A Holocaust website: effects on preservice teachers' factual knowledge and attitudes toward traditionally marginalized groups.

The Holocaust remains one of the most effective and extensively documented subjects for an examination of basic humanitarian issues. Knowledge is the key to an intelligent understanding of such a tragic passage in human history, the key to a wisdom that will never let it happen again. To address the need for quality, accessible information about the Holocaust, the Florida Center for Instructional Technology developed an extensive website titled The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust. This study was designed to investigate the effectiveness of the website. Specifically, data were collected by way of pre and posttest measures to determine if access to The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust significantly impacted the knowledge level or attitudes of preservice teachers.

The experiment was conducted at the University of South Florida in the spring of 2000 with students (n= 115) enrolled in the Introduction to Computers in Education course. Students were randomly assigned to a treatment condition in which the experimental group used the Holocaust website to develop a lesson plan, and students in a control condition interacted with a website that was unrelated to the Holocaust. Students in all treatment groups were administered a criterion-based knowledge instrument and two attitude scales. Results suggest that more cognitive engagement with the content area may be required to impact a significant change in preservice teachers' knowledge or attitudes.

**********

Holocaust Education

The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum's Guidelines for Teaching about the Holocaust (2001) states, "The history of the Holocaust represents one of the most effective, and most extensively documented subjects for a pedagogical examination of basic moral issues" (p. 1). It is a series of events occurring recently enough in Western history that legible documents, photographic imagery, film, and survivor testimony are available to the instructor or curriculum designer with which to create authentic student activities.

Teachers can use historical events such as the Holocaust to warn of the horrifying results of racial and cultural intolerance, and thus help maintain a democratic and tolerant society. Analyses of the Holocaust can touch on a number of currently relevant human rights issues ranging from cultural intolerance to racism.

In a study conducted in 1996, a sample of male and female students from six secondary schools in South East England (n=43) were presented with a series of questions which were intended to explore their knowledge and attitudes regarding the Holocaust and Holocaust education (Carrington & Short, 1997). They found students generally felt that Holocaust education played an important role in teaching about human rights issues in a variety of contexts. To effectively teach the Holocaust, teachers must be given the chance to develop knowledge and attitudes that are needed. Particularly in the social sciences, preservice teachers need to have the skills that are required to initiate and facilitate dialogue on culturally sensitive topics such as race and racism (Howard & Denning del Rosario, 2000). In addition to a knowledge base, they need the cultural awareness and practical know-how to put that knowledge base to use.

In a study conducted to measure preservice teachers' knowledge regarding issues related to multicultural education, Taylor (1999) distributed a multicultural knowledge test to 78 preservice teacher education students (n=78) enrolled in three sections of a Social Foundations in Multicultural Education course. The test was a 35-item, seven-point Likert-type response format measure of topics and issues central to multicultural education knowledge. The instrument response format ranged from 1 (none) to 7 (extensive) to measure knowledge of topics and issues central to general multicultural education. Comparing student responses to an average knowledge-level score of 4.00 (the median test value), Taylor reported that the knowledge-level of the preservice teachers was significantly below average, indicating the need for teachers to become multiculturally literate (Taylor, 1999). Taylor emphasized the need for preservice teacher education programs and teacher educators to make multicultural education a curricular pr iority by assessing the needs of prospective teachers and fulfilling those needs at all costs (Taylor, 1999).

Pedagogic Expertise and Multicultural Education

If teachers do not equip themselves with proper knowledge as well as attitudes about change in the environment around them, they will be left behind as change occurs (Kudva, 1999). Recent academic inquiries have examined subject matter expertise within the context of teacher professionalism. Some feel that expert knowledge alone does not automatically translate into an understanding of how to model it for students. That is, without being able to demonstrate uses for that knowledge, or put it somehow into action, the expertise may not be very useful. Sternberg and Horvath (1995) defined pedagogic expertise as a prototype in which family resemblance can be found among expert teachers. Their first criterion, however, is that he or she have extensive accessible knowledge that is usable for teaching. In addition, this expert must have knowledge of the organizational context in which the teaching occurs and be able to adapt practical constraints within the field of teaching (Sternberg & Horvath, 1995).

