Printer Friendly

The pervasiveness of racial prejudice in higher education in the U.S: raising awareness and solution.

Racial issues are significant in the United States of America because of the racial diversity in the society. Diversity is one of the greatest strengths of America's higher education system, and has helped to make it one of the best in the world. Diversity: (1) enriches the educational experience by fostering learning and appreciation of those whose background and experiences are different from ours; (2) promotes personal growth and a healthy society by challenging stereotypes and prejudices (3) encourages critical thinking as well as sensitivity; (4) strengthens communities and the workplace in its preparation of students to live effectively in an increasingly complex, pluralistic society, enhancing respect and teamwork and giving birth to a society whose members are judged by the quality of their character and their contribution to the good of all; (5) boosts America's ability and strength by maximizing the many talents and potentials of all citizens for the general good. The author has personal experience in both predominantly white and historically black institutions and has observed that:

* Racial prejudice remains a major problem in the United States society and its institutions of higher learning,

* Racial prejudice is entrenched and pervasive,

* Its persistence and pervasiveness seem like grounds for despair,

* It is so deeply embedded that it seems almost impossible to eradicate, reduce, or manage, and

* Racial prejudice is not restricted to a race because each race has formed some prejudices about other races.

Racial Prejudice--Definition

Prejudice means prejudging. But the classic definition of prejudice is the one put forth by the famous Harvard psychologist, Gordon Allport, who published The Nature of Prejudice in 1954. He defined prejudice as "an aversive or hostile attitude toward a person who belongs to a group, simply because he belongs to that group, and is therefore presumed to have the objectionable qualities ascribed to that group ... Prejudice is an antipathy based on faulty and inflexible generalization. It may be felt or expressed. It may be directed toward a group or an individual of that group ..." (Gordon 1954, 9). (1) Racial prejudice could also be defined as the tendency to make an automatic connection between race and certain moral or behavioral traits (Goodhart 2005). (2) The disturbing reality of this definition and view is that some of these connections are in part correct. For example:

1. Jews are more likely to be successful in business than Pakistanis;

2. Young African Americans (Afro-Caribbeans) are more likely to succeed in sport or popular culture than young Chinese;

3. Some racial groups possess a stronger work ethic than others.

Illuminating this is not an expression of racial prejudice; it only becomes so when the explanation of the trait is racial rather than historical (Goodhart 2005). (3) Foster (1991, 203) defined racial prejudice as "an ideology: a representation of the 'other' in terms of negatively evaluative content." (4) Institutional racial prejudice can be defined as unequal treatment based on race that is entrenched in institutions and it also refers to those practices in institutions that favor one group over another based on race.

The origin of racial prejudice can be traced back to human migrations. Without these migrations, different races and ethnic groups would probably never have come into contact (USAG-Hessen Equal Opportunity). (5) When humans from different races came into contact their physical differences such as skin color and other physical features become social visibility variables. Difference is often perceived as wrong, and all other groups become the out-groups. When different racial groups interact, they continually vie for scarce resources and each group tries to maintain or enhance its self interests. One group will inevitably possess more power than the others and becomes the in-group while all other groups become the out-groups (USAG-Hessen Equal Opportunity). (6) The in-group inevitably controls the limited resources, sets the rules, and feels superior to all the other groups. On the university campus, sheer number often equals more power. Therefore the racial group with the largest representation becomes the in-group that feels "superior" because of its racial group and tends to be prejudiced towards other racial groups on campus.

As much as we may want to totally eradicate prejudice from our daily activities and interactions we need to be realistic in this situation. Pervasive racial prejudice will always be with us to some extent because it is based on a common human tendency to extrapolate from limited experience. The point here is to raise our awareness of racial prejudice and to seek means to adequately prevent negative consequences resulting for racial prejudice (Goodhart 2005). (7)

