pre7-7 N = 931; post7-7 N = 1100), which represent relatively low and relatively high salience of ‘objective threat’.
    [Show full text]
  • The Parasocial Contact Hypothesis Edward Schiappa, Peter B
    Communication Monographs Vol. 72, No. 1, March 2005, pp. 92–115 The Parasocial Contact Hypothesis Edward Schiappa, Peter B. Gregg, & Dean E. Hewes We propose a communication analogue to Allport’s (1954) Contact Hypothesis called the Parasocial Contact Hypothesis (PCH). If people process mass-mediated parasocial interaction in a manner similar to interpersonal interaction, then the socially beneficial functions of intergroup contact may result from parasocial contact. We describe and test the PCH with respect to majority group members’ level of prejudice in three studies, two involving parasocial contact with gay men (Six Feet Under and Queer Eye for the Straight Guy) and one involving parasocial contact with comedian and male transvestite Eddie Izzard. In all three studies, parasocial contact was associated with lower levels of prejudice. Moreover, tests of the underlying mechanisms of PCH were generally supported, suggesting that parasocial contact facilitates positive parasocial responses and changes in beliefs about the attributes of minority group categories. Keywords: Parasocial; Contact Hypothesis; Prejudice; Television Studies One of the most important and enduring contributions of social psychology in the past 50 years is known as the Contact Hypothesis (Dovidio, Gaertner, & Kawakami, 2003). Credited to Gordon W. Allport (1954), the Contact Hypothesis, or Intergroup Contact Theory, states that under appropriate conditions interpersonal contact is one of the most effective ways to reduce prejudice between majority and minority group members. Coincidentally, two years after Allport’s book, The Nature of Prejudice, was published, Horton and Wohl (1956) argued for studying what they dubbed para-social interaction: “One of the most striking characteristics of the new mass media—radio, Edward Schiappa (Ph.
    [Show full text]
  • Training in Intergroup Dialogue Facilitation: Skills for Multicultural Social Work Practice
    Training in Intergroup Dialogue Facilitation: Skills for Multicultural Social Work Practice Introductory Essay Social work asks that its practitioners work for social justice—meaning that social workers must be competent about the needs and challenges faced by their clients, and that they possess the skills to simultaneously empower and equip their clients with the skills to lead healthy, productive, and fulfilling lives. The values of dialogue mirror that of social work. At its heart, dialogue asks its participants to connect the social to the personal; it demonstrates, in a concrete way, how individuals are directly impacted by social, historical, and political realities. Moreover, dialogue facilitation necessitates several practices that ensure effective social work practice, including critical consciousness, cultural competency, interpersonal communication skills, including active listening, validation, intentional question-asking, and feedback. It also asks that students engage in cyclical processes of reflection and action (praxis). In doing so, it requires that students engage in critical reflection about identities, assumptions, values, and systems of privilege and oppression. Its emphasis on awareness and critical consciousness offers social workers important information about diverse experiences, but it also demonstrates the importance of cultural competency in effective social work practice. As explained in the syllabus, this course will address the social work ethics and values from the NASW Code of Ethics, including the social work values of social justice, the importance of human relationships, and competence (in multicultural practice), as well as the ethics related to cultural competence and social diversity (1.05) and to social and political action (6.04). This course develops multicultural competency skills to work with disenfranchised and oppressed groups in culturally competent ways and to address social injustice due to discrimination and oppression.
    [Show full text]
  • “Contact” Sports: Competitive Athletic Experience, Racial Attitudes, and Intergroup Contact
    University of Nebraska at Omaha DigitalCommons@UNO Theses/Capstones/Creative Projects University Honors Program 5-2020 “Contact” Sports: Competitive Athletic Experience, Racial Attitudes, and Intergroup Contact Savana Nawojski [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/university_honors_program Part of the Gender and Sexuality Commons, Race and Ethnicity Commons, and the Sports Studies Commons Recommended Citation Nawojski, Savana, "“Contact” Sports: Competitive Athletic Experience, Racial Attitudes, and Intergroup Contact" (2020). Theses/Capstones/Creative Projects. 87. https://digitalcommons.unomaha.edu/university_honors_program/87 This Dissertation/Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the University Honors Program at DigitalCommons@UNO. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses/Capstones/Creative Projects by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “Contact” Sports: Competitive Athletic Experience, Racial Attitudes, and Intergroup Contact An Honors Thesis by Savana Nawojski in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirement for the Degree Bachelor of Science with Honors University of Nebraska at Omaha May 2020 Faculty Mentor: Dr. Daniel Hawkins ABSTRACT Allport’s (1954) Intergroup Contact hypothesis suggests that interaction among people from different racial and ethnic backgrounds can reduce prejudice, particularly in situations that involve cooperation and common goals. Although participation in competitive sports may provide opportunities for cooperative interaction among people from different racial backgrounds, and athletic teams tend to be more diverse at higher levels (NCAA 2019), relatively little work has examined the contact hypothesis in this context. Using a national representative data set (N = 966), we examine whether respondents’ levels of competitive ​ athletic experience are related to their attitudes toward African Americans.
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Pedagogical Dialogue in a Multicultural Education Theory Course
    Georgia State University ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University Educational Policy Studies Dissertations Department of Educational Policy Studies 5-12-2017 Pedagogical Dialogue: A Study of Pedagogical Dialogue in a Multicultural Education Theory Course. Jeffrey Morrison Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/eps_diss Recommended Citation Morrison, Jeffrey, "Pedagogical Dialogue: A Study of Pedagogical Dialogue in a Multicultural Education Theory Course.." Dissertation, Georgia State University, 2017. https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/eps_diss/160 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Department of Educational Policy Studies at ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. It has been accepted for inclusion in Educational Policy Studies Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks @ Georgia State University. For more information, please contact [email protected]. ACCEPTANCE This dissertation, PEDAGOGICAL DIALOGUE: A STUDY OF PEDAGOGICAL DIALOGUE IN A MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION THEORY COURSE, by JEFFREY STUART MORRISON, was prepared under the direction of the candidate’s Dissertation Advisory Committee. It is accepted by the committee members in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree, Doctor of Education, in the College of Education and Human Development, Georgia State University. The Dissertation Advisory Committee and the student’s Department Chairperson, as representatives of the faculty, certify that this dissertation has met all standards of excellence and scholarship as determined by the faculty. ________________________________ _____________________________ Joyce E. King, Ph.D. Jodi Kaufmann, Ph.D. Committee Co-Chair Committee Co-Chair _________________________________ ______________________________ Vera Stenhouse, Ph.D. David W. Stinson, Ph.D. Committee Member Committee Member _________________________________ Date _________________________________ William L. Curlette, Ph.D. Chairperson, Department of Educational Policy Studies _________________________________ Paul A.
    [Show full text]