Teaching the Holocaust

Teaching the Holocaust can be one way to raise consciousness about general intercultural relationships (Brown & Davies, 1998). The Holocaust as an event and Holocaust denial literature are difficult classroom topics to teach, however, and should be approached carefully. The universal availability of web-based material increases the need for pedagogical guidance. For example, the Internet has allowed for a greater availability of Holocaust denial literature, ideas, and research (Landesman, 1998). Thus, intelligent use of resources must be taught in the classroom (Borrowman, 1999).

Two British researchers gathered data from secondary teacher's perceptions about the Holocaust as an historical event and how it is taught. They found many areas pertaining to teachers' perceptions on teaching the Holocaust that needed further investigation. Specifically, Brown and Davies (1998) found that teachers devoted insufficient time to teaching the Holocaust and used the events of the Holocaust as a mere context for understanding World War Two. In addition, the teachers did not collaborate effectively and lacked clarity about the cognitive and affective aims of Holocaust education (Brown & Davies, 1998).

A Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust

In response to a bill passed by the Florida Legislature in 1994 (Florida Statute 233.061 requiring public school instruction of the history of the Holocaust), graduate students and staff at a major Florida university created a web-based instructional program for Holocaust education. This award-winning site, The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust, is now an amalgam of over 6,000 files in a variety of media ranging from virtual reality tours, videos, survivor testimonies, and photos, to thought provoking teacher-resource and student-activity sections (http://fcit.coedu.usf.edu/holocaust). The site is meant to be a resource for certified and preservice teachers, many of whom have had little or no training for teaching such sensitive material.

The instructional goal of the website is to provide a single starting point for Holocaust education with relevant background information and links to instructional resources. The content of The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust is presented from three perspectives: Timeline, People, and The Arts. An introduction to the Teacher's Guide reads: "Holocaust study is a very sensitive subject, and the appropriateness of material is dependent upon individuals. All materials should be reviewed before use in class." In designing the site, it was hoped that, through the study of the Holocaust, students and teachers alike would be able to develop an understanding of the ramifications of prejudice and racism, and help to ensure that an event such as the Holocaust will not happen again (Barron, 1998).

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to investigate whether or not preservice teachers' factual knowledge and attitudes toward traditionally marginalized groups would be significantly changed through interaction with the Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust website. Second, the study was meant to examine the state of preservice teachers' knowledge on the Holocaust. Third, any correlation between subjects' knowledge and attitudes would be analyzed.

METHOD

A pretest-posttest control group experimental design was used for this research. Participants were randomly assigned to either an experimental group, in which the Holocaust website in CD format was used, or to a control group, in which a different (not associated with the Holocaust) website in CD format was used.

PARTICIPANTS

Participants in the study were preservice teachers enrolled in an undergraduate course--EME 2040: Introduction to Computers in Education. All students enrolled during the spring semester, 2000, were invited to participate. Of 143 participants who began the study, 115 completed both the pretest and posttest. The sample included:

* Gender: Males (28%) and Females (72%);

* Ethnicity: White (70%), African American (13%), Hispanic (13%), American Indian (1%), and Asian/Pacific Islander (1%);

* Academic Standing: Freshman (17%), Sophomores (48%), Juniors (23%), and Seniors (9%); and

* Major: Elementary Education (42.6%), Secondary Education (24%), Physical Education (8%), Special Education (5%), Guidance Counseling (2%), Art Education (1%), Higher Education (1%), and other (17%).

INSTRUMENTATION

Two types of instruments were developed for this research: an objective test of Holocaust factual knowledge and two scales to assess attitudes toward diversity and perceptions of traditionally marginalized groups.