Racial prejudice is observable in all societies and it is not restricted to any single race. It is not the prerogative of any particular group. The socialization process in every group of people has equipped its members with some predetermined and fixed notions and views of other groups of peoples. This prejudging of other groups results in a set of expectations, attitudes, tendencies, over-categorization, and fixed responses. Prejudice developed through socialization processes and personal experiences early in life, usually by adulthood, become deeply entrenched in the cognitive repertoire. Racial prejudices are in fact so well-learned that they are automatically activated when one meets or interacts with a member of the relevant racial groups. Members of the dominant or majority groups become the in-groups while members of the minority groups become the out-groups. Naturally the out-group suffers at the hand of the in-group. Regardless of how much one would like to believe that passing legislations and making policy decisions to promote comfort and harmony among diverse races, the fact remains that genuine decision, effort, and success in accepting racial diversity and shunning racial prejudice are often primarily on the personal level. The individual has to decide to disabuse his or her mind of racial prejudice and to remain alert and resist tendencies to operate from the platform of racial prejudice.

There are a host of racial, prejudice-related characteristics in higher education that constitute barriers to harmonious racial coexistence on college campuses. Some of these barriers include stereotypes, discrimination, harassment, lack of organizational political savvy, an unsupportive work environment, exclusion and isolation, qualifications and performance being questioned, lack of mentors, diversity backlash and an unhealthy workplace climate (Wentling and Palma-Rivas 1997). (8) These barriers inhibit attainment of individual and organizational goals. They need to be identified and resolved before higher institutions of learning can reap the many advantages of racial diversity on campuses and in the American society. It is impossible to effectively deal with issues one is not aware of or unprepared to confront. It is the hope of the author that when the various areas and variables where racial prejudice manifests itself on higher institution campuses are identified, discussed, and solutions offered that one may begin to hope that college campuses will become more comfortable and welcoming to all its members.

Stereotypes

Often people take a few notions and ideas about a group, and see every member of that as being the same. As Samuel Betances (1993) states, people judge others who are different from them uncritically and quickly, invent simplistic labels and expect every member of that group to behave the way the label inventors expect them to behave. (9) Wentling and Palma-Rivas (1997), cite studies that report labels generalized to some racial groups. For example (1) Asian-Americans are assumed to be research oriented and not able to supervise people, (2) Hispanics are assumed to be unassertive, (3) African Americans are perceived as being lazy and incompetent. (10) We learn our stereotypes through our socialization processes such as our interactions with our family members and associates, in schools, and from the mass media. Prejudice will continue to thrive as long as individuals within racial groups hold on to beliefs and expectations which are based on stereotypes. These predetermined, incorrect and uncomplimentary myths which are generalized to all members of each group have negative impact on climate, relationships and productivity on our campuses of higher education.

The playing field is not even for all employees because those from minority groups often have less privilege and fewer rights. There is the general assumption that members of minority groups have decided to work in the institution because they have no other choice. Members of the majority group even believe offering them jobs is a great favor rendered to them. Minority employees are often expected to perform below standard because they come from groups that are "inferior intellectually", deficient in their preparation for the job, and have a host of characteristics that constitute barriers to the effective performance of their duties. They are not judged as individuals. They derive the perception of their ability and competence from the minority groups they belong to. There is much to be unlearned because stereotypes perpetuate prejudice. As a result of faulty assumptions; and preconceptions, minority employees feel undervalued; and feel exposed to hostility, alienation, and isolation.

Discrimination

In this article discrimination could be defined as a treatment or consideration based on race rather than the individual merit. It is the practice of letting an individual's skin color or racial affiliation become the determining factor in job offers, committee assignments, promotion, and other employment benefits. Sometimes it is difficult to deal with racial discrimination, because it is complex and subtle. It is not unusual to appoint a less skilled and less qualified employee from the in-group to positions, committees and task forces while employees from the minority groups with better qualifications, experience, and skills are passed over just because of their racial affiliation. Members of the in-groups often expect preferential treatment and feel safe and secure that their interests will be protected. During exercises such as performance evaluation, employees from the majority group feel that they have no cause for anxiety, irrespective of the level of performance they exhibited during the academic year. The fact that an overwhelming number of supervisors and members of evaluation committees come from the in-groups may result in members of the in-groups receiving glowing evaluation and recommendations. On the other hand minority employees are often subjected to more rigorous scrutiny with no one to stand in the gap for them. In higher education, there are instances of reverse discrimination that could affect individuals from the different racial groups. For instance, in a predominantly white campus the Caucasian employee may be the victim, while on a historically black campus a black employee may be the victim.

