Diversity in the Classroom and Students’ Moral Reasoning

Sylvia Hurtado

Matthew J. Mayhew

Mark E. Engberg

University of Michigan

Introduction “Institutions should foster intellectual honesty,

responsibility for society’s moral health and for social justices, active participation as a citizen of a diverse democracy, discernment of the ethical consequences of decisions and action, and a deep understanding of one’s self and respect for the complex identities of others, their histories and their cultures” (p. xii).

The Association of American Colleges and Universities (2002)

Theoretical Overview Moral reasoning development

What? Postconventional reasoning When? One-term change? Where? In context (psychologist’s fallacy) How? Cognitive disequilibrium

Diversity theory Cognitive disequilibrium via active learning,

interaction with diverse peers

Key Features Assess impact of participation in a diversity course using a

standard measure of moral reasoning (DIT2);

Beyond the standard pre- and post assessments, account for the type of pedagogy and learning that students report;

Model students’ selection of these courses as a way to emphasize that students’ comfort levels and predispositions can be accentuated or challenged during college

Sample 236 cases (151 diversity and 85 management)

71% female 22% students of color 65% underclassmen 80% primarily White neighborhoods

By course. . . Diversity course = 87% female, 23% students of color Management course = 42% female, 19% students of color

Survey and Missing Data Surveys

Student Thinking and Interaction Survey (STIS) Time 1 and Time 2

Defining Issues Test 2 Time 1 and Time 2

California Critical Thinking Dispositions Index (CCTDI)

Time 2

Missing Data EM Algorithm-Estimates missing values from

population

Variables Pre-course demographic controls

Race Gender Previous diversity-related course learning

Course-related variables Time 1 moral reasoning Participation in diversity course Active learning factor (6 item – alpha = .77) Disposition toward critical thinking

Outcome: Time 2 moral reasoning

DIT2 Mean Differences for Diversity and Management Courses

34.01

27.99

31.25

26.882526272829303132333435

Pre-test DIT2 Post-test DIT2

Diversity Course

ManagementCourse

Results

* p<.05,**p<.01,***p<.001

.21***

NS

.18**

.11*

NS

.57***

.39***.15*

.19**

NS

-.15*

Race(Minority)

Gender(Female)

Course(Diversity)

Previous Diversity Courses

Disposition to Critical

Thinking

Active Learning

Environment

Moral Reasoning

Time 1

Moral Reasoning

Time 2

Summary of Significant Direct and Indirect Effects on Moral Reasoning Time 2

Direct Effects DIT2- Time 1*** CCTDI*** Course (diversity)*

Indirect effects Previous Diversity

Course** Race* Active learning*

*p<.05, **p<.01, ***p<.001

Implications Moral reasoning skills should be “standard

equipment” of college graduates; diversity courses affect moral reasoning

Importance of accounting for pedagogy as well as course-taking behavior in classroom-based studies

Change over one term has important assessment implications for faculty interested in measuring student development

For More Information Diverse Democracy Project University of Michigan 610 E. University, 514 SEB Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1259

Phone: 734.647.7439 E-mail: divdemo@umich.edu Website: http://www.umich.edu/~divdemo/