Knowledge Test

The knowledge test was developed by content experts working on the Holocaust website. A test blueprint was developed though an analysis of the content included in the Timeline section of the holocaust site. There are seven main divisions of this section, focusing on specific stages of the Holocaust in terms of its development. From each of these sections, several key ideas were distilled. These ideas were first refined into statements, and subsequently converted into test questions. The questions were then reviewed and revised by Holocaust content experts and psychometricians. The final version of the Holocaust knowledge test consisted of 44 multiple-choice items, each of which presented four response options. The internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's Alpha) for the knowledge test was .77 for the pretest and .68 for the posttest.

Attitude Scales

The attitude scales were constructed based upon existing validated instruments for measuring tendencies toward bias and stereotyping, as well as general attitudes toward diversity. Two types of items were included in the instrument. First, 21 items presented statements indicative of attitudes both toward marginalized groups in general (e.g., "Minorities have contributed much to the cultural life of America"), and toward specific groups (e.g., "I am usually comfortable around homosexuals"). Responses to each item were obtained on a 5-point Likert scale (with response options ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree). Responses to the 21 items were averaged to provide an Affinity Toward Diversity score. Coefficient alpha for the pretest scores was 0.84, and for the posttest scores it was 0.82.

The second part of the attitude instrument was developed to measure participants' perceptions of specific groups. A set of 18 bi-polar adjectives (e.g., Honest--Dishonest) was presented in conjunction with a target group of traditionally marginalized people (African-Americans, Hispanic Americans, Jewish Americans, Asian Americans, Persons with Mental Handicaps, and Homosexuals). Responses to each pair of adjectives were gathered on a 5-point semantic differential scale. Each participant was presented two of the six marginalized target groups in randomized, counterbalanced versions of the instrument. Internal consistency reliability estimates for this component of the attitude scales ranged from .80 to .85. To estimate respondents' perception of traditionally marginalized groups, an index of bias was calculated. This index was obtained by calculating a deviation score from a neutral response to each item (e.g., deviation from 3.0 on the 5-point semantic differential). As deviations in either direction may be c onsidered bias, the absolute value of the deviation score was used. The deviation scores were then averaged across the set of 18 bipolar adjectives and across the two target groups to obtain a mean absolute deviation from neutrality (ABSDEV) score for each respondent.

Demographics 

A final component of the data collection instrument employed a set of questions designed to collect demographic data from the respondents (e.g., age, gender, ethnicity, major field of study, and academic standing). Prior to the use of the instruments in research, all of the measures were reviewed by a sample of K-12 teachers attending a Holocaust education workshop. The teachers were asked to offer feedback on the question wording and the clarity of the items. Information based on participants' comments about item clarity were used to guide minor revisions to item content and wording.

PROCEDURES

The participants were randomly assigned to a treatment condition (in which the students used The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust to develop a lesson plan) or a control condition (in which an alternative website, FCAT 4th Grade Reading: A Staff Development Tool) was used for lesson plan development. To encourage participation and enhance engagement in the materials, an incentive in the form of extra credit for the course was offered for the completion of both the pretest and posttest measures.

On the day of the pretest, each student received a packet containing a knowledge test, one version of the attitude instrument, a lesson plan assignment sheet (see Appendix A) and a CD. Students were encouraged to answer the questions as honestly as possible. Following administration of the instruments, graduate assistants for the class collected the test forms.

Students were required to develop a lesson plan based on the CD included in their packets. Students assigned to the experimental group were required to complete an assignment using The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust, while students in the control group developed a lesson plan based on the 4th Grade FCAT site. These assignments were designed so that the student needed to review and investigate the particular resource they were assigned. The Holocaust activity used a question that built upon a section of the guide titled Timeline and required the student to read and synthesize material from each of the sections. The students were given one week to complete the assignment. Posttest data were collected during the class session in which the assignments were turned in.