Harassment

Any conduct or comment based on racial group that is likely to cause offense and humiliation may be termed harassment--hostility, ostracism, and verbal abuse. Harassment distracts employees from focusing on task-related responsibilities, reduces productivity, and can lead to increased turnover. Wentling and Palma-Rivas (1997) cite Poole's report in which he states that harassment could have a negative impact on five areas: (1) physiological, (2) emotional, (3) career path, (4) self-perception, and (5) social and interpersonal relations. (11) Harassment inhibits high-performance work teams. Employees from out-groups suffer various forms of harassment. It is not unusual to see them subjected to very uncomplimentary comments by colleagues from the majority group. They are often targets of sharp criticism. Reports abound of instances during meetings when contributions members of the minority groups make do not often receive the merit they deserve, or they may be completely ignored. It is not unusual to have the same idea come from the in-group at a later time and for it to be acknowledged as a brilliant idea. The effect of such treatment distracts minority employees from focusing on task-related responsibilities, reduces productivity, and creates a workplace climate that makes them want to seek employment elsewhere.

Poor Career Development Opportunities

Every employee strives to make progress on the job and to attain positions of increasing responsibility. Access to relevant experiences and opportunities are vital to the realization of such a dream. In higher education, teaching, research, and services are critical areas for career development and advancement. Often, employees from the underrepresented groups have limited access to the experiences and opportunities they need to grow professionally. Consequently, members of the out-groups do not have easy access to open doors to high-responsibility jobs. Usually, they are stuck with non-challenging, dull, less visible, less important, and less rewarding positions, duties, and inconsequential committees. Such employees realize that they are doomed to slow career development and advancement. The old boy network from which the minority employees are excluded, champions the cause of the majority employees, even when it is glaringly unfair. Favoritism, selective hiring, promotion, and placement are some forms of bias rampant in a number of higher institutions. Minorities are aware of all these anomalies, and could become frustrated and disillusioned. An unhealthy workplace climate is usually a byproduct in such an institution, and career development; and advancement become a slow process.

Lack of Organizational Political Savvy

Organizational politics are informal, unofficial, and sometimes behind-the-scenes efforts to sell ideas, influence an organization, increase power, or achieve other targeted objectives (Brandon and Seldman, 2007). (12) Political savvy involves the internal and external politics that impact activities in an organization. Campus politics are frequently seen as a taboo and negative. Yet campus politics influence almost everything that transpires on campus. One needs to learn and be able to successfully navigate the nuances of campus politics in order to thrive. Naivete and lack of campus political savvy are often more observable among members of the out-groups. These may be due to the lack of information, support, and direction that would enable them to accurately perceive the organization's political environment and make it work in their favor. Often, vital information and access to experiences that would make employees politically astute are not readily accessible to minority employees, while their counterparts from the majority group are furnished with the information and experience at the opportune time and are thus able to enhance their ability and chances to succeed in the institution.

Unsupportive Work Environment:

On some campuses, employees of diversity have little opportunity to develop informal relationships that would help them access to networks. Vital information is concealed from them while they are simultaneously subject to constant scrutiny, and are therefore under constant intense pressure to continuously perform at an outstanding standard. This results in such employees constantly trying to remain error free, exhibiting hesitation to ask for assistance for fear of being tagged incompetent. There are often many congregating, clandestine conversations among majority employees. The minority employees are constantly made to feel like outsiders and aliens in a foreign land, and are often uncomfortable and confused.

Exclusion and Isolation:

Relationships among employees develop both at the formal and informal levels. Sometimes the informal interactions and rapport drive the formal relationships. Employees from the out-groups are often not aware of the various networks, informal groups and interactions that take place on campus. They are ignorant of activities planned by members of these informal groups. Members of the out-groups are not usually invited to informal setting like cook outs, evening and weekend get-togethers where some very important decisions and relationships are developed. When such employees become aware of these events, they feel left out, isolated, and see themselves as the outsiders and the outcasts. They are never welcome in the "inner circle". Such exclusive and selective behaviors could lead to personal and professional alienation, and lack of trust among members of the campus community.

