Educational Benefits Of Diversity Research Articles

Dynamic Diversity

Through an analysis of relevant social science evidence, this article provides a deeper understanding of critical mass, a concept that has become central in litigation efforts related to affirmative action admissions policies that seek to further the educational benefits of diversity. We demonstrate that the concept of critical mass requires an understanding of the conditions needed for meaningful interactions and participation among students, given the particular institutional context. To highlight this contextual definition of critical mass and to avoid further obfuscations in the legal debate, we offer the term dynamic diversity and outline four main components of dynamic diversity that institutions can attend to. By thinking of dynamic diversity as the goal, institutions and lawyers should be better poised to answer the question of how much diversity is necessary for leveraging its educational benefits.

How Much Diversity is Enough? The Curvilinear Relationship Between College Diversity Interactions and First-Year Student Outcomes

Recent legal challenges to race-conscious college admissions processes have called into question what constitutes a sufficient level of diversity on college campuses. Previous research on the educational benefits of diversity has examined the linear relationship between diversity interactions and student outcomes, but multiple theoretical frameworks suggest that this relationship may be curvilinear. The present study investigated this possibility using a longitudinal sample of 8,615 first-year undergraduates at 49 colleges and universities. The results indicate that rare or moderate diversity interactions are associated with virtually no growth (and sometimes even slight declines) in leadership skills, psychological well-being, and intellectual engagement, whereas very frequent diversity interactions are associated with considerable growth. The results are similar regardless of students’ race, institutional characteristics, and whether the interactions are interracial or across multiple forms of difference. Implications for institutional practice and future research are discussed.

The Educational Benefits of Diversity: The Unfinished Journey from “Mandate” in Brown to “Choice” in Grutter and Comfort*

This paper reviews the rationale behind the recent US Supreme Court ruling in the University of Michigan's Grutter v. Bollinger case (2003). It describes the educational benefits of diversity as documented by research and argued by the seventy-five amicus briefs filed in support of the law school's race-based admissions policies. It further discusses the implications of the Grutter decision on race-conscious decisions, on “choice” integration programs, and on increased diversity strategies in K–12 schooling based on the requirements of compelling interest and policies that are narrowly tailored.

Toward a Deeper Understanding of the Diversity Rationale

How did “diversity” come to occupy such a key position in public discourse, particularly concerning education policy? Given the widespread recognition of diversity, is there an intellectual tradition or philosophical orientation that informs its application to education? And, based on the traditions examined, what is gained and lost by focusing on the diversity rationale? This article examines the legal history of using the diversity rationale to justify affirmative action and the philosophical foundation of the ideal of diversity. This foundational analysis not only adds a new direction to the scholarship on the educational benefits of diversity but also illuminates the tensions associated with affirmative action in general and with this rationale in particular. The authors aim to influence educational practice in a direction that well serves a multi-racial/ethnic democratic society

The Educational Benefits of Sustaining Cross-Racial Interaction among Undergraduates

In June of 2003, the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the University of Michigan Law School's practice of considering race in admissions by a margin of 5-4 (Grutter v. Bollinger), but struck down the formulaic approach for admitting freshman by a margin of 6-3 (Gratz v. Bollinger). Even though the Court narrowed the use of race by rejecting mechanical scoring systems that assign bonus points to underrepresented students, it left the door open for colleges and universities to continue to consider race in admissions to enroll a critical mass of racially/ethnically diverse students. Among the members of the Court itself, there was major disagreement over the value and effects of diversity in an educational setting. For example, Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who authored the majority opinion in Grutter, wrote that body diversity is a compelling state interest that can justify using race in university admissions, whereas her counterpart Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the dissenting opinion that he was not convinced that educational benefits flowed from diversity and listed this shortcoming among a long list of other issues that can potentially bring about future lawsuits. Given the conflicting opinions, it is clear that the controversy regarding claims about the educational benefits of diversity is far from settled, and there continues to be a pressing need to understand empirically how students actually benefit, if at all, from being in more racially/ethnically diverse environments. This study applies a multilevel approach to examine the student- and institution-level effects of one key form of diversity--namely, frequency of cross-racial interaction. Two key research questions guided this study: (a) How do college students who report high levels versus low levels of cross-racial interaction compare with regard to the educational outcomes of openness to diversity, cognitive development, and self-confidence? (b) How do students who attend institutions with high peer versus low peer average levels of cross-racial interaction compare on measures of openness to diversity, cognitive development, and self-confidence? Background Because of the recent national attention on the constitutionality of race-conscious admissions practices, a growing body of empirical research about diversity has emerged in the last 10 years, focusing mainly on racial/ethnic diversity with particular interest in enrolling a larger proportion of underrepresented students (African American, Latino/a, & Native American). Several publications have recently reviewed this body of research (see, for example, Chang, Witt, Jones, & Hakuta, 2003; Hurtado, Dey, Gurin, & Gurin, 2003; Hurtado, Milem, Clayton-Pedersen, & Allen, 1998, 1999; Milem & Hakuta, 2000; Smith, Gerbick, Figueroa, Watkins, Levitan, Moore, et al., 1997). Basically, these reviews showed that diversity-related benefits are far ranging, spanning from benefits to individual students and the institutions in which they enroll, to private enterprise, the economy, and the broader society. There was remarkable consistency among these reviews concerning both the empirical studies they considered and the conclusions they drew. One important conclusion that emerged from these reviews is that the vitality, stimulation, and educational potential of an institution are directly related to the composition of its student body, faculty, and staff. A number of studies have shown that campus communities that are more racially diverse tend to create more richly varied educational experiences that help students learn and prepare them better for participation in a democratic society (Antonio, 2001b; Astin, 1993a; Bowen & Bok, 1998; Chang, 1999; Chang et al., 2003; Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, & Gurin, 2002; Hurtado, 2001; Milem, 1994; Orfield & Kurlaender, 2001; Pascarella, Edison, Nora, Hagedorn, & Terenzini, 1996; Sax & Astin, 1997). One reason for this appears to be that race still shapes opportunities and experiences in U. …

Cultural Competence in Audiology

Cultural Competence in Audiology

Expert Report of Kent D. Syverud in Grutter v. Bollinger

Editor's Note: In Grutter v. Bollinger, __ U.S. ___ ; 123 S. Ct. 2325; 156 L. Ed. 2d 304 (2003), the Supreme Court rendered a landmark decision approving the use of race as one factor in admissions decisions at the University of Michigan Law School. The opinion of the Court discussed an expert opinion of Kent D. Syverud, Dean of the Vanderbilt Law School, concerning the educational benefits of diversity, noting that "when a critical mass of underrepresented minority students is present, racial stereotypes lose their force because non-minority students learn there is no 'minority viewpoint' but rather a variety of viewpoints among minority students." The expert report to which the Court referred was prepared at the Vanderbilt Law School in 1999 and attached as an Exhibit (in Volume 3 of the Appendix) to the Defendant University of Michigan Law School's Memorandum of Law in Support of Motion for Summary Judgment, May 3, 1999, Grutter v. Bollinger, C.A. No. 97-75928, in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan. The report was also referenced in the appendix to the Writ of Certiorari in the Supreme Court of the United States at 215a. What follows is the original expert report as submitted to the Court.

The Michigan Cases and Furthering the Justification for Affirmative Action

In this paper, I endorse the decision of the Supreme Court of the U.S. in Bollinger v. Grutter (2003). I argue that the educational benefits of diversity are an important enough state interest to justify the use of racial preferences and that, especially due to the absence of race-neutral alternatives, this use of racial preferences is narrowly tailored to that state interest However, I also indicate that I am willing to give up my support for diversity affirmative action in the U.S. for a $25 billion a year education program to put in place a quality educational system K through 12 for every child in the country. Unfortunately, I have yet to find any critics of affirmative action who are also willing to support such a program.

Educational Benefits of Diversity in Medical School

Many U.S. medical schools have abandoned affirmative action, limiting the recruitment and reducing the admission of underrepresented minority (URM) students even though research supports the premise that the public benefits from an increase in URM physicians and that URM physicians are likely to serve minority, poor, and Medicaid populations. Faculty and students commonly assume they benefit from peer cultural exchange, and the published evidence for the past two decades supports this notion. This research examined the students' perceptions of the educational merits of a diverse student body by surveying medical students at two schools. In 2000, medical students from all four years at Harvard Medical School and the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine were enrolled in a telephone survey about the relevance of racial diversity (among students) in their medical education. Students responded to the interviewer's questions on a five-point Likert-type scale. Of the 55% of students who could be located, 97% responded to the survey. Students reported having little intercultural contact during their formative years but significantly more interactions during higher education years, especially in medical school. Students reported contacts with diverse peers greatly enhanced their educational experience. They strongly supported strengthening or maintaining current affirmative action policies in admissions. The responses and demography of the Harvard and UCSF students did not differ significantly, nor did they differ for majority students and URM students-all groups overwhelmingly thought that racial and ethnic diversity among their peers enhanced their education. Diversity in the student body enhanced the educational experiences of students in two U.S. medical schools.