DATA ANALYSIS

Data were analyzed using both analysis of variance and correlational methods. Group difference in changes from pretest to posttest on knowledge and attitude scores were assessed using analysis of covariance. In addition, two factor ANOVAs (treatment condition by occasion of testing) were used to examine changes in perceptual bias toward specific marginalized groups, and correlations between knowledge and attitude scores were evaluated. Finally, individual item difficulty indices were used to guide a content analysis of participants' performance on the knowledge test.

RESULTS

Attrition Bias 

Careful attention was given to potential differences between those participants who completed the study and those who dropped out. An analysis of differences in demographics and pretest scores for completers versus noncompleters was conducted to estimate biases due to attrition effects. The [chi square] test of independence was used to compare these two groups on several demographic variables. No statistically significant differences were evidenced for the two groups when gender (1, n=143) = 1.41, p .24; race (1, n=142) = 6.52, p=.09; and major field of study (2, n=143) = 0.30, p=.86 were examined. In addition, independent means t-tests were conducted to explore potential differences in age and knowledge pretest scores between the two groups. Once again, no statistically significant differences were found (p=.58 and p=.54 respectively). These results suggest the absence of any systematic bias due to attrition.

Holocaust Knowledge

Group means and standard deviations for the pretest and posttest knowledge assessments are provided in Table 4. The experimental group evidenced a mean change in knowledge of less than one point (pretest X=22.6, posttest X = 23.4). A similar magnitude of change was realized by the control group (pretest X = 22.9 posttest X = 23.7). The ANCOVA for difference in change across the two groups, Table 1, showed no statistically significant difference F(1, 112) = 0.00, p >.05.

Perceptions Toward Traditionally Marginalized Groups

Group means and standard deviations for the pretest and posttest perceptions are provided in Table 4. The variable ABSDEV summarizes the total perceptional change over the different target groups. The experimental group evidenced a mean change in perception of around three hundredths of a point (pretest X=0.565, posttest X=0.53). A lesser magnitude of change was realized by the control group (pretest X= 0.57, posttest X= 0.56). The ANCOVA for difference in change across the two groups, Table 2, showed no statistically significant difference F(1,10l) = 0.16, p>.05.

Table 6 summarizes the ANOVA scores on perception for the various marginalized groups. The results indicate no statistically significant interaction between the different groupings, whether pretest/posttest or control/experimental groups. Although there were no statistically significant differences, Figure 1 highlights the pretest/posttest perception scores. The trends highlighted suggest that the treatment may have been too weak and too short a duration to have a significant impact on the subjects' perceptions towards traditionally marginalized groups.

Affinity Towards Diversity

Group means and standard deviations for the pretest and posttest knowledge assessments are provided in Table 4. The experimental group evidenced a mean change in affinity of two hundredths of a point (pretest = 77.40, posttest = 77.38). A slightly larger, but still statistically insignificant, magnitude of change was realized by the control group (pretest = 75.81, posttest 77.26). The ANCOVA for difference in change across the two groups, Table 3, showed no statistically significant difference F(1,108) = 3.61, p >.05.

Content Analysis of Preservice Teacher Knowledge

Item analyses of the Holocaust knowledge test, based on pretest and posttest administrations, were conducted to characterize the sample in terms of content knowledge elements. The proportion of experimental group students (n=56) who answered items correctly on the knowledge pretest ranged from .11 to .98. Posttest results showed a range from .19 to 1.0. These results are displayed in Figure 2. On 34 of the 44 test items, posttest proportions correct exceed pretest proportions.

Items were analyzed according to their level of difficulty and no subject matter commonality was found. The item answered incorrectly by most students (p=.11 pretest, p=.20 posttest) asked which organization drafted the law stating that a war of aggression is prohibited. Although the correct answer to item 25 was the International War Crimes Tribunal, most students incorrectly chose the United Nations, perhaps because it was most familiar to them. Students did show a considerable amount of improvement (.09) from pre to posttest on item 25.