Qualification and Performance Questioned

When employees from any of the minority groups manage to secure positions that have been seen as outside the ones that are normally available to them, their qualifications and performance are deliberately doubted. They come under strong scrutiny as they are believed to lack the required ability, competence, and credibility. Members of the in-group fail to accept the fact that the minority employees have acquired the required knowledge, skills, and experiences that make them the best qualified for the coveted position. Even when they come up with innovative ideas and initiatives they become targets for uncomplimentary comments, and efforts will be made to discredit them. The comment, "They don't know what they are doing," is heard often. Having someone in authority who believes in hiring the best qualified for the job, irrespective of the group they come from really helps and makes a difference. He/she becomes the rock on which the qualified, competent minority employees can lean on and run to in times of distress. Nobody, minority employees included, likes to feel he/she is recruited or has access to what they deserve just because he/she belongs to a particular group rather than on the basis of qualification and competence.

Lack of Mentors

Mentors are higher ranking, significant, superior officials with more sophisticated knowledge, skills and experience who faithfully offer necessary support, especially professional and emotional support, to enhance and guarantee the upward mobility of a protege's professional career. Since such high caliber of employees often come from the in-group on campus, the employees from the out-groups have great problem finding mentors who can identify with them and see them as younger versions of themselves. Consequently, they lack the guidance, encouragement, connection, and advocacy that mentors can provide to overcome obstacles such as isolation, lack of credibility, and lack of political savvy. On some campuses there are very few out-group colleagues to look up to. The older colleagues themselves are struggling to survive and are making serious efforts to gain acceptance into the networks and circles that are recognized on campus. Many of them are frustrated and disillusioned and consequently, they can not provide the direction and guidance which the new or young colleague of diversity needs.

Diversity Backlash

Diversity backlash could be defined as the negative reactions of the majority group to the perceived development and acquisition of power, faster promotion and progress towards equality by employees from out-groups. The majority group reacts negatively because they fear they are losing power, and the workplace is becoming too neutral and a "no man's land". Racial assumptions, biases, perspectives, and frames of references influence the pattern of interactions on campus. Minority employees know that they often have to go beyond the norm to survive and succeed. They are often professionally aggressive, very dedicated and committed to their duties, very productive and apply a lot of industry and efforts into their work. Therefore, the majority employees develop the phobia that they are losing in their own territory. They become uncomfortable and nervous. They feel something drastic has to be done if they are to continue to enjoy their comfort zone and their sometimes undeserved and unearned privileges. They may embark on negative propaganda exercises against those minority employees who seem to be advancing. Efforts are made to make it look like these minority employees were promoted or hired as tokens or to fulfill the diversity need, not because they were the most qualified in the candidate pool or that they merit the appointments. Uncomplimentary comments are made, and naturally, the minority employees do not appreciate them. They are unlikely to forget that they are in hostile territory and as such their guard is constantly up. The minority employees are always careful to interpret events in light of such negative comments. The unfortunate result is that sometimes they could mistakenly translate what their majority employees innocently did or said, with no intended harm.

Solutions

Racial prejudice is a long-standing issue that has taken many forms in higher education in the United States and in American society as a whole. One of the purposes of this paper is to suggest solutions that have the potential to counteract the causes of racial prejudice in higher education. We are all different. We are all individuals with our pre-formed beliefs, assumptions, and prejudices. However, we have come together to constitute the campus community. Since we cannot successfully legislate what individuals believe and how they act, when it comes to racial prejudice, we depend on individual's awareness, attitudes, convictions, and efforts to effect any change in the eradication or at least in the reduction of racial prejudice. Institutions of higher learning should seek and maintain strategies for racial prejudice reduction and eradication and for developing more positive attitudes towards people from different racial groups.

