This article was downloaded by: [Umeå University Library]On: 14 November 2014, At: 01:27Publisher: RoutledgeInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registeredoffice: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

Journal of Ethnic And Cultural Diversityin Social WorkPublication details, including instructions for authors andsubscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/wecd20

Effectiveness of Diversity InfusionModules on Students' Attitudes,Behavior, and KnowledgeMahasin F. Saleh a , Linda Anngela-Cole a & Alice Boateng aa School of Social Work , University of Nevada , Reno, Nevada,United StatesPublished online: 10 Aug 2011.

To cite this article: Mahasin F. Saleh , Linda Anngela-Cole & Alice Boateng (2011) Effectiveness ofDiversity Infusion Modules on Students' Attitudes, Behavior, and Knowledge, Journal of Ethnic AndCultural Diversity in Social Work, 20:3, 240-257, DOI: 10.1080/15313204.2011.594995

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15313204.2011.594995

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the“Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as tothe accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinionsand views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Contentshould not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sourcesof information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever orhowsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arisingout of the use of the Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Anysubstantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Journal of Ethnic & Cultural Diversity in Social Work, 20:240–257, 2011Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLCISSN: 1531-3204 print/1531-3212 onlineDOI: 10.1080/15313204.2011.594995

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules onStudents’ Attitudes, Behavior, and Knowledge

MAHASIN F. SALEH, LINDA ANNGELA-COLE, and ALICE BOATENGSchool of Social Work, University of Nevada, Reno, Reno, Nevada, United States

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness ofdiversity infusion modules provided to university students in apredominantly white homogeneous community. A mixed-methodapproach using a pre-post retrospective design was used to mea-sure attitudes, behaviors, and knowledge about diversity issues,and included a comparison group (total N = 179). Although theresults indicated improvement for students that received the infu-sion modules, the effects of past experiences with diversity appearto have limited the effectiveness of the infusion. Recommendationsfor infusing diversity content in higher education programs incommunities where exposure to diverse groups is limited areprovided.

KEYWORDS Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) accred-itation, diversity, cultural awareness, cultural sensitivity, socialwork education, diversity research, white privilege

INTRODUCTION

Competent and ethical social work practice requires that social workersrespect cultural uniqueness. Teaching the skills needed to practice culturallysensitive social work can be challenging (Phan et al., 2009). Furthermore,teaching these skills to students from culturally homogeneous backgroundscan pose particular challenges, as these students are more limited in theirexposure to diversity than students who come from communities whereinteraction with ethnically and culturally diverse groups is an everyday

The authors would like to thank Mr. Bob Fulkerson for developing and facilitating thediversity pilot modules and Dr. Karen Koprea-Frye for her assistance with data collection.

Address correspondence to Dr. Mahasin F. Saleh, School of Social Work, University ofNevada Reno, 1664 N. Virginia St., Reno, NV 89557, USA. E-mail: msaleh@unr.edu

240

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 241

occurrence. The journey toward an understanding of diversity for whitestudents starts with students exploring their own cultural identity, theirinteractions with people of other ethno-cultural groups, and the concept of“white privilege.” This study describes the design, implementation, and eval-uation of a diversity infusion experience that addressed social work students’change in attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors about diversity.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Social Work Education and Diversity

Schools of social work vary widely in terms of diversity of community,students, and faculty, as well as their understanding of diversity and associ-ated skills. Decisions about who teaches and how diversity is taught differin social work programs across the country (Le-Doux & Montalvo, 1999).In addition, the Council on Social Work Education (CSWE) EducationalPolicy and Accreditation Standards (EPAS) (2008) require that diversity beaddressed both explicitly and implicitly in the social work curriculum. TheEPAS recognize that there may be different curricular paths that programscan take to reach accreditation requirements, including those pertaining todiversity. At the same time, the EPAS note that program context is vital.Therefore, assessing and understanding program context is critical in theplanning, development, and delivery of diversity curriculum.

Given that students may meet classmates from different ethno-culturalbackgrounds, it is essential that programs pay special attention to how theyprepare students for practice, as they will work with people from othergroups. According to the National Association of Social Workers’ Standardsfor Cultural Competence in Social Work Practice, the first step in the processis gaining self-understanding of one’s own identities, values, biases, beliefs,and assumptions surrounding diversity (NASW, 2001). Also, given the impor-tance of self-awareness, educators must take care to focus on the affective aswell as the cognitive and behavioral dimensions of learning and assessmentwhen designing curriculum (Comerford, 2004). It has been noted that socialwork curricula targeting the affective domain in diversity content have yet tobe thoroughly addressed in the literature (Le-Doux & Montalvo, 1999). Thisis especially important in light of the EPAS focus on student practice com-petencies. The foundational element of performing cognitive and behavioralcompetencies is to have solid affective understanding of what one is prac-ticing or discussing. Attitudes are a critical element of the affective domain,and an awareness of one’s underlying attitudes is essential for understand-ing, embracing, and practicing social work values and ethics. Students needto be challenged to explore their histories, attitudes, and biases in order tobecome competent social workers (Cournoyer, 2008).

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

242 M. F. Saleh et al.

Some researchers have found that infusion of diversity in the socialwork curriculum produces positive changes in students, including increasesin student comfort levels and acceptance of diversity (Herda-Hipps,Westhuis, & Diehl, 2001), and constructive changes in perceptions of oppres-sion (Garcia & Van Soest, 1997). Yet others have found that minority studentshave had greater increases in diversity awareness as compared to majoritystudents (Anderson, Hayashi, & Frost, 2009). These researchers have con-cluded that the assumptions and biases of the dominant culture need to bemore actively challenged in the classroom. Their findings suggest that facultyneed to discover educational strategies that have a greater impact on whitestudents. Congruent with these findings, our school of social work decidedto infuse additional diversity curriculum into classes, resulting in the currentstudy.

It is important to note that studies in this area do not specifically focuson assessment of students’ past exposure to diversity. Nevertheless, “expo-sure to diversity while growing up” was one theme that emerged in a contentanalysis of 23 MSW student papers (Bender, Negi, & Fowler, 2010, p. 44).Students in an MSW program were asked to submit papers describing theirethnic background and ancestor assimilation process as well as to reflecton their ethnic identity. Students may or may not mention past exposure toother groups in assignments. Thus, it would be helpful to specifically assessstudents’ past exposure to diversity in order to increase awareness of a socialwork program’s context.

Overview of the Diversity Infusion Modules

A desire to improve the culture of diversity and acceptance among socialwork students and faculty was also one of the precipitators of curriculuminfusion modules designed for this study. For the purposes of this program,diversity was broadly defined to include cultural and social diversity, suchas racial/ethnic/cultural groups, LGBT persons, and people with disabili-ties. The school invited a statewide trainer and leader in diversity issues todevelop and present diversity modules to the social work undergraduate andgraduate students. The presenter consulted closely with the school’s diversitycommittee in developing the modules. As with any curriculum, the infu-sion modules were adapted to fit undergraduate and graduate levels. Eachgroup received between two to four sessions depending on their level (pre-major, BSW, and MSW). The infusion modules began with an introduction tothe modules and experiential exercises in both BSW and MSW orientations(pre-majors did not receive the orientation module). In addition, under-graduate social work students received two diversity modules that wereinfused in their classes, while the graduate social work students receivedthree diversity modules infused into their course work. To differentiate the

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 243

academic levels, an additional module was presented to the social workgraduate students.

A comparison group consisted of undergraduate and graduate studentsenrolled in two Human Development and Family Studies (HDFS) coursesand one introductory gerontology course. These allied helping professionstudents did not participate in the infusion, which included the social workorientations and diversity modules. Typically students who enroll in thesecourses major in Human Development and Family Studies, or psychology,sociology, nursing, social work, or general studies.

The main content and focus of the infusion modules was racism, power,white privilege, oppression, and health disparities. Various teaching modal-ities were utilized, including, but not limited to, experiential exercises,didactic methods, storytelling, discussion, PowerPoint, and films. Groundrules were covered to create a safe place for students to share and explorethe material. Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack of Privileges (McIntosh,1988), social identity storytelling (self-reflection in the context of anotherperson’s story), a film exploring white privilege, and analysis of institutionalracism locally are some of the specific exercises that were utilized. Pair andclass debriefing after experiential exercises and class discussions were uti-lized to elicit empathy toward others and self-reflection about one’s ownattitudes, beliefs, and values.

In order to support the work of the diversity infusion modules, socialwork faculty and staff also participated in a faculty diversity day. The mainpurpose of this event was to inform faculty of diversity infusion content sothey could reinforce it in their classes. The module content presented by thecommunity expert comprised many of the same experiential exercises thatwere included in the diversity modules for the students.

METHODS

Participants

Participants were social work and allied helping profession students at alarge land grant university in the western United States. The social work stu-dents consisted of 53 pre-major students, 34 Bachelor of Social Work (BSW)majors, and 38 Master’s of Social Work (MSW) majors. As a comparisongroup, 54 students enrolled in two Human Development and Family Studies(HDFS) courses and one gerontology course were voluntarily surveyed. Atotal of 179 students completed the questionnaire (38 MSW students; 87social work undergraduate students (pre-majors and majors); and 54 alliedhelping profession students (50 undergraduate; 4 graduate) (comparisongroup). The overall response rate was 83% (87% social work; 75% alliedhelping profession). Power analysis indicated for a large effect size p < .05(two-tailed); a sample size of 179 would result in a power of .91.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

244 M. F. Saleh et al.

Measures

Following the diversity infusion modules and at the end of the 2008fall semester, a mixed-methods pre-post retrospective questionnaire wasdistributed to the social work students enrolled in social work, HDFS, andgerontology courses. Surveys were distributed in nine classes (six socialwork classes, two HDFS classes, and one gerontology class). All studentswere told their participation was voluntary. The survey questionnaire wasused to assess students’ past and current exposure to groups other thantheir own, evaluate and measure attitude and behavior change before andafter the infusion modules, assess student knowledge of diversity after theinfusion, and to facilitate students’ feedback about their experience with theinfusion modules.

The survey questionnaire included basic demographic questions andtwo scales embedded in the instrument, the Multicultural/MultiracialExperience Inventory (MEI) and the Multiculturally Responsible Index (MRI).The MEI was originally designed to “assess an individual’s type of histori-cal development pattern and contemporary multicultural identity” (Ramirez,1999, p. 167). The measure has two versions, one for persons of color andone for whites (Ramirez, 1999). For this study Parker and Sager’s (2008)adapted version and scoring of the MEI was utilized; the adapted MEI short-ens and combines the two versions so that both populations can use thesame scale. Reliability and validity information for the MEI Revised can befound in Multicultural/Multiracial Psychology (see p. 167). Internal consis-tency of the MEI (current) total was determined by correlating each item withthe total MEI score for this sample. The average item to total score correla-tion was very good, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .89. The internal consistencyof MEI (past) total was excellent, with a Cronbach’s alpha of .92.

The first eight questions on the MEI focus on family of origin andchildhood/youth exposure to diversity, while the final eight questions focusupon current choices surrounding exposure to and relations with diversepeople. Specifically, seven of the eight MEI “current” questions focus oncurrent behaviors, while only one question focuses on attitudes. Pre-postretrospective formatting was built into this scale: students identified experi-ences during youth and then identified experiences after the pilot. A sampleitem from the MEI states, “The teachers and counselors with whom I had theclosest relationship growing up were. . . .” Participants were asked to chooseone of the following responses: “1 = almost entirely my group; 2 = mostlymy group with a few people from other groups; 3 = mixed—my groupplus numerous people from other groups; or 4 = mostly people from othergroups, almost entirely people from other groups” (Ramirez, 1999, p. 173).Individual scores on the MEI items range from 1 to 5, with a total score thatranges from 8 to 40.

The Multiculturally Responsible Index (MRI) was originally designed tomeasure current cultural responsibility status or the extent to which a person

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 245

is accountable for one’s actions surrounding diversity. It consists of 14 itemsthat focus on both attitude and behavior; 8 items focus on attitude and 6items focus on behavior (Parker & Sager, 2008). Original items include “Isee myself as neither superior nor inferior to other groups” and “I striveto achieve a non-biased identity” (Parker & Sager, 2008, p. 9). However,for this study, the format of the MRI items was adapted to fit into a pre-post retrospective format. The formatting was changed by adding the phrase“Thinking back to the end of last summer,” to the beginning of each of theeight attitude items. Then, the same eight items were used again, except that“Today” was used as the stem for each item. Individual scores on the MRIrange from 1 to 10, with a total score that ranges from 7 to 70.

This pre-post format provided an opportunity for students to reflectupon each item prior to the infusion modules and then to think about theitem in the present, after they had experienced the diversity infusion mod-ules. The pre-post retrospective design was chosen in part because of thelimitations of some traditional pre-post tests, in which results do not neces-sarily show an accurate picture of the impact of an intervention. Respondentsmay under- or over-estimate understanding of a construct prior to participat-ing in an intervention and then at post, they may over- or underreport actualgains. The pre-post retrospective design can assist in controlling for thisresponse shift bias (Drennan & Hyde, 2008; Lam & Bengo, 2003). Rockwelland Kohn (1989) found that by administering the pre-post tests at the endof the program, participants had gained awareness due to the training, andtherefore, they had the perspective to more accurately assess their base-line behaviors and attitudes. While limitations of the pre-post retrospectivedesign have been noted (e.g., Howard, 1980; Lam & Bengo, 2003), there islack of agreement regarding the extent and nature of the limitations. Dueto the type of training and participants, the fit and benefits of this designoutweighed the drawbacks for this study.

The survey also included 10 content/knowledge questions based onthe material that was presented in the diversity infusion, including itemsthat addressed diversity, race, power, oppression and privilege, institu-tional racism, and the intersections between race, class, and health. Finally,nine open-ended questions were used to assess the social work students’evaluation of their experience with the diversity infusion. Students in thecomparison group were not asked the open-ended questions, since they didnot participate in the diversity infusion program.

Data Analysis

The main question that guided this analysis was whether the diversity infu-sion modules made a difference in knowledge, attitudes, or self-reportedbehavior for undergraduate and graduate social work students. Three mea-sures were used and three groups were compared (one group was a

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

246 M. F. Saleh et al.

comparison group that included students from allied helping professionclasses). The guiding research questions were as follows:

1. Did participation in the diversity infusion modules make a differencein attitudes, knowledge, or behaviors about diversity for social workstudents?

2. To what extent were the students exposed to diversity while they weregrowing up?

3. Did students’ exposure to diversity while growing up make a differencein the effectiveness of the diversity infusion modules?

Analysis of Variance (ANOVA), along with t-tests and descriptive statis-tics, were used to answer the first question. The ANOVA addressed theeffectiveness of the infusion modules on knowledge, attitudes, and behav-iors. As for the second question, the MEI scale recorded responses toquestions about the historical context of the influence of the study par-ticipants’ diversity experiences. Frequencies of the first half of this scaleinformed the background context of the study participants. In analyzing thethird question, the students’ history, along with the responses to the infu-sion effectiveness, were compared to determine whether students’ historicalcontext had an impact on effectiveness of the infusion. T -tests were used inthis analysis.

FINDINGS

Student participants were relatively young (mean age was 29 years)and primarily female (83.8%). There were two groups of social workstudents (Graduate MSW, 21.2%; Undergraduate Social Work, 48.6%),and a comparison group consisting of allied helping profession stu-dents (30.2%). The majority of students were white (70%); followed byother/multiracial (11.7%), Latino/Hispanic (10.6%), African-American (6%),and Native American (1.7%) (see Table 1).

Effectiveness of the Diversity Infusion

Two strategies were used to determine whether the diversity infusion madea difference in attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors among students in thesample. The first strategy was to use ANOVA (F-test) to compare differencesin mean scores of three groups of students (BSW, MSW, and the comparisongroup) on the MEI, MRI, and knowledge tests. The second strategy was touse t-tests to compare the historical and current context scores on the MEIand MRI scales. Means and standard deviations for the dependent variablesare listed in Table 2, along with the results of the ANOVA.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 247

TABLE 1 Demographic Characteristics of Sample (N = 179)

Variable Sample size Percentage

GenderFemale 150 83.8%Male 29 16.2%

Age19–23 years 65 36.3%24–28 years 50 28.0%29–33 years 23 12.8%34–38 years 10 5.6%39 and older 24 13.4%Missing 7 3.9%

Student StandingUndergraduate Social Work 87 48.6%Graduate Social Work 38 21.2%Allied Helping Profession 54 30.2%

EthnicityAfrican-American 11 6.0%Latino/Hispanic 19 10.6%White/Caucasian 125 70.0%Native American 3 1.7%Other/Multiracial 21 11.7%

TABLE 2 Comparison of Means & SD for MEI, MRI, and Knowledge Tests

MRIKnowledge MEI (historical) MEI (current) (historical) (current) MRI (test)

MSWMean 17.68 20.69 50.72 57.24 8.53a

N 38 32 17 17 17SD 6.79 5.49 9.09 9.77 2.35

SW UndergradsMean 17.53 20.57 51.05 59.06a 8.61N 80 77 83 87 87SD 6.46 4.36 11.94 8.71 1.62

Comparison GroupMean 16.28 19.35 47.81 52.76 6.02N 50 46 54 50 54SD 6.14 5.68 10.59 12.16 2.25

Note: MEI range = 8–40 (higher score indicates more multicultural interaction); MRI range = 7–70(higher score indicates greater multicultural interaction); Knowledge test range = 0–10 (higherscore indicates more correct on test).aSignificant in ANOVA.

RESULTS OF THE ANOVA

A one-way repeated measures ANOVA was conducted to compare scoreson the MRI and MEI, at time 1 (past), and time 2 (current). ANOVA alsowas used to compare differences among the three student groups on theknowledge test score. There were two statistically significant findings:

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

248 M. F. Saleh et al.

First, there was a statistically significant difference in MRI (current)scores among the three groups, F 2, 153 = 6.24, p = .05. Post hoc compar-isons using the Tukey HSD test indicate that the mean score for the BSWstudents (M = 59.06, SD = 8.71) was significantly higher than the meanscore for the comparison group (M = 52.76, SD = 12.16). The MSW scores(M = 57.24, SD = 9.77) did not differ significantly from either of the othertwo groups, but the mean and standard deviation for the MSW students wasmuch closer to the BSW student scores than the comparison group scores.

Second, there was a statistically significant difference in total knowledgescores among the three groups, F 2, 157 = 30.72, p = .001. Post hoc compar-isons using the Tukey HSD test indicate that the mean score for the MSWstudents (M = 8.53, SD = 2.35) was significantly higher than those of thecomparison group (M = 6.02, SD = 2.25). BSW students’ scores (M = 8.61,SD = 1.62) did not differ significantly from either of the other two groups,but the mean score was much closer to that of the MSW students’ (M = 8.53,SD = 2.35) than the comparison group students’ (M = 6.02, SD = 2.25). Inboth analyses, the scores of the comparison group were lower than those ofthe social work students. This indicates that social work students have morediversity knowledge and have more positive attitudes toward diversity thanthe comparison group.

RESULTS OF THE T-TESTS

An independent-samples t-test was conducted to compare differences in theMRI (current context) and knowledge test between social work students(combined MSW and BSW groups) and the comparison group.

MRI (current). The results of the t-test using the MRI revealed signifi-cantly higher scores for social work students (M = 58.76, SD = 8.9) than forthe comparison group (M = 52.76, SD = 12.16); t152 = 3.47, p = .003). Themagnitude of the differences in the means was eta2 = 0.07, indicating thatthere was a moderate effect. These findings suggest that the diversity infu-sion with social work students had a significant and moderate effect in pro-moting positive attitudes and behaviors toward people from other groups.

Knowledge test. A second independent-samples t-test was used to com-pare differences in mean scores on the knowledge test between social workstudents and the comparison group. The results of the t-test indicated signifi-cantly higher mean scores for the social work students (M = 8.51, SD = 1.96)in contrast to the comparison group (M = 6.02, SD = 2.25); t(157) = 7.22,p = .001). The magnitude of the difference was eta2 = .25, indicating a largeeffect size. These findings indicate that the diversity infusion with the socialwork students had a significant and substantial effect on their knowledge ofdiversity issues.

MRI (past & current). A third one-sample t-test was used to compare thepast/current scores on the MRI among students who had participated in thediversity infusion. The results, t99 = 44.48, p = .001, indicate that students’

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 249

current scores on the MRI (M = 58.76, SD = 8.87) were significantly higherthan their past scores on the MRI. This finding indicates that students whoparticipated in the diversity infusion were more willing to engage in activitieswith people from diverse groups as a result of the program.

MEI (past & current). A final one-sample t-test was conducted to com-pare MEI past/current test results for the students who had participated inthe diversity infusion. The results indicate that there is a statistically sig-nificant difference between the past scores (M = 17.58, SD = 6.54) andcurrent scores (M = 20.61, SD = 4.70); t(108) = 45.87, p = .001. This find-ing supports the effectiveness of the diversity infusion in promoting morepositive attitudes and behaviors toward engaging with people from diversebackgrounds.

Effects of Students’ Past Exposure to Diversity

Descriptive statistics from the MEI (past) scale were used to assess the stu-dents’ exposure to diversity while they were growing up. Higher scores onthe measure indicate greater level of exposure to diversity. The overall meanscore for the sample was 17.19, with individual item scores that were all inthe 1 to 2 range, indicating that students had little or no involvement withother groups while growing up. The individual items on the MEI (past) werecompared across racial/ethnic groups and the white students scored lower(M = 14.91; SD 4.46) than the minority students (M = 21.60; SD 7.15). Thisindicates white students had even less exposure to diversity growing up incomparison to the minority students. See Table 3.

T-test. Group differences on the MEI (past) were not significant in theANOVA analyses on the BSW, MSW, and comparison groups. However, afollow-up t-test was conducted to determine whether there was a statisti-cally significant difference between social work students (BSW and MSWgroups combined) and the comparison group. Again, there was no signifi-cant difference in scores for social work students (M = 17.58, SD = 6.54),and the comparison group (M = 16.28, SD = 6.14); t166 = 1.20, p = .23.The findings from both analyses indicate that social work students and thecomparison group were similar in terms of their exposure to diversity inchildhood/youth. When individual items on the MEI were compared acrossracial/ethnic groups, the white students scored lower (mean scores rangedfrom 1.56 to 2.17) than the minority students (mean scores ranged from2.51 to 3.30). It appears that the minority students were more comfort-able than white students in venturing outside their own social and culturalgroups.

Relationship of Historical Context to Infusion Effectiveness

Three of the findings from the ANOVA analyses were nonsignificant: the MEI(past and current), and the MRI (past). These results are most interesting, as

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

250 M. F. Saleh et al.

TABLE 3 Descriptive Statistics by Item of the MEI (Historical Context) Scale (N = 168)

Scale item Mean SD

1. Racial/ethnic composition of neighborhood where I grew up wassimilar to my group.a

2.06 1.18

2. My childhood friends that visited my home were similar to owngroup.a

2.01 .95

3. The teachers with whom I had the closest relationships growing upwere similar to my group.a

2.11 1.25

4. The people who have most influenced my education have beensimilar to my own group.a

2.20 1.10

5. In H.S., my closest friends were similar to my own group.a 2.06 1.086. The ethnic background of the people I have dated has been similar

to my own group.a2.05 1.16

7. In jobs, my closest friends have been people similar to my owngroup.a

2.46 .99

8. The people with whom I have established close relationships withhave been similar to my own group.a

2.20 .89

MEI (historical) Totalb 17.19 6.43

aIndividual item scale scores range from 1 = not very culturally mixed to 5 = very culturally mixed.bTotal scale ranges from 8–40, with 8 indicating little contact with groups other than one’s own, and 40indicating much mixed cultural contact.

they may indicate that a lack of exposure to diverse cultural and socialgroups while growing up may impede the ability for a diversity infusion tohave impact. It may be the case as well that there was not enough timefor change to take effect; however, it would take a longitudinal design toestablish that effect. The first interpretation parallels the finding indicated inthe MEI (past) results. These findings are discussed in greater detail in thediscussion section.

OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS

Students were asked nine open-ended questions, including, “Do you doanything differently as a result of these classes?” Ninety students respondedto this question. Content analysis was used to determine specific patternsin their responses. Forty-one (45.5%) students reported that they did not doanything differently, while 5 (5.5%) reported that they did. In addition, 22(24.4%) students reported that they gained a greater awareness as a resultof the pilot program. Fourteen students (15.5%) reported that they tookaction as a result of the diversity pilot. Two (2.2%) students reported thatthey were not sure if they did anything different. Interestingly, 6 (6.6%) stu-dents reported that they decreased negative actions/behaviors in terms ofdiversity and were focusing on positive behaviors. These qualitative resultsprovide further support for the effectiveness of the diversity infusion mod-ules. The qualitative questions are intended to be discussed in a relatedpublication.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 251

DISCUSSION

The purpose of the study was to evaluate students’ changes in diversityattitudes, knowledge, and behaviors after their involvement in diversity mod-ules that were infused in social work undergraduate and graduate classes.The new knowledge that this study contributes is that student history ofpast exposure to diversity needs to be assessed, especially because it maytake students with limited past exposure longer to internalize diversity teach-ing. These findings indicate that more resources may be needed (e.g., time,money, and human capital) to teach and help students internalize andthen create environments where diversity is celebrated, particularly in whitehomogeneous communities.

Using the retrospective pre-post strategy allowed for the conclusionthat there were significant changes in social work students’ awareness oftheir diversity attitudes and some of their current behaviors as a result ofthe infusion modules. The MRI results indicated that there was a positivechange in social work students’ attitudes and some present behaviors, withno such change in the comparison group’s attitudes. In addition, significantdifferences are noted between social work students and the allied helpingprofession students’ comparison group in attitudes, behaviors, and knowl-edge. Given that both groups of students had similar exposure to diversity intheir youth, the consistently higher scores achieved by social work studentsindicates that the diversity infusion had a positive effect.

The MRI past/current results indicate that there was a positive changein social work students’ attitudes and some behaviors from pre to post, whilethere was not a significant change in the allied profession students’ attitudes.This finding also could be interpreted as a self-reported change in behavioramong the social work students in the short term, because of the natureof the questions on the MEI and MRI. At the same time, the MEI was notsignificant between the pre and post, which could be interpreted that overalllonger-term self-reported behaviors did not change. These findings are notsurprising as the infusion mainly focused on self-awareness and changingattitudes, rather than behaviors.

Both the MRI and MEI scales look at past and current experiences and,while it would be logical that scores on both scales would have showna difference after the infusion, the fact was that there was only a signifi-cant difference on the MRI current, which primarily tests attitudes. The MEI,which primarily tests behaviors, did not change in terms of statistical signif-icance; however, the scores were very close. One possible explanation forthese findings may be related to cognitive-behavioral theory, which positsthat attitudes change before behaviors. The MEI assessment data showedthat students in this study were limited in their exposure to diversity whilegrowing up. Due to the past limited exposure to diversity, it may be unlikelythat behavior changes surrounding diversity would occur suddenly after one

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

252 M. F. Saleh et al.

intervention. The data also showed students’ attitudes changed, which is apositive finding, because that is the first step in the change process.

It is important to note that a majority of both the social work andcomparison group students came from predominantly white homogeneousbackgrounds. The students’ limited exposure to diversity was anticipated,given the university’s student demographics. However, it was vital that anassessment of students’ prior experiences with diversity was obtained, sothat conclusions are based on empirical evidence rather than assuming orrelying solely on student demographic indicators. The MEI data showed thatthe diversity infusion had less of an impact on students’ with little childhoodand youth exposure to diversity, especially in terms of their attitudes andsome of their behavior. It may be the case that with less exposure to diversitywhile young, longer and more intensive efforts must be taken to changebehaviors toward individuals different from one’s own culture. Althoughsome may believe that a desired goal is merely “tolerance” of diversity, socialwork mandates moving beyond tolerance to acceptance, appreciation, andcelebration of people from diverse backgrounds.

LIMITATIONS

Although this study provided important information about the effectivenessof diversity infusion modules in a social work curriculum, as with any study,it had limitations. The mixed-methods retrospective pre-post survey strategyallowed us to compare the influence of the infusion modules with prior lifeexperience involving exposure to diversity as the baseline, rather than usinga pretest at the beginning of the class. This allowed the use of a wider lensin assessing the effectiveness of the modules and avoided any contaminationof the results from pretest conditioning. Some, however, might consider theretrospective pre-post survey strategy to be a limitation.

Another study limitation is that some of the outcomes measured basedon the diversity infusion modules (attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors)are actually taught as part of the BSW and MSW social work curriculum.Therefore, positive findings from this study may be due to the traditionalcourse content, rather than the diversity infusion modules’ special sessions.Although there may be overlap in content, it was apparent that prior to theinfusion, some students in the program were not responding to diversitycontent in ways that faculty (and CSWE criteria) would deem appropriatefor students ready to work with clients in a professional social work context.Therefore, the diversity infusion modules were implemented, and then out-comes were measured with the pre-post retrospective method. Controllingfor a possible content overlap would require an elaborate design that wouldinclude measuring baseline attitudes, knowledge, and behaviors of students

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 253

prior to entering the BSW or MSW programs. This approach is not feasibledue to students taking social work courses prior to being accepted into themajor, and therefore, leading to potential contamination that cannot be con-trolled. Therefore, the limitation of possible “knowledge contamination” wasdeemed acceptable in the current study.

IMPLICATIONS FOR SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION

CSWE emphasizes the importance of program context in accreditation andre-accreditation; therefore, the assessment of students’ past exposure todiversity may provide vital program context information to facilitate theaccreditation process. Thus, new knowledge gained from this study in rela-tion to white students’ past exposure to diversity contributes to the currentdiscussion of social work diversity education. Social work programs in pre-dominately white communities should consider assessing their students’background in regard to past exposure to diversity and then based upon thefindings increase the diversity content in the curriculum, especially in termsof awareness of white privilege, racism, and bias. As with clients, assess-ments, rather than assumptions, need to be used to evaluate the context ofthe exposure for social work students. Knowing more about students’ earlyexposure to diversity is helpful in designing a social work program thatproduces students that truly value diversity. It would also be valuable forall teaching faculty to be aware of the students’ levels of past exposure todiversity. The assessment information may heighten awareness and directionin curriculum planning and preparing for accreditation or re-accreditation.In addition, it would be helpful in the future, as was done in the currentstudy, to prepare all teaching faculty for infusions or other curricula inter-ventions by having them participate in a condensed version so that theycould reinforce the content and experiences in their courses.

Awareness and self-reflection are foundational steps for social workersand students as they move forward in their education and field practice(Bliss, 2005). Therefore, it is recommended that diversity infusion modulestake place as early as introductory classes at the undergraduate level, so thatstudents have time for their behavior to “catch up” changes in their attitudesand self-awareness. Students need to learn that the challenging work ofself-exploration must take place before behavior change and substantiveskill acquisition can be achieved. Providing a safe place for students toexplore and challenge their own biases and beliefs is essential (Garcia &Van Soest, 1997).

Since it may take some time for schools to consider, plan, and imple-ment a pilot diversity infusion, gradual steps are suggested. For example,individual instructors could assess their students’ past exposure to diversity

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

254 M. F. Saleh et al.

and utilize strategies above and beyond what they currently use in theclassroom. Based on assessment findings, instructors may recognize theneed to tap students’ historical experiences and their present-day impact.One creative strategy includes utilizing film about children and families whoare experiencing and dealing with prejudice and discrimination. Film is oneideal educational intervention, because it has been used to engage studentson a deeper level (Downey, Jackson, Puig, and Furman, 2003). Assignmentsbased on these types of films could help students relate to what minoritychildren may experience, since white students with limited past exposure todiversity may never have even imagined what it may have been like for aminority child to face prejudice and discrimination.

One powerful film titled Kemo Sabe by writer/director Rana Kazkaz(2007) is an example of an especially poignant short film (12 minutes) thatportrays minority children facing multiple layers of prejudice and discrimi-nation. The film could provide an empathetic lens for students. In summary,the main character Yussef, a six-year-old Arab-American child, aspires to bea cowboy, but is an Indian along with other minority children on the play-ground. The rules are set by Randy, a white child and king of the cowboys.Yussef acquires the jeans and belt that are required to become a cowboy,even though his family cannot afford them. In challenging his ethnic role,Yussef is finally granted cowboy status, but he is left to question if being acowboy is what he thought it would be.

Self-reflection and analysis of the film characters could be targetedthrough specific discussion questions or written assignments. Students couldbe asked to step into the shoes of each character, such as Yussef, Randy,Raoul (the Indian chief), and George (a cowboy and attempted advocate)and share who they relate to the most and the least. Students could be askedabout roles they or others may have played in childhood and how they maysee such issues impacting youth today. They could analyze the dynamicsin the film and how this may be represented in the larger community andsocietal systems. Finally, to assist students in conceptualizing behavior andsocial change, film assignment questions could include, “Based upon thewhite privilege dynamics you witnessed in the film, what types of activitiesand interventions would you plan for and with the children if you were asocial worker assigned to them in an after-school neighborhood program?”and “From an ecosystemic perspective discuss both the desired and possibleimpacts of these planned activities/interventions.”

These questions could be slightly adapted and utilized for other films.This type of creative film assignment could fit a variety of classes, includingHuman Behavior in the Social Environment (HBSE), practice, diversity, andfield at both the BSW and MSW levels. It could be expanded for MSW-level students. This short and memorable film, as well as other assignedfilms, could be referred to in other classes to reinforce and expand attitudes,knowledge, and behavior.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 255

DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH

Discovering effective diversity curriculum interventions for schools of socialwork in predominately white homogeneous areas is essential. In undertakingthe review of literature for this study, it appears that the majority of studieson diversity curriculum focus on MSW students, rather than BSW students.Given that the BSW is a generalist and a terminal degree for many students,it is important that undergraduates receive a solid foundation in diversity,and that researchers assess the effectiveness of diversity curriculum at boththe undergraduate and graduate levels.

Additional suggestions for future research include utilizing the MEI toassess students’ past exposure to diversity and then designing curriculuminterventions based on the assessment results. The curriculum interventionscould then be tested through pre-post knowledge and attitudes tests. Inaddition, exploring various types and amounts of interventions and accu-rately measuring specific outcomes is suggested. Specific outcomes mightinclude greater specificity in understanding participants’ past exposure todiversity (e.g., number of people and intensity of relationships); evaluationof each student’s understanding of and role in “white privilege” and how thisfosters or deters from their ability to provide proper social work services todiverse clients; and assessment of change in specific behaviors related tointeractions with diverse groups over time. Disseminating the findings fromprograms in white homogeneous areas would contribute to a deeper under-standing of how to teach these complex diversity issues more effectively. Aspecific recommendation is that even small pilot projects from white homo-geneous schools be evaluated and the findings disseminated for the growthof the profession.

CONCLUSION

As social work educators at a land grant university, located in a white homo-geneous community, diversity issues needed to be addressed in differentways than they would in more diverse settings. It was concerning that theexisting diversity curriculum was not sufficient, given our students’ deep-seated beliefs and limited exposure to diverse groups throughout the lifecourse. Findings from this study indicate that the extent of students’ pastexposure to diversity may play a larger role in determining positive out-comes than originally thought. Based on the literature reviewed along withthe results of this study, there is an indication that the diversity infusionmay have a greater impact if there is an intensive focus on self-explorationabout individual issues related to white privilege, and what it means to be amember of a majority group when working professionally with people froma variety of backgrounds. This may be particularly true in predominantly

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

256 M. F. Saleh et al.

white homogeneous communities, but future research will need to answerthis question.

Diversity knowledge is a first step in training, but internalizing changesin attitudes and behavior takes time. An understanding of one’s own culturalcontext and biases is essential to achieving appropriate, competent pro-fessional interventions with all types of vulnerable populations. Educatorsin professions that require sensitivity and a deep understanding of diver-sity issues may benefit from an in-depth assessment of the backgroundof their students, followed by custom-designed diversity curriculum that isinfused into their classes and programs. The infusion needs to include astrong self-exploration component, especially when students are from whitehomogeneous backgrounds.

REFERENCES

Anderson, W., Hayashi, R., & Frost, C. J. (2009). Measuring the diversity awarenessof social work students: The Dual Perspective Inventory. Journal of Teachingin Social Work, 29(3), 258–270.

Bender, K., Negi, N., & Fowler, D. N. (2010). Exploring the relationship betweenself-awareness and student commitment and understanding of culturallyresponsive social work practice. Journal of Ethnic and Cultural Diversity inSocial Work, 19, 34–53.

Bliss, S. (2005). A case for developing the emotional capacities of social workers.Smith College Studies in Social Work, 73(3), 59–62.

Caro, J., Jones, C., Sosa, A. (Producers), & Kazkaz, R. (Writer/Director) (2007). Kemosabe [Motion picture]. United States.

Comerford, S. A. (2004). Strengthening the affective and behavioral dimensions oflearning about human diversity: Sharing personal narratives on off-site retreats.Journal of Teaching in Social Work, 24(3/4), 183–200.

Council of Social Work Education (CSWE). (2008). Educational Policy andAccreditation Standards (EPAS). Retrieved September 25, 2009, fromhttp://www.cswe.orghttp://www.cswe.org

Cournoyer, B. R. (2008). The social work skills workbook (5th ed.). Belmont, CA:Wadsworth Publishing Company.

Downey, E. P., Jackson, R. L., Puig, M. E., & Furman, R. (2003). Perceptions of effi-cacy in the use of contemporary film in social work education: An exploratorystudy. Social Work Education, 22(4), 401–410.

Drennan, J., & Hyde, A. (2008). Controlling for response shift bias: The use of retro-spective pre-test design in the evaluation of a master’s programme. Assessmentand Evaluation in Higher Education, 33(6), 699–709.

Garcia, B., & Van Soest, D. (1997). Changing perceptions of diversity and oppres-sion: MSW students discuss the effects of a required course. Journal of SocialWork Education, 33, 119–129.

Herda-Hipps, P., Westhuis, D. J., & Diehl, D. S. (2001). Student responses to humandiversity course and teaching diversity. Journal of Comparative Social Welfare,17(1), 25–35.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014

Effectiveness of Diversity Infusion Modules 257

Howard, G. S. (1980). Response-shift bias: A problem in evaluation interventionswith pre/post self-reports. Evaluation Review, 4(1), 93–106.

Lam, T. C., & Bengo, P. (2003). A comparison of three retrospective self-reportingmethods of measuring change in instructional practice. American Journal ofEvaluation, 24, 65–80.

Le-Doux, C. L., & Montalvo, F. F. (1999). Multicultural content in social work gradu-ate programs: A national survey. Journal of Multicultural Social Work, 7(1/2),37–55.

McIntosh, P. (1998). White privilege and male privilege: A personal account of com-ing to see correspondence through work in women’s studies (Working Paper189). Wellesley, MA: Wellesley College Center for Research on Women.

National Association of Social Workers (NASW). (2001). NASW Standards forCultural Competence in Social Work Practice. Retrieved December 1, 2009, fromhttp://www.socialworkers.org/practice/standards/NASWCulturalStandards.pdf

Parker, M., & Sager, J. (2008). Becoming multiculturally responsible on campus:From awareness to action. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company.

Phan, P., Vugia, H., Wright, P., Woods, D. R., Chu, M., & Jones, T. (2009). Teachingnote—A social work program’s experience in teaching about race in thecurriculum. Journal of Social Work Education, 45(2), 325–333.

Ramirez, M. (1999). Multicultural psychotherapy: An approach to individual andcultural differences (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Rockwell, S. K., & Kohn, H. (1989). Post-then-pre-evaluation. Journal of Extension,27(2).Retrieved July 22, 2009, from http://www.joe.org/joe/1989summer/a5.php

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

Um

eå U

nive

rsity

Lib

rary

] at

01:

27 1

4 N

ovem

ber

2014