Other items in which improvement was remarkable from pre to posttest included item 24 (pretest p=.43, posttest p=.6l) asking the name of the decision made at the Wannsee Conference in 1942. The correct answer was The Final Solution, a key decision made in the gruesome events of the Holocaust in which millions were essentially sentenced to death. Many participants, however, chose the distracter, The New World Order, a term more familiar to 21st century Americans and an incorrect answer. Although the choice of A New World Order suggests many participants may have been guessing, significant improvement was noticeable between pre and posttest scores (.18) on item 24.

The question most participants answered correctly, Item 1, asked participants to choose an overall definition of the Holocaust (p=.98 pretest, p= 1.00 posttest). The correct answer was that the Holocaust was the systematic murder of millions of nonconformists to Nazi-policy. The fact that all participants eventually answered this item correctly is positive news for multicultural education. It may also be attributable, however, to the fact that the distracters were too obviously wrong (e.g., a hoax, a Jewish holiday, an exaggerated story about Jews during the Second World War).

A few items showed a negative progression from pre to posttest scores. One example is item 8 (p=.77 pretest, p=.6l posttest) discussing socio-political conditions in Germany that may have had an effect on the rise of Nazism. The question asked how Germans attributed their loss in the First World War.

Answers included: the French were physically stronger men; the state of Bavaria had betrayed them; Britain was too great a power; and certain groups had betrayed them at home. The negative change in item 8 from pre to posttest may be a result of unlucky guessing.

Further examination of a number of items resulted in discussion of some changes (mostly distracters) in items on the knowledge test. It was decided in item 25, for example, that the distracter The United Nations would be replaced with something less identifiable. Due to a noticeable improvement between pre and posttest scores on item 24 the distracter New World Order has not been changed. Because many consider the topic of scapegoating to be vital to multicultural education, item 8 will remain as it is.

Knowledge and Perception Correlations

Table 5 describes a correlation matrix between knowledge, affinity, and perceptions. The correlation numbers of test reliability in both control and experimental groups are low. The experimental group knowledge correlation (.59) would indicate the treatment was limited towards having an impact of test subjects. A change worth noting in the experimental group was the relationship between perceptual bias and knowledge. There was a change of -.32 (pretest = .02, posttest = -.30), indicating that additional knowledge about the Holocaust was associated with less bias towards other groups. Knowledge and affinity experienced a change of-.23 (pretest .29, posttest .06). In this case, exposure to the treatment brought the participants to having a negligible correlation. An interesting change in the control group was with the correlation of perceptual bias and affinity. There was a change exhibited of -.25 (pretest = .32, posttest = .07). This number would be hoped for in the treatment group, but somewhat surprising in the control group. Overall, since there was no significant difference between the two groups, the changes described highlight some interesting trends, but fail to indicate any tangible effects as a result of exposure to the treatment.

CONCLUSION

The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust is an extensive website that receives over two million hits per month. The purpose of this study was to investigate whether or not preservice teachers' factual knowledge and attitudes toward traditionally marginalized groups would be significantly changed through interaction with the Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust website. The participants (n=115) were randomly assigned to an experimental group or to a control group. Pretests and posttests relating to Holocaust knowledge and attitudes were administered to both groups.

The results indicate that exposure to the Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust did not have a significant impact on either the factual knowledge or the attitudes of the subjects. The findings suggest that the limited amount of engagement required of the subjects (they had to write a lesson plan related to the material) was not sufficient to impact a change in either knowledge or attitudes. Perhaps a more thorough, directive approach to the material would be more beneficial.

A related observation of the study focuses on the knowledge level of preservice teachers. The data collected provide baseline information about the strengths and weaknesses in their background information and knowledge related to Holocaust events. This information can be useful for enhancing the Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust and re-designing the curriculum of education courses in social science methods.

This study provides several areas for further research. The type and amount of engagement required with the Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust needs to be broadened to determine if prolonged, in-depth exposure to the curriculum would have a significant impact on the knowledge or attitudes of the participants. In addition, the knowledge test should be revised to form a more consistent level of questions.

The baseline data on preservice teacher's knowledge about the Holocaust should also be further investigated. A comprehensive review of the literature produced very little information about the state of teacher's knowledge related to the Holocaust. Using the pretest data from this study, additional studies could be conducted to further refine areas of instructional need. To that end, plans are underway to administer the same knowledge and attitude instruments to preservice teachers in the fall of 2000 and spring of 2001. Similar investigations with practicing teachers would be appropriate and beneficial.

In summary, the study of the knowledge and attitudes of preservice teachers has several implications for future research related to Holocaust education. Only by equipping our teachers with the resources and information they need, can we ensure that students will be able to learn from the Holocaust and develop an understanding of the ramifications of prejudice and intolerance.

APPENDIX A

1. Using The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust as your reference material, create a lesson plan explaining the Nazi idea of the "Final Solution." Information on this topic can be found in the Timeline section, under Nazification, The Ghettos, and The Camps. You can find more information on this topic in the People section under Perpetrators. At the end of each section there is also a link for teachers offering tips on activities, lesson plans, and vocabulary. There is also a Resources section that provides a glossary, book lists, maps, video lists, and movies.

* In creating your lesson plan, be sure to include the historical context of the "Final Solution," how and why this was allowed to happen, as well as its ultimate consequences. As you create your lesson, please keep the following in mind:

* If your lesson requires students to read a story, please make sure it is age appropriate and include the title of it. The Resources section provides lists of books under a variety of groupings.

* Be sure to include a list of the vocabulary words being used in your lesson.

* Include a list of all other materials needed for both you and your students to complete this lesson.

* If you plan on using this CD program with your students, please make note of the sections you will be using with them.

* Give step-by-step directions on how this lesson will be taught.

2. Using The Teacher's Guide to the Holocaust as your reference material, create a lesson plan explaining the diversity of people victimized by Nazi oppression. Information on this topic can be found in the People section under Victims. At the end of this section there is a link for teachers offering tips on activities, lesson plans, and vocabulary. There is also a Resources section that provides a glossary, book lists, maps, video lists, and movies to further aid you. Remember to give step-by-step directions for your lesson. As you create your lesson, please keep the following in mind:

* If your lesson requires students to read a story, please make sure it is age appropriate and include the title of it. The Resources section provides lists of books under a variety of groupings.

* Be sure to include a list of the vocabulary words being used in your lesson.

* Include a list of all other materials needed for both you and your students to complete this lesson.

* If you plan on using this CD program with your students, please make note of the sections you will be using with them.

APPENDIX B

We all have general perceptions about groups of people. Such perceptions are neither right nor wrong, they are a part of being a member of modern society. This section has pairs of words that are opposite in meaning. For each group of people represented (one on the left side of the page and one on the right), mark the space between each pair of words that is closest to your perceptions. Remember that there are no right or wrong answers. If at any point you feel uncomfortable you may discontinue.

Examples

If you feel the group members are probably quiet, you would mark a space near the word quiet.

Quiet [check] ___ ___ ___ ___ Noisy

If you feel the group members are definitely noisy, you would mark the space nearest the word noisy

Quiet ___ ___ ___ ___ [check] Noisy

[FIGURE 1 OMITTED]

[FIGURE 2 OMITTED]

Table 1

ANCOVA Summary Table: Knowledge Test

Source     df     MS       F      P

Pretest      1  1623.83  73.08  <.0001
Treatment    1     0.06   0.00  >.05
Residual   112    22.22
Total      114
Table 2

ANCOVA Summary Table: Absolute Deviation from Neutrality (ABSDEV)

Source     df    MS     F      P

Pretest      1  8.17  67.90  <.0001
Treatment    1  0.02   0.16  >.05
Residual   101  0.12
Total      103
Table 3

ANCOVA Summary Table: Affinity

Source      df  MS      F     P

Pretest      1  8.57  173.01  <.0001
Treatment    1  0.18    3.61  >.05
Residual   108  0.05
Total      110
Table 4

Means and Standard Deviations for Composites Variables

                                      Pretest                Posttest
                               Mean       SD        Mean        SD

Experimental Group
Knowledge                      22.6       5.02      23.37       6.23
Affinity                       77.40      9.40      77.38       9.18
African Americans               3.02      0.39       3.13       0.56
Asian Americans                 3.21      0.45       3.37       0.46
Hispanic Americans              3.02      0.58       3.10       0.49
Homosexuals                     3.20      0.32       3.19       0.12
Jewish Americans                3.22      0.38       3.22       0.55
Persons with mental handicaps   2.98      0.34       3.28       0.29
ABSDEV                          0.565     0.37       0.53       0.42

Control Group
Knowledge                      22.86      5.0       23.68       5.84
Affinity                       75.81      9.60      77.26       8.22
African Americans               3.24       .058      3.19       0.50
Asian Americans                 3.33      0.47       3.54       0.41
Hispanic Americans              3.24      0.40       3.41       0.50
Homosexuals                     3.36      0.51       3.19       0.34
Jewish Americans                3.21      0.27       3.28       0.54
Persons with mental handicaps   3.24      0.31       3.08       0.23
ABSDEV                          0.57      0.43       0.56       0.46
Table 5

Correlations between Knowledge, Affinity and Perceptions

                    Knowledge  Affinity  Perceptual Bias

Experimental Group
Knowledge              .59       .29           .02
Affinity               .06       .80          -.10
Perceptual Bias       -.30      -.21           .68

Control Group

                    Knowledge  Affinity  Perceptual Bias

Knowledge              .67       .07          -.17
Affinity               .06       .76           .32
Perceptual Bias       -.18       .07           .60

Note:- Pretest correlations are above the main diagonal and posttest
correlations are below. Diagonal elements are test retest stability
estimates.
Table 6

ANOVA Summary Table: Perceptions


Group                           F     p
African Americans              0.02  0.88
Hispanic Americans             0.07  0.79
Persons with Mental Handicaps  2.73  0.10
Jewish Americans               0.02  0.88
Homosexuals                    0.26  0.61
Asian Americans                0.03  0.87

References

Barron, A.E. (1998). Developing a large-scale instructional programme on the Web. Educational Media International, 35(3). 192-196.

Borrowman, S. (1999). Critical surfing: Holocaust denial and credibility on the web. College Teaching, 47(2), 44-47.

Brown, M., & Davies, I. (1998). The Holocaust and education for citizenship: The teaching of history, religion, and human rights in England. Educational Review. 50(1), 75-83.

Carrington, B., & Short, G. (1997). Holocaust education, anti-racism, and citizenship. Educational Review, 49(3), 271-282.

Howard, T.C., & Denning del Rosario, C. (2000). Talking race in teacher education: The need for racial dialogue in teacher education programs. Action in Teacher Education, 21(4), 127-37.

Kudva, P. (1999). Relevance of a knowledge base for a teacher as a professional. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 429 932)

Landesman, B. (1998). Holocaust denial and the Internet. Reference Librarian, (61), 287-99.

Sternberg, R.J., & Horvath, J.A. (1995). A prototype view of expert teaching. Educational Researcher, 24(6), 9-17.

Taylor, P.A. (1999). Multicultural education issues: Perceived levels of knowledge of preservice teachers and teacher educators. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 436 502)

United States Holocaust Memorial Museum (2001). Teaching about the Holocaust: A resource book for educators. Washington, DC: Author United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. Retrieved from the World Wide Web February 19, 2002: http://www.ushmm.org/education/foreducators/teachabo/teaching_holcaus t.pdf