The best solution to racial prejudice would begin at the personal or individual level. Self-awareness could become the starting point. Everyone on campus needs to individually become more aware of how his/her individual behavior towards others contributes to the perpetuation of racial prejudice on campus and in society at large.

This could begin with everyone on campus deciding to objectively question and check his/her pattern of thinking. The preconceived beliefs, assumptions and generalizations should be identified then the following questions should be used to examine each of them: 9 Where did it come from or how was it acquired or developed?

* Is it factual, accurate, and right?

* Is there a need to take another look at the preconceived belief, reassess it and change the way of prejudging?

* What needs to be done to create and foster a campus relationship and environment where everyone, irrespective of skin color feels welcomed, valued, respected, and treated fairly based on his/her individual merit and not on his/her race.

This process will be more effective in reducing or eliminating racial prejudice on campus if it becomes a common agenda on campus. This is where a strong and committed leadership becomes a critical factor in successfully developing a framework to reduce or eliminate racial prejudice in higher education and in encouraging buy-in from all its members, irrespective of skin color.

The administration should ensure that the campus organizational climate is healthy, warm, nurturing, non-threatening, and inclusive so that all employees can perform at their highest possible levels. The workplace climate is a result of the relationships that exist among employees. The issue of creating and maintaining the type of climate that would make employees, especially the minority employees, comfortable and happy, has to be given adequate attention. It requires effort, and constructive and conscious planning. The administration should promote activities and opportunities that boost interaction and sharing among employees from all racial groups. Kriza Jennings (1996) claims that focusing on helping others to feel welcome can help to address other issues, such as classism, or cliques--certain people only talk to certain others. (13)

Administration should treat the "emotional virus". According to Brown and Leigh (1999) emotional virus is the net effect of emotional mismanagement and shortsighted management practices. Brown and Leigh (1999) believe that an organization is very much like an organism and external stressors or internal imbalance can make it weak and unhealthy. Brown and Leigh claim that the workplace climate will thrive when there is a supportive management, contribution from employees, self-expression, recognition, clarity, and challenge. (14) Administration should systematically and carefully study and examine the situation and plan to counteract the causes of emotional stressors. This is a crucial way to provide a lasting solution, and build a healthy climate that is free of anger, frustration, anxiety, and bad blood.

Usually, one fears what one does not know or understand. Many theories have been developed to deal with changes in inter-group interaction. Though inter-group processes are complex and cannot be explained by one single theory, contact theory provides significant information on inter-group processes. Contact theory suggests that contact can decrease prejudice, as persons of different groups get to know one another on a personal basis. During such contact people of different groups discover similarities and realize that individuals do not necessarily lend credence to the characteristics assigned to their groups. Increased contact may also decrease the illusion that outgroups are homogeneous (15). Contact theory further states that interaction between individuals of similar social and economic status, such as the campus community, has a great opportunity to lead to: (1) developing common goals, (2) disconfirming negative attitudes and (3) seeing each other as typical of their group so that newly formed positive attitudes and beliefs can be generalized (Baron and Byrne 1991). (16)

The institution should use a variety of methods and a composite of various areas to promote a comprehensive understanding of racial groups. Opportunities such as workshops and brown bag sessions should be provided for employees to (1) learn about people who are different from them and work to appreciate and value those differences, (2) develop cultural competency, (3) experience cross-cultural learning. Being open to learning about others who are different from oneself reduces the fear of the unknown, reduces tension and anger, pulls down walls, and promotes understanding and unity. After an institution-designed workshop on racial groups, a participant commented, "I experienced a wide spectrum of emotions of different intensity. My feelings varied through guilt, frustration, anger, sadness, compassion, hurt, joy, threatened, and defensive. ..The black members shared painful memories, which touched me deeply. For the first time in my life I felt that I was truly hearing it from the other side. (Visser, M., G. Cleaver & J. Schoeman,)." (17) When people desist from labeling others who are different from them unfairly, look beyond the obsolete labels, old scripts and media impressions, and practice effective communication, then they will begin to harness the rainbow in the workplace.

Employees from out-groups also have a vital role to play in reducing and eliminating racial prejudices on the campus. They should take initiatives to fit into the campus community without compromising that which makes them different. They should learn the rules, watch for clues, get involved and resist the temptation to stay isolated in their own groups, and desist from negative attitudes and finger pointing at members of the majority group(s). They should take charge of their progress, reject rejection, and seek out relationships that would help them succeed, and feel a sense of belonging. Employees from the out-groups should not get bitter and give up. When efforts to combat racial prejudice are put forth by all racial groups, higher institutions will benefit from the richness of racial diversity. And there will be nothing to lose but the chains that destroy a healthy, successful and effective higher education.

Since racial prejudice usually stems from ignorance about other racial groups, educational opportunities to interact with people from other races should be provided. Here are some tips to enable the campus community to effectively cope with racial groups, unlearn acquired racial prejudices, and avoid hostility, alienation, and isolation. Individuals need to:

* Be aware that difference can feel like a threat at first.

* Be aware of their race-related beliefs and assumptions and the traps they create.

* Know that supposedly stubborn automatic prejudices are amenable to change.

* Be willing to have all their race-related beliefs and assumptions challenged.

* Realize that repeated practice at suppressing stereotypic associations and replacing them with alternative associations can successfully undermine their automatic activation.

* Become more conversant with other races and their cultures.

* Recognize the signals of racial barriers.

* Be a part of the solution and not a part of the problem.

* Learn from generalizations about other cultures, but do not use those generalizations to stereotype, write off or oversimplify their ideas about another race or person. The best use of a generalization is to add it to their storehouse of knowledge so that they can better understand and appreciate other interesting, multi-faceted human beings.

* Try to put themselves in the other person's shoes.

* Seek direct experience with other races and cultures

Conclusion

It is evident that racial prejudice is pervasive in our institutions of higher learning. As a result of the complex and sensitive nature of the problem, there is no easy solution or strategy to eradicate racial prejudice from our campuses. The problem will not disappear. Institutions and individuals in the campus community will have to continuously seek ways to raise awareness of racial prejudice, manage it and appeal to the better judgment of individuals to challenge and confront their underlining racial beliefs and assumptions with a view to broadmindedness and enlightenment.

Reference:

Allport, Gordon. 1954. The Nature of Prejudice. Boston: Beacon Press.

Betances, Samuel. 1993 Harnessing the Rainbow: Diversity and Change in the Workplace. Produced and directed by Tedd C. Determan Marketing Corporation and United Training Media, 25min., Distributed by Quality Video Program, (videocassette).

Brandon, Rick and Marty Seldman. 2007. Excerpt: Survival of the Savvy. http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:FAgzRsE7JdMJ:www.fastcompany.com/ bookclub/excerpts/0743262549.html+Organizational+Political+Savvy+ definition&hl-en&ct=clnk&cd=14&g1=us (accessed May 10, 2007).

Brown, Steven and Thomas Leigh, 1999 in Doc Childre, and Bruce Cryer, Achieving Coherence out of Chaos: The Inner Quality Management Model 1. http://www.heartmath.com/Library/Articles/Achieve.html (accessed January 10, 2007).

Foster, D. 1991. Race and Racism in South African Psychology. South African Journal of Psychology. 2, no. 4: 203-210.

Goodhart, David. 2005. "Not Black and White." Prospect Magazine, no. 110. http://www.prospect-maeazine.co.uk/printarticle.phD?id=6866 (accessed January 9, 2007).

Jennings, Kriza. 1996. Fostering a Workplace Climate for Diversity. ARL: A Bimonthly Newsletter of Research Library Issues and Actions 185, 1. http://www.arl.org/newsltr/185/foster.html (accessed January 2007).

USAG-Hessen Equal Opportunity. Equal Opportunity Instructors' Guides. Racism and Sexism. http://www.usaghessen.eur.army.mil/EO/instructorsguides/RacismandSexism.htm (accessed January 12, 2007).

Visser, M., G. Cleaver & J. Schoeman, 1999. "Racism: Raising Awareness amongst a Group of Students," South African Journal of Higher Education, 13 no. 1: 195-204.

Wentling, Rose M. and Nilda Palma-Rivas. 1997. Diversity in the Workforce Series Report #1: Diversity in the Workplace: .4 Literature Review MDS-9.34 Berkley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education. http://ncreve.berkley.edu/AllInOne/MDS-934.html accessed January 10, 2007).

(1) Allport, Gordon, The Nature of Prejudice (Boston: Beacon Press, 1954), 9.

(2) David Goodhart, "Not Black and White," Prospect Magazine, no. 110 (2005), http://www.prospect-magazine.co.uk/printarticle.php?id=6866

(3) ibid.

(4) Foster, D. "Race and Racism in South African Psychology," South African Journal of Psychology. 21, no. 4 (1991):203.

(5) USAG-Hessen Equal Opportunity, Equal Opportunity Instructors' Guides, Racism and Sexism. http://www.usaehessen.eur.army.mil/EO/ instructorseuides/RacismandSexism.htm

(6) Ibid.

(7) David Goodhart. David Goodhart, "Not Black and White, Prospect Magazine, no. 110 (2005), http://www.prospect-maeazine.co.uk/printarticle.php?id=6866

(8) Rose M. Wending and Nilda Palma-Rivas, Diversity in the Workforce Series Report #1: Diversity in the Workplace: A Literature Review MDS-934 (Berkley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1997). http://ncrve.berkley.edu/AllInOne/MDS-934.html.

(9) Samuel Betances, Harnessing the Rainbow: Diversity and Change in the Workplace. (Produced and directed by Tedd C. Determan Marketing Corporation and United Training Media, 25min., Distributed by Quality Video Program, 1993, (videocassette).

(10) Rose M. Wending and Nilda Palma-Rivas, Diversity in the Workforce Series Report #1: Diversity in the Workplace: A Literature Review MDS-934 (Berkley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1997). http://ncrve.berkley.edu/AllInOne/MDS-934.html

(11) Rose M. Wentling and Nilda Palma-Rivas, Diversity in the Workforce Series Report #1: Diversity in the Workplace: A Literature Review MDS-934 (Berkley: National Center for Research in Vocational Education, 1997). http://ncrve.berkley.edu/Al1InOne/MDS-934.html

(12) Rick Brandon and Marty Seldman. Excerpt: Survival of the Savvy, (2007). http://209.85.165.104/search?q=cache:FAgzRsE7JdMJ:www.fastcompany.com/ bookclub/excerpts/0743262549.html+Oreanizational+Political+Savvy+ definition&hl-en&ct=clnk&cd=14&gl=us

(13) Kriza Jennings, 1996. "Fostering a Workplace Climate for Diversity," ARL: A Bimonthly Newsletter of Research Library Issues and Actions 185, no. 10 996) http://www.arl.org/newsltr/185/foster.html

(14) Steven Brown and Thomas Leigh, in Doc Childre, and Bruce Cryer, Achieving Coherence out of Chaos: The Inner Quality Management Model 1. http://www.heartmath.com/Library/Articles/Achieve.html

(15) Visser, M., G. Cleaver & J. Schoeman, "Racism: Raising Awareness amongst a Group of Students," South African Journal of Higher Education, 13 no. 1 (1999): 196.

(16) Baron, R.A., and Byrne, D. Social Psychology, Understanding Human Interaction (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1991), in Visser, M., G. Cleaver & J. Schoeman, "Racism: Raising Awareness amongst a Group of Students," South African Journal of Higher Education, 13 no. 1 (1999): 196.

(17) Visser, M., G. Cleaver & J. Schoeman, "Racism: Raising Awareness amongst a Group of Students," South African Journal of Higher Education, 13 no. 1 (1999): 201.

Justina O. Osa, Associate Professor, Graduate Professional Education Programs, Department of Educational Leadership and Supervision, Virginia State University
COPYRIGHT 2007 Forum on Public Policy
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2007 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Osa, Justina O.
Publication:Forum on Public Policy: A Journal of the Oxford Round Table
Date:Jun 22, 2007
Words:5380
Previous Article:The politics of AIDS in the black community.
Next Article:Defining religion, spirituality and human experience.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2018 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters