UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Design, intentions, and implementation of diversity programs 1997

You don't seem to have a PDF reader installed, try download the pdf

Item Metadata


ubc_1997-0500.pdf [ 6.01MB ]
JSON: 1.0055997.json
JSON-LD: 1.0055997+ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 1.0055997.xml
RDF/JSON: 1.0055997+rdf.json
Turtle: 1.0055997+rdf-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 1.0055997+rdf-ntriples.txt

Full Text

DESIGN, INTENTIONS, A N D IMPLEMENTATION OF DIVERSITY PROGRAMS by RITA A C T O N B.A. , The University of Calgary, 1987 Dip. Ed., The University of British Columbia, 1992 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF M A S T E R OF ARTS in THE F A C U L T Y OF G R A D U A T E STUDIES Department of Educational Studies Adult Education Programme We accept this thesis as conforming -~>jo the required standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH C O L U M B I A September 1997 ©Rita Acton, 1997 In- presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the. requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the head of my department or by his or her representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be,allowed without my written permission. DE-6 (2/88) ABSTRACT This is a study of some of the challenges and opportunities of workplace diversity programs as they are experienced by consultants working in the lower mainland region of British Columbia. This study reinforces that the context severely limits what may be achieved, and therefore diversity programs are seen as a beginning process. Working towards change does not end when the workshop is over. Change is an ongoing process which, in workplace contexts, needs to be supported by the entire organization inclusive of senior management, front line workers and support staff. Qualitative, in-depth interviews were conducted with a group of consultants to determine program design, intentions, and influences facilitating or hindering implementation of these programs. The programs are delivered in a variety of workplace contexts such as educational institutions, non-profit organizations, municipalities, school boards, hospitals, telecommunications, financial and insurance industries. The data reveals that these programs, whether of two hours, two days or two weeks duration, offer a place for introspection and reflection necessary for gaining greater self-awareness. These programs deal with highly emotional, value-laden issues; therefore, the overall goals of diversity programs cannot be reached unless there are policies implemented which support the goals and objectives of the programs. The study's findings challenge conventional models of designing, facilitating, evaluating, and implementing programs in that the planning process is done not only with the intellect, but also with the heart. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract i i Table of Contents i i i List of Figures v Acknowledgments vi Dedication vii CHAPTER ONE: INTRODUCTION 1 Background 1 Personal Statement 5 Purpose and Research Questions 6 General Approach 8 Significance of the Research 10 Organization of Thesis 14 CHAPTER TWO: LITERATURE REVIEW 16 Diversity Management 17 Intercultural Training 24 Implementation 26 Adult Education 28 Multicultural Education 33 Multicultural Teaching 35 S ummary of Literature 3 7 Conceptual Framework 39 CHAPTER THREE: R E S E A R C H M E T H O D O L O G Y 43 Research Design 43 Relevance of Personal Experience 44 Selection of Study Participants 48 Gathering Data 49 Why Qualitative Interviews? 50 How Were Interviews Conducted? 51 Document Review 52 Managing Data 52 Confidentiality 53 Pilot Test 54 Transcribing Process 55 Data Analysis 57 Interview Analysis 60 Document Analysis 62 iv Criteria of Soundness 63 Limitations of Study 66 CHAPTER FOUR DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS 70 General Introduction 70 Program Design 71 Study Participants' Intentions and Characteristics 73 Program Intentions 75 Implementation 77 Context 79 Content 82 Program Goals 83 Facilitation 84 Evaluation 86 CHAPTER FIVE CRITICAL ANALYSIS 90 Program Design 90 Intentions 92 Implementation 94 Context 96 Content 99 Program Goals 101 Facilitation 103 Evaluation 105 CHAPTER SIX S U M M A R Y , CONCLUSIONS, IMPLICATIONS 108 REFERENCES 116 APPENDICES: Appendix 1: Request for Ethical Review 124 Appendix 2: Certificate of Approval 131 Appendix 3: Letter Of Invitation 132 Appendix 4: Subject Consent Form 133 Appendix 5: Interview Guide 135 Appendix 6: Cover Letter to Study Participants 136 Appendix 7: Contact Summary Form 137 Appendix 8: Codes Applied to Analysis 138 Appendix 9: Interview Questions 139 V LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 Conceptual Framework: Program Elements Linking Design, Page 40 Intentions, and Implementation of Diversity Programs ACKNOWLEDGMENTS There are so many people to thank who have supported and guided me in my research journey. First and most importantly, my research supervisor Dr. Judith Ottoson whose guidance, unflinching support, and attention to detail made it possible for me to bring the thesis to completion. I was able to persevere in the research journey largely because of her courage to be not only a teacher but also a learner as we explored this topic together. I would like to thank her for being a supervisor, a scholar, and a friend throughout this project. My thesis committee: Dr. Thomas Sork for whom I had the honour of serving as a Graduate Teaching Assistant and whose thorough feedback was immensely beneficial; Dr. Thelma Cook whose expertise and insights have encouraged me greatly. It was a great pleasure to work with them. My external committee member: Dr. Daniel Pratt whose courses and commitment to teaching inspired me. I feel very fortunate to be a member of the adult education community. Special thanks and recognition to Gordon and Mary Selman who opened the wonderful world of adult education to me, and whose friendship I especially value. I would like to thank the faculty and staff in the Department of Educational Studies, particularly Shauna Butterwick, Allison Tom, Kjell Rubenson, Roger Boshier, Jeannie Young and the late William Griffith. Many other friends have been so supportive: Eric Darner, John Gooding, Steven Noble, Denise Hawthorne, Abu Bockarie, May Yano, Deborah MacNiel, Joel Zapata, Jan Johnson, Marina Niks, Linette Smith, Reginald Nnazor, Rosemary Taylor, Cynthia Andruske, Doris Wong, Garnet Grossjean, Mamolete Mohapi, and the late Pat Dyer. I feel a special gratitude to Tom Nesbit, Adrienne Burk, Alan Segal, Reva Joshee, and Adrienne Chan. To my friends in Capilano College's English Department whose continual support unfolded in many different ways. To Ranjini and Sharmalene Mendis, Janet Yuchem, the Stiles, the Schissels, the Morkens, Hazel and Mike Leier, John Lo, and my fitness buddies at the Cameron Recreation Center who always cared enough to ask about the research, and reassured me of their unwavering belief in my abilities. To my father-in-law and mother-in-law, Stan and Diane, for whose love, reading of my thesis, positive feedback and lengthy discussions of the ideas, I am truly grateful. To my sisters-in-law Shannon Grossi and Marilyn Acton, uncles Robert and Douglas Marsh, Guy and Tillie Pickard, and my beautiful nieces and nephews: Darrell Acton, Matthew, Marissa, and Milanna Grossi for their care and love. Finally, to my family most of all. Their love, generosity, warmth, support and respect for my goals and ambitions have meant everything to me. To my parents Vinicio and Bernice Grossi who made many sacrifices to make this achievement possible. My brother, Dr.Victor Grossi, whose own accomplishments exemplified to me the value of persistence and determination in education. My grandmother Margherita D'Antonio, whose courage I respect, and my grandfather, the late Vittorio D'Antonio. DEDICATION To the study participants, who work tremendously hard to make their of the world more tolerant, accepting, and respectful. To my husband and best friend Tim, whose love for me has no boundaries. 1 CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION We live in a society of great diversity, but how conscious are we of living with what diversity means? The purpose of this chapter is to provide background information on the challenges and opportunities diversity presents; how programs designed under the broad categorization of diversity intend to address these challenges and opportunities; and how diversity issues are discussed within the related scholarly literature. Further, this chapter provides information on why I am personally interested in and committed to researching this area; the specific purpose of the study and research questions; the general approach; the significance of the research; and a summary of how the thesis is organized. Background Organizational contexts are characterized by peoples' different ethnicities, nationalities, religions, socioeconomic status, gender, age, sexual orientation, and physical abilities. Given these diverse backgrounds, an ongoing challenge exists to foster a cooperative and respectful working environment. Many organizations are attempting to create organizational cultures which value and encourage more rather than fewer perspectives. As organizations attempt to deal with diversity in the workplace, the challenges of valuing diversity in workplace and educational contexts need to be better understood. Focusing attention specifically on adult education, there has always been an emphasis on valuing the diverse experiences and perspectives of adult learners. This assumes, however, that there is a recognition, acceptance, and appreciation of the different ways in which people experience or understand their worlds. For a variety of 2 reasons, educators may not always be aware of their limited understandings with respect to learners' diverse backgrounds. One approach to raising awareness may begin when educators engage in an examination of their own prejudices, biases, and beliefs. Educators may spend insufficient time understanding how their perspectives influence decisions made in planning, evaluating and implementing programs for groups of adult learners. Gathering information on the how to of the planning process of programs does not seem as daunting a task as gathering information on how to become aware of one's own complex and unique diversity. While it is assumed in education that there is the need to incorporate the many perspectives of learners and to encourage an inclusive learning environment, there are not many discussions which focus on developing approaches to creating this kind of environment. Diversity programs in general begin to address the challenges and opportunities offered by bringing more information, more points of view, and more ideas together in a meaningful manner. Diversity programs are designed to promote change. The programs are intended to raise people's awareness of the diversity within our society, communities and workplaces; provide new knowledge and information to question commonly held assumptions and beliefs; and educate people with skills to recognize and address the barriers which prevent effective intercultural communications. Diversity training in the workplace begins the process of learning more about one's own set of beliefs and assumptions in order to better understand and appreciate the perspectives of others. Organizational contexts provide a mapping of the issues, the problem areas, and the amount of money, time and commitment willing to be invested in diversity programs. What is not as clearly defined is 3 the complex nature of the journey embarked upon in delivering diversity programs, a journey which, metaphorically, has many bumps along the way. This journey is a process which has to be undertaken together by those involved with teaching the programs; those participating in the programs; and those implementing policies to support the programs. There is much diversity programs can do. The most significant being to help organizations become more open, inclusive and reflective of the larger community. The alternatives (fear of difference, isolation, minimal interaction with co-workers from other backgrounds, and intolerance) are not qualities conducive to a healthy, productive working environment (or to a healthy society). Diversity programs are a beginning process. The programs are only one small piece submerged in a huge organizational milieu of systems fostering hierarchical and linear ways of thinking. These ways of thinking block out what is critical to the fabric of co-existing as individuals who do not fit predetermined categories imposed by society and reinforced by institutions. The diversity of ways of being and acting and relating to each other cannot be categorized in a linear fashion. Programs researched in this study are designed to work together with organizational systems in expanding the narrowness of the system to reflect the multiplicity of peoples' ways of being and knowing. Diversity programs are situated in a paradigm where the change process is rooted "in a restructuring which involves more than changing policy; it means a break with the past and the status quo" (Ghosh, 1996, p. 36). Diversity programs present opportunities for organizations to become involved in the change process and begin breaking with the past. This does not imply that a two-hour workshop will be enough time to resolve the tensions of resistance to recognizing and appreciating differences. It is enough time, however, for people in the workplace to start talking and thinking about the impact of their behavior. Diversity programs in the workplace will not solve huge, systemic societal problems. From a theoretical perspective, appreciating diversity as a positive attribute of our society is difficult to dispute. The practice, however, of valuing and respecting all cultural backgrounds is a different story. Recent news reports on reactions to the Royal Commission's Report on Aboriginal People strongly indicate that the practice of valuing diversity in our society is not happening. C B C radio reported how First Nations people did not anticipate the degree of resistance from mainstream society (CBC Noon News Radio, February 5th 1997). The efforts of the participants involved in this study, with the various diversity programs, offer one way of working towards minimizing (and some day eliminating) resistance to an inclusive society. Inclusivity, as Ghosh (1996) states, emphasizes differences as advantages and does not emphasize differences as disadvantages. The literature addresses how one of the main advantages of diversity programs is that they encourage groups of people to come together and discover that "what they have in common as human beings and as members of a firm supersede differences associated with their genetic and cultural heritage" (Ellis & Sonnenfeld, 1994, p. 89). One limitation of diversity training programs is that participation does not necessarily mean that positive interactions will result. Cynics could argue that diversity programs reinforce stereotyping and have a negative effect and may, in the long run, do more harm than good. More resistance than acceptance of varying perspectives may result. 5 Change is not easy and "significant change requires a certain amount of ambiquity, ambivalence, and uncertainity for the individual about the meaning of the change" (Fullan, 1982, p. 31). Diversity programs in organizations may be seen as a solution to embracing the many diverse identities working in a particular context; the training may, in turn, cause more tension amongst workers. There is agreement in the literature that fostering discussions to increase cultural understanding and tolerance must be done over time, and on successive occasions (Ellis & Sonnenfeld, 1994; Thompson & DiTomaso, 1988; McEachin, V.D. , 1992; Simmons, 1994). The duration, context, purpose, facilitation, mix of participants, and whether the training is compulsory or voluntary will also influence the creation of a cooperative, accepting, and tolerant work environment. These programs are a starting point. Personal Statement As an educator, I have always questionned the degree to which I create a classroom community and am able to connect with the learners. I reflect on the ways in which I am successful in creating a learning environment whereby the experiences of the individual learners are validated. The recent death of Paolo Freire has reinforced the intense belief I share with Freire in his advocacy of teacher as learner. In the many different contexts that I have had the privilege to teach in, I have always maintained that my role as teacher was two-fold: to teach and to learn from the wealth of learners' experiences. I am passionately interested in this area because I acknowledge that greater self-understanding fosters greater acceptance and understanding of others. I look at diversity programs as helping me bridge gaps with increased awareness, information and skills in responding to the diversity of learner populations. One of the critical aspects of 6 diversity training programs is the facilitation processes adopted in creating an inclusive environment. Facilitators of diversity programs are in a unique situation whereby the facilitation of their subject matter places them in positions where they may be perceived as more knowledgeable and aware of their own diverse identities. Researching the kinds of diversity programs I have focused on reinforces that this journey of self-awareness is a continuous process for the workshop participants and facilitators of diversity programs. Purpose and Research Questions The purpose of this study is to describe and critically analyze workplace diversity programs in terms of program design, intentions and implementation. I use the broad categorization of diversity in describing this area of study, but I do so in a cautious manner. The whole notion of what diversity means, and where diversity fits in the workplace, can be overwhelming. Peoples' best intentions of wanting to find out more about what they can do to create an inclusive environment may collide with not knowing how to do this thing called diversity. A descriptive and critical analysis of the program content, program goals, the facilitation of intercultural discussions, the influences of the organizational context, the evaluation of the programs, the intentions of the design, and what facilitates or hinders the intentions and implementation of diversity programs will contribute to expanding the knowledge base in planning for, facilitating, evaluating and implementing diversity programs. A critical analysis of diversity programs may, further, suggest the degree to which diversity programs are used for the purpose of improving the organization's public image versus a long-term commitment to the programs, the culture of the work environment, and the influence of a different set of politics for the 7 study participants who work as internal members of the organization and those who work as outside consultants. The research questions are: One, what are the main program elements of diversity training programs offered in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia? Two, how consistent is the implementation of these programs with the intentions of the designs and with what the literature reveals? Three, what facilitates or hinders the implementation of these programs as intended? The literature suggests that it is not enough to limit the focus on the intentions of the programs, but to extend that focus to what facilitates or hinders the implementation of the programs. What hinders the implementation of the programs, in large part, can be attributed to the organizational paradigm whereby quick, instant results are expected. These expectations are unrealistic and incompatible with the nature of diversity programs. There are no instant solutions to such enoromous issues. It is a developmental process (Fullan, 1982; Madison, 1992). Effective change takes time. Evaluating the long-term impact of diversity programs is an enormous challenge given that the literature exposes how employers are willing to spend money on short-term workshop sessions and not follow-up sessions. Patton (1992) argues that the methods of evaluation should be matched to and appropriate for the program being evaluated and programs whose approach is developmental cannot be evaluated easily. Since attitudes and values change slowly, evaluating the program's effectiveness is not adequate "for examining psychological or behavioral changes in individuals" (Healy, Cooper, & Fygetakis, 1992, p. 69). Diversity programs move into uncharted territory and underscore how traditional approaches of evaluation are both inapproriate and inadequate (Stockdill, 1992). "Formative evaluation typically assumes that ultimate goals are known, and that 8 the issue is how best to reach them. By contrast, developmental evaluation is preformative in the sense that it is part of the process of developing goals and implementation strategies" (Patton, 1992, p. 26). The evaluation and implementation of diversity programs do not take place in a social and political vacuum. Diversity training programs are situated within a particular social, cultural, and political environment. The outcomes of these programs will not only be influenced by the personal backgrounds, experiences, perspectives, and assumptions of each diversity facilitator, but also by the training programs, organizational contexts, participants, program goals, learning environment created in the training programs, transfer of learning back into the work environment, teaching methods, philosophies, and policies of the organizations. Analysis of the main program features, intentions and implementation of the specific workplace training programs provides a glimpse of the enormity and complexity that diversity programs imply. General Approach Qualitative, in-depth interviews with eleven study participants, and two participants for the pilot test interviews, indicate how there is not an easy idenitification with the label of diversity trainer. Rather, the labels identified with more easily include program designer, facilitator, adult educator, teacher and intercultural communication specialist. I will be referring to diversity facilitators instead of diversity trainers throughout the thesis, and to the subjects in the study as study participants. Interviews are conducted to find out the main program elements; the intentions of the program design; and what facilitates or hinders the intentions and implementation of these programs. The majority of the study participants work as external consultants, 9 delivering programs offered in the Lower Mainland of British Columbia in a variety of workplace contexts (educational institutions, non-profit organizations, municipalities, school boards, hospitals, and telecommunications, financial and insurance industries). Their work experience ranges from two to over eleven years. The remaining study participants are internal members of their organizations as senior administrators. The research will show how the programs are not prepackaged to fit all workplace contexts. They are shaped by organizational contexts; type of sectors the organizations represent, whether business, municipal government, health, community or education (public schools, universities and colleges); organizational philosophies and policies governing; level of administrative support; the type of participation (voluntary or mandatory); the mix of participants; and the program duration. Document review of program materials is also gathered for data information. The diversity programs in this study are designed to meet the needs of the clients. The specific needs of the client group obviously differ. The differences vary in terms of clients' needs to broaden their understanding of the strengths that adapting intercultural communication skills will bring to their organization. The intercultural communication, multicultural management and managing diversity literature reinforce that one of the major strengths of doing diversity is that it makes good business sense. Tapping into what diversity offers will give businesses the competitive edge they need to deal with globalization. The specific need of some of the clients is to learn how diversity will increase customer-service productivity. For community organizations, the client group is in search of alternate ways to better reflect the changing needs of community members. Programs are also designed to teach other client groups about policies in the workplace 1 0 detailing harassment issues, human rights issues, and needs of access and equity. Further, some other programs are designed for client groups of educators and practioners whose need is to gain a better understanding of their personal values, assumptions and beliefs, in order to better understand the diversity of cultural backgrounds in their classrooms. Significance of the Research A study of this nature is worthwhile for several reasons. Firstly, to reveal that researching such a highly sensitive, value laden topic is not easy. There are no clear boundaries whereby diversity programs fall neatly into place with other types of educational programs. The programs are embedded in an arena of unpredictablity and uncertainity. There are many fuzzy areas to the processes of planning, evaluating and implementing diversity programs. At the same time, it is this conceptualization of fuzziness which is critical to the message these programs are advocating. The message is that these programs are trying to offer, whether in a two hour, two day or two week session, a place for introspection and reflection. It is for this very reason of what the programs try to do that it becomes a somewhat daunting task to match the intentions of the program design with the variance of participant expectations, attitudes, and needs. Secondly, these programs question peoples' socialization process and challenge what Mezirow (1991) refers to as previous patterns of assumptions; Freire (1970, 1992) describes as investigating people's thinking; Brookfield (1986) claims as reinterpreting past behaviors; Lindeman (1926) states are new patterns emerging; and, what Darder (1991) defines as knowledge (a historical and cultural product forever in a creative state of partiality). The programs are described by some of the study participants as a tiny piece working towards the bigger picture. How this bigger picture begins to unfold is in the 1 1 reinforcement that the issues surrounding diversity are extremely serious and will not go away. Diversity is not a hot topic or a politically correct topic that will fade eventually. The literature on cross-cultural programs supports the notion that the overall purpose of diversity programs is a larger social vision. The programs intend to encourage people to look at issues related to the bigger picture, issues of power, oppression and social injustice; the imbalances in society and how we play a role in that; the need to have people recognize their own personal voice; and, to work towards a world where discrimination is not valued and organizations have the capability of being inclusive. Thirdly, this study will expose some of the ways diversity training programs provide opportunities for people to start thinking about what they can do on a personal level to affect change. It will be argued that the ideal situation for these programs to filter change at every level of the organization is that persons in senior positions, who have the authority to implement change, can begin this change process by examining how their own sets of values, assumptions and adopted mainstream societal views impact on the organization. Fourthly, because there are very few qualitative studies of this nature, there is a need for this research. What struck me is how forthcoming some of the participants were in relaying their trepidation about being involved in a qualitative study, since they have never been asked by academics before to participate in one. Some have participated in quantitative studies, but not in qualitative interviews. It is for the reason of this being a relatively new area to explore that I have experienced, throughout the research process, enthusiasm on the one hand and a high degree of uncertainity on the other hand. I strongly believe that it is this uncertainity that I experienced as a researcher that is so critical to the 12 message these diversity programs are trying to promote. The message is that in order for people to learn from each other and to really listen to one another (not just pretend to listen, or superficially listen, or listen to only hear when the other person stops talking so that one can resume talking) people need to become more comfortable with displacing themselves from roles of experts and adopting the role of learners. In other words, for there to be long-lasting change, I think that the more people adopt the role of learner, the more hope there is that one day studies such as mine will not be needed because a society dominated by voices from the mainstream will be replaced with the mainstream learning from and listening to the voices of those who have traditionally been silenced. What has been at the core of adult education is respect for the individual learner. The significance of this research for the field of adult education is that a study of diversity programs will provide adult education with a broader range of information and perspectives to draw on in critically examining where adult education has been and what direction the field is headed in as we move into the twenty-first century. What needs to be examined and critiqued is how the adult learner is defined. The criticism of adult education, implicitly and explicitly, is that adult education's prevailing beliefs about adult learners have supported racism and sexism: "White male developmental models have been emphasized, and theories of learning that stress individualism, linear thinking, and Anglo European values of self-sufficiency have been generalized to all adults as universal" (Flannery, 1994, p. 17). Others argue that practioners must acknowledge "influencing beliefs, attitudes, and behavior that, in turn, affect teacher-learner interactions" (Colin, S.A.J. & Preciphs, T.K., 1991, p. 62). In order to overcome distorted perceptions of various groups of people individuals need to honestly examine their goals, 1 3 values, and priorities as educators and as people (Hayes, 1994, p. 79). While there is much written and discussed in the field about designing curricula to reflect the learners' needs, broader perceptions of these needs involve moving beyond categorizing adult learners into clusters according to ethnicity, race, sexual orientation, physical abilities, gender and age. For adult education to continue growing and changing, the intentions, implications and motivations of current practices and learning theories need to be continually revisited to meet the changing learner populations in the classrooms. The works of Mezirow (1991), Freire (1970) and Brookfield (1986) have been influential in their explanations of transformative learning, critical reflection, and consciousness raising, but what is missing from these works is a comprehensive understanding of how to gain greater awareness of one's own perspectives and the implications of those perspectives. Lindeman's (1926) work, The Meaning of Adult Education, reinforces the key principle of adult education: "Experience is the adult learner's living textbook" (Lindeman, 1926, p. 7). The influence the field of adult education has had and continues to have in claiming that adult learners are valued and acknowledged for their experience and background is extremely important. Adult educators have opportunities to create learning environments where learners can come to rely on their textbook of life experiences. Lindeman (1926) provided a key principle of adult education, but ways to develop appreciating and valuing the diverse experiences of learners have been missing. Lindeman's (1926) assertion that adult learners' experience is their living textbook implies that the adult educator has to already know how to welcome, value, respect, appreciate, and understand the many different life experience textbooks in their 14 classrooms. This is an enormous challenge for all educators whose attitudinal and behavioral baggage is brought into the learning environment: "Attitudes are wrapped up with a person's feelings, needs and self-concept. To let them go requires a change in self. Attitudes are easy to maintain because persons see what they want and may distort reality so as to find evidence to support any position they want to hold" (Colin, S.A.J. & Preciphs, T.K., 1991, p. 63). Flannery (1994) and Clark (1992) purport that the challenge to adult educators is to find ways to help adult learners make sense of their experiences, but to do this educators must first attend to their own struggles, make meaning of their own experiences, and learn from their own learning processes. Diversity programs and adult education programs can work towards similar objectives: facilitating environments where peoples' backgrounds are acknowledged and appreciated. But adult education practioners, educators, and theorists need to relearn what it means to facilitate an inclusive environment. Adult education according to Flannery (1994) suggests that there have to be alternatives to universality that can provide adult education with inclusive perspectives on adults as learners. Organization of the Thesis Chapter One has provided information on some of the challenges and opportunities diversity presents, and how diversity programs address these challenges and opportunities. As well, Chapter One gave a preview of how diversity issues are discussed in the literature; why I am interested in researching this area; the purpose of the study, research questions, the general approach, and the significance of the research. Chapter Two discusses the literature and conceptual framework which informs the study. Chapter Three describes the methodology and methods used to conduct this study. Chapter Four 1 5 gives a descriptive analysis. Chapter Five provides a critical analysis of the main program elements identified by the study participants, the intentions of their program design and what facilitates or hinders the implementation of the programs. In Chapter Six the summary, conclusions and implications for practice are discussed. 16 CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW To understand how organizations create inclusive workplace environments, a wide range of different literatures related to multiculturalism, cultural awareness, cross- cultural programs and workplace training are studied to understand the rationale behind diversity programs. An extensive review of the reading material resulted in the following specific literatures applied: Diversity management, intercultural training, implementation, adult education, multicultural education and multicultural teaching. The literatures chosen to frame this study reveal how the absence of follow-up programs, corroborate with the minimal degree to which the spirit of diversity programs are embraced. In other words, commitment to the programs need to be on a long-term basis. One way commitment unfolds is through policies supporting program goals. A perusal of the literature indicates that there are fewer materials addressing diversity training programs than those examining the orientation process in cross-cultural programs. The implementation literature supports the assumption that in order for there to be substantive change, training programs need to be incorporated within the fabric of the organizational structure. The resistance of organizations that do not perceive training as an ongoing process may account for the abundance of literature on short-term orientation programs. The remaining literatures offer theoretical and practical ideas which reflect the essence of diversity programs. Diversity programs encourage a wide spectrum of varying perspectives. The intercultural training, adult education, multicultural education, and multicultural teaching literature discusses the influences varying perspectives have in the workplace and the classroom. 17 The chapter concludes with a summary of the literatures and an explanation of the conceptual framework used to guide the analysis of this study. Diversity Management A general theme in this literature is that organizations buy into diversity because it makes good business sense. For that reason, it is worth the employers' efforts to do what they can to encourage diversity programs in the workplace. This literature explores diversity training in the workplace as a response to organizations attempting to create an organizational culture which values and encourages more, rather than fewer, perspectives. There is not as much written from the perspective of Canadian business contexts. As a result, the study relies on training program features described in training sessions predominantly from the American context. There are similarities in the approaches taken by businesses in both the Canadian and American contexts. Both adopt diversity programs to solve workplace conflict problems, use similar program features to characterize diversity programs, design programs with similar intentions of the program design, and have similar facilitations and barriers in program implementation. There are differences, however. These are obvious in that the contexts cannot be generalized because of specific organizational cultures fostered in different work environments. The Canadian business perspective proposes that "by embracing the element of ethnocultural diversity in their workforce, they have enhanced their ability to understand and tap new markets both within Canada and abroad" (Taylor, 1995, p. 1). The American perspective echos this notion of recognizing the competitive advantage to be gained by valuing diversity in the workplace (Thompson & Di Tomaso, 1988; Ellis & Sonnenfeld, 1994). From the context of the United Kingdom, Ross and Schneider (1992) encourage 18 employers to choose change in their organizations and to realize the business advantage of doing so. Adopting this change should not be forced legally, but result from commitment to change at a personal level. For some organizational contexts, encouragement unfolds in a variety of ways. There is what I like to call hands-off encouragment, and hands-on encouragement. Hands-ojf encouragement implies that management supports training, but is not personally involved as a participant in training sessions. Hands-on encouragement is most effective when management is committed at a personal level, and sees the benefits of diversity training as an ongoing process. It is not enough to have what the literature and data reveal as stand alone training. The training programs have a very important role, but they need to be viewed, not in isolation, but as having a dual purpose. The training process is a beginning or orientation, that is, a particular context for people to explore their fears, concerns, confusion, frustrations and hope. Within this context, process support systems need to be in place for participants to continue the learning and to reflect on that to which they have been introduced. Diversity workshops are one part of a multifaceted struggle to get beyond guilt and paralysis and work towards change. Simmons (1994) and Thompson & DiTomaso (1988) assert that the most critical step in bringing about long-lasting organizational change is a reexamination of the organizational cultures. Novogrodsky (1994) describes how it is not enough to encourage tolerant attitudes, but to go beyond that and address the ways in which racist thought becomes so embedded in institutional structure and practice that it is often hard to identify. The values inherent in most organizational contexts are 19 shaped, predominantly, by the attitudes and perceptions of persons in higher level of management. The remainder of this section examines the management of diversity in specific Canadian and American workplace training programs. Canadian organizations discussed in the literature are Petro-Canada and Warner-Lambert Canada Incorporate. These programs are designed and based on the assumption that exposure to the complexity of workforce diversity is better than ignorance of these issues, and meeting the needs of a culturally diverse workforce will foster more innovative, creative decision making, and satisfying work environments. Petro-Canada's vision reflects how the organization's bottom-line success is linked to diversity issues. Taylor (1995) describes how the largest Canadian-owned oil and gas company recognized that making links with the ethnocultural communities they served was the approach to expand the business. Valuing diversity in this company translated into incorporating ethnocultural diversity into marketing and sales strategies by integrating ethnocultural diversity into advertising, developing services targeted at specific ethnocultural markets, and advertising on ethnic/multicultural television and radio stations. The intention of diversity programs in this context is for organizations to become aware of the changing diverse communities. This organization and other Canadian businesses acknowledge what they believe is "the critical link between valuing diversity and responding effectively and efficiently to the needs of an increasingly diverse consumer market" (Taylor, 1995, p. 10). Selling diversity to the business community by showing how many more markets can be tapped into is consistent with how some of the study participants described approaching the corporate mentality whereby the results in 20 productivity are what matters. Taylor (1995) reinforces this by commenting how getting across the message that managing diversity is a business imperative helps overcome barriers. Implementing diversity in organizations takes time and money. While a few Canadian organizations embrace diversity, other business environments divert the necessary time and money away from addressing diversity issues. The main reason is best summarized by the following comment: "There are so many critical issues facing our business in today's global market that the whole concept of managing diversity is unimportant" (Survey respondent qtd. in Taylor, 1995, p. 20). The data is consistent with the notion that organizations have not taken steps towards integrating diversity into their broader organizational picture. This may eventually happen, possibly in five or six years. According to Warner-Lambert Canada Incorporate, their organizational culture welcomes and embraces the value of diversity by focusing on a broader definition of diversity: "Valuing diversity benefits the organization simply by virtue of the fact that our customers are diverse. The more our organization reflects the consumer population, the more in sync it will be with what customers want, need, and are looking for" (James, Diversity Manager qtd. in Taylor, 1995, p. 12). Looking at diversity issues strictly through a business lense is not enough. This diverts attention away from what is really at stake - personal commitment to the programs, polices and practices in place. Diversity issues are not a commodity. People are the focus. This literature review now shifts to American-based programs. The American programs discussed are National Transportation Systems (NTS), General Computer, Inc. (GCI), United Communications Corporation (UCC) and Pacific Gas & Electric (PG & E). 21 The different programs provide a comprehensive examination of diversity programs relevant to program design, intentions and implementation. Ellis & Sonnenfeld (1994) describe how NTS has made participation in its one day Diversity workshop mandatory for all full-time managers and supervisors. GCI has developed a series of programs that enable employees voluntarily to explore race and gender-related topics in an introductory Diversity workshop, and then participate in more in-depth training and cross-cultural interaction throughout their tenure in the organization. UCC primarily uses a series of Valuing Diversity videos to address cultural diversity. A study by Johnson & O'Mara (1992) about Pacific Gas & Electric's (PG&E) training program describes how the company trained 27,000 employees. Their solution was not to hire outside expert consultants, but to train and certify 110 staff employees as diversity trainers. Johnson and O'Mara (1992) argue that internal trainers have a vested interest in the training's outcome because they will interact with the participants again. NTS's organizational context has managers leading the workshops after taking a three-day facilitator training program. The primary benefit, cited in the NTS example, of having managers facilitate is that they share with the participants the common culture of the organization. Manager's unresolved biases and prejudices, and lack of sensitivity in handling the interpersonal dynamics of the group hinder implementation of these workshops. PG&E's trainers go through a six day certification process. It is not clear that by the end of the process PG&E's trainers are better able to confront their own biases than the NTS managers who go through a three-day program. The best intentions of internal training may not produce the kinds of results employers may expect. 22 Diversity programs vary according to the clientele and what kinds of problem areas are identified. The ground a workshop covers depends partly on the needs and situation of the participants and partly on the concerns of the facilitator (Simmons, 1994). The NTS experience cautions against having an inadequate mix of participants in which unrepresented groups may feel like tokens. "The optimal group would have roughly an equal representation of men, women, whites, and people of color, so that no individual would feel isolated" (Ellis & Sonnenfeld, 1994, p. 86). There are differing points of view about participant mix. Louis (1994) suggests that diversity training is designed primarily for white people; Giroux (1992) claims that multicultural discussions often exclude white culture; and Amstutz (1994) stresses that white culture has its own unique characteristics, which needs to be included in discussions of diversity. There is an ongoing debate as to whether mandating participation fosters greater acceptance of diversity training programs. Most of the programs in a Canadian context, are voluntary, whereas most programs in American contexts are mandatory. For example, P G & E trains all 27,000 employees. NTS's approach uses mandatory workshops to demonstrate support from top management. GCI's voluntary participation raises the issue of whether or not the training results in "preaching to the converted, missing the employees who need the training most" (Ellis & Sonnenfeld, 1994, p. 89). Requiring participation in GCI's corporate culture (described as progressive and informal) may generate more resistance than acceptance, thereby resulting in counterproductive diversity programs. The strength of GCI's program is that, similar to NTS's managers facilitating the workshops, GCI's support comes from top management. 23 A study by McEachin (1992) on selected case studies of diversity training programs drew several conclusions regarding the support or lack of it from management. First, training starts with managers, cultural concepts will be disseminated to non- managers and non-supervisors. Second, the study claims that it is easier to train non- managers because managers will support the training. This supports PG&E's training program's assumption that internal employees are capable of becoming certified as diversity trainers. And finally, the training programs should be developed specifically for the company or service agency (McEachin, 1992). PG&E, NTS and GCI's training programs best illustrate the benefits of programs designed especially for their companies. PG&E's program, in contrast, the support comes directly from the internal trainers who are employees and coworkers. The advantage of this situation is that rapport, trust, and a sense of collegiality may be established if it is not already there in the first place. The disadvantage of this kind of support is that because the trainers are very familiar with the organizational culture, policies, and politics it may be difficult for participants to disclose how they feel about diversity issues. To conclude this section of the literature review on managing diversity, there is agreement that diversity programs in the workplace help organizations begin the process of: (1), creating an environment where employees feel they can voice their cultural needs; (2), educating managers in advance; (3), introducing knowledge to substitute for myths and stereotypes among co-workers; (4), fostering understanding and teamwork; (5), fostering respect for employees as individual actors rather than toward treatment of employees as members of groups with easily categorized differences: and (6), fostering positive work relations (Thompson & DiTomaso,1988; Simmons, 1994; McEachin, V.D. , 24 1992; Martin & Ross-Gordon, 1990; Ellis & Sonnenfeld, 1994). The discussion of diversity issues challenges the organization as a social community. Intercultural Training This literature reviews intercultural training as an overall approach to improving effective, creative, multicultural interactions in everyday situations. Intercultural communications training programs are designed for those who need to increase their knowledge and skills for communication across cultures. There are certain assumptions made about intercultural training programs, but it becomes important to not lose sight of the overall picture of the programs. These programs are intended to provide a context for people to develop cross-cultural and intercultural communication skills to apply in knowing oneself better. The ability to shape and influence our environment brings about desired changes and finding harmony with others depends on knowing ourselves and our cultures (Pedersen & D'Andrea, 1988; Daniels & Heck, 1991). Intercultural programs prepare people for increasing amounts of intercultural contact (Brislin & Yoshida, 1994). Given the richly diverse backgrounds characterizing today's society, increasing our understanding of multicultural interactions becomes important, and may also contribute to helping us become conscious of the ways in which we are exclusive rather than inclusive. A clearer perception of one's own multicultural identity is an important beginning in understanding the complex diversities amongst groups of people. Often, it may be easier for members from the majority society to identify and acknowledge the different cultures of minorities than to accept their own cultural identity. The content for intercultural programs can include definitions and types of diversity, examinations of communication skills, and explorations of diverse cultures. Developing intercultural 2 5 communication skills refocuses attention on the need to continue learning from the conversations we have with each other. Intercultural training is a long-term developmental process based on three stages of development (awareness, knowledge, and skill), and a clearer perception of our own multicultural identity surfaces (Pedersen & D'Andrea, 1988; Daniels & Heck, 1991; Brislin & Yoshida, 1994). Brislin & Yoshida (1994) outline specific content areas of intercultural training. The intentions of the self-awareness stage characterized are to move participants from being culturally unaware, to becoming aware of the way their lives have been shaped by the culture into which they were born. This includes learning respect, being sensitive toward diverse cultural backgrounds, being aware of one's own values and biases, and becoming comfortable with differences. Knowledge is categorized as culture-general knowledge which refers to specific theories or themes commonly encountered in cross- cultural interactions, and culture-specific knowledge which refers to customs and rules specific to the various cultures. Culture-general skills include flexibility, tolerance, and openness characterizing accepting perspectives which are different from our own; culture-specific skills include understanding individual differences within all societies. The hope is that greater self-understanding expands peoples' awareness and abilities for future intercultural interactions. The difficulty in quantifying observable attitude and behavioral change is that it is not always possible to determine in what context participants from intercultural workshops apply the specific awareness, knowledge and skills. The following literature addresses some of the influences facilitating or hindering implementation of programs. 26 Implementation Implementation of diversity programs is uncharted territory, and the scarcity of literature exposes some reasons why this might be the case. Diversity programs are designed to have follow-up sessions. It is unrealistic to have two hour programs delivered with no follow-up sessions and believe that this is all that is needed to address the complexity of diversity issues in the workplace context. The implementation literature discusses some of the barriers to follow-up programs, and the prevailing managerial aproaches and attitudes to implementing policy supporting the efforts of the diversity programs. Ross and Schneider (1992) describe how implementation is in the hands of those persons who fear they might have the most to lose. Persons at the top of hierarchical structures, in power positions to implement policies and to support the resources, time, money and committment for diversity programs, are often side-tracked by the pressure to see quick changes and results. Despite the best intentions of one time diversity programs, this is not enough to bring about long-term results. Ottoson's (1995, p. 26) assertion that application requires more than a good idea, appropriately summarizes the gap in diversity programs between the initial delivery and absence of follow-up sessions. Diversity programs promote many good ideas; contentious ideas such as change. Implementing the change process requires messy work: Application means getting one's hands dirty, it means having the heart to persevere in the face of obstacles, it means having the touch to apply with sensitivity, it means having the guts to make tough choices, and it means 27 having one's feet firmly grounded in practical reality. (Ottoson, 1995, p. 25) Fullan (1982) argues that change is a frustrating, discouraging business and the implementation of change itself creates more uncertainity, and uncharted territory. "Too much of policy analysis, implementation studies, and descriptions of the policy process is shaped by the assumption that all human action is literal and instrumentally rational" (Yanow, 1996, p. 8). There is much discussion in the literature about the benefits of diversity training programs in the workplace, from a business point of view. Not enough attention is paid, however, to understanding the meanings of policies, values, feelings and beliefs which are expressed in the policies and the meanings attached by audiences. It is not enough for organizations to have policies in place with the assumption that there will be a universal interpretation of the policies: "Once an implementor interprets a policy and acts on that interpretation, a reader of that interpretation is no longer dealing with the original policy. Subsequent readers engage a policy different, sometimes subtly, from one initially legislated" (Yanow, 1996, p. 231). This view proposed clashes with the traditional, linear model of policy process. The biggest barrier to change in this area is that employers have interpreted equal opportunity and affirmative action as something which has been imposed on them at the expense of us (Ross & Schneider, 1992; Mills, 1994; Bergmann, 1996). Moving from the intentions of program design to implementation of the programs requires that organizations work as a team with diversity facilitators. The intentions of the persons designing the programs may not always reflect the intentions of the organizational contexts. The contexts themselves may create 28 insurmountable barriers which are difficult to break down no matter how cooperatively diversity facilitators might design programs to meet the needs of the specific clientele. Given these constraints, efforts made by the trainers and employers to bridge the gaps between varied expectations need to be acknowledged as moving forward with diversity issues. Recreating organizational environments where not knowing and relearning are constructed as positive ways to move ahead with these issues. That may very well be a naive and unrealistic assumption of what needs to happen for there to be change, but I believe that the shift in peoples' thinking (particularly people in power positions) about diversity issues cannot happen in what Yanow (1996) describes as a machine-linear model. There has been very little movement and the literature reflects this lack of momentum in achieving change. For substantive change to occur training needs to be incorporated as an on-going process, with follow-up evaluations playing a pivotal role. At a theoretical and philosophical level, the spirit of these programs is not embraced. Adult education's critical role in the field, now, is to complement the change process diversity programs promote. Adult Education A review of the adult education literature on diversity education and training programs suggests that five types of cultural diversity programs are currently being implemented: assimilation/acculturation, cultural awareness, multicultural, ethno-centrist, and anti-racism (Martin, 1994, pp. 255-258). Martin recognizes that cultural diversity education and training programs are seen as a solution in organizations experiencing ethnicity-related problems. A summary of Martin's five cultural diversity programs 29 follows. Assimilation/Acculturation programs are designed to improve academic performance and promotion of minorities within the regular curriculum. Cultural Awareness programs are designed to promote feelings of unity, tolerance, and acceptance within the existing social structure. Multicultural programs encourage respect for the uniqueness of each individual and attempt to increase individuals' consciousness and appreciation of differences. Ethno-centrism programs promote social action; examine past and present discrimination; and, recognize targeted ethnic groups. Anti-Racism programs promote social justice via perspective transformation and socio-structural change to eliminate oppression of one group by another. Martin (1990) reviews four program types that address organizational problems created by a culturally diverse work force. The program types are as follows. Type one programs target managers and indirectly address issues related to cultural diversity. Type two programs target all employees and indirectly facilitate the resolution of problems related to cultural diversity. Type three programs provide workshops for managers to sensitize them to work-related cultural perspectives. Type four programs provide workshops for employees to address organizational concerns that originate with cultural diversity. Hemphill (1992) suggests that the planning of cultural diversity programs in adult education may be based on three distinct points of view: the Deficit/Assimilation, Multicultural, and the Empowerment/Anti-Bias Perspectives. The Deficit/Assimilation view assumes that problems in cultural diversity can be solved by fixing the others. Hemphill (1992) claims that this kind of program assumes that these others need to be trained and changed so they can assimilate into the dominant culture. In contrast, 30 supporters of Multicultural programs believe that all cultures should be valued equally, and that increased understanding among the cultures will resolve problems of inequality. Further, Empowerment/Anti-Bias programs suggest that increased understanding across cultural boundaries is not enough: "They identify discriminatory phenomena such as racism and cultural domination and seek to design educational processes that will take direct action to combat them" (Hemphill, 1992, p. 10). Martin's (1990 & 1994) and Hemphill's (1992) program types offer interesting contrasting assumptions on which the programs are based. Cultural differences challenge managers to change how they view their employees. According to Piturro & Mahoney (1992), valuing diversity in the workplace is changing to resemble Hemphill's (1992) Multicultural program. Programs are designed with the intention of assimilating the others into the dominant culture, or increasing understanding of the many cultures, or taking action to dig deeper into racism embedded within the organizational structures. The literature also identifies advantages and disadvantages of formal diversity programs in adult education. Amstutz (1994) claims that the main advantage of formal diversity workshops is that they stimulate awareness, which must be raised if behavior is to be changed. Disadvantages include the workshop topic appearing to be superficial to the primary goal of the institution, learners not viewing the programs as an integral part of what instructors do, and adult educators assuming that knowledge of student diversity is not relevant to their particular program area (Amstutz, 1994, p. 46). Labeling, generalizing, and making assumptions about certain groups of learners neatly fitting into predetermined categories seriously limits their ability to define their 31 own place in the educational world, without conforming to prepatterned categories constructed by others. An important reoccurring theme in adult education is that the experiences and perspectives of learners become valued and incorporated. As organizations attempt to deal with how to value diversity in the workplace, adult education needs to continually find ways to include more voices and shared perspectives. Including more voices in the discourse is challenging. Meeting that challenge requires an increased understanding of one's own diverse identity. Mezirow's (1991), Freire's (1970) and Brookfield's theories of adult education have been important in defining the areas of critical consciousness, perspective transformation and learner transformation through awareness and critical reflection. Unless one becomes critically reflective of their own subject positions, it is not likely that one will be able to understand what Mezirow (1991) warns against (namely, taking for granted social norms and cultural codes which distribute power and privilege). Freire (1970) does not accept the idea that one can simply transmit knowledge. Instead, knowledge is co-created and should result in change of its structures. In practice, as educators who significantly shape and influence the perceptions of many groups of people, it becomes important to be honest and critique our abilities to connect with the varied experiences in diverse teaching and learning situations. It is my view that to begin the process of connecting with learners, one has to engage in a reflective dialogue with oneself, first, and ask in what ways is the teaching making spaces for as many perspectives as possible to be included? Further, understanding our limitations as educators is a significant contribution in helping us connect with our learners. The perspective the individual educator brings to the teaching situation is one 32 perspective and is limited in understanding the individual diverse perspectives of each learner. Moriarity and Wallerstein (1980) claim that Freire's method stands out as one of the few teaching strategies developed for use with adults, because in this method all participants are peers. Freire's work rejects traditional education which proposes a closed system; instead he proposes an alternate approach, "an open system, amenable to change" (Vella, 1995, p. 4). What is critical in the teaching and learning processes is that there are a multitude of diverse perspectives continually shaping and re-shaping the program content. Vella (1994) describes how listening to learners' wants and needs helps to shape a program that has immediate usefulness to adults. What can be linked from diversity programs to educational settings is that persons in privileged positions such as teachers, educators, and facilitators need to continually question what they bring to the teaching moment in terms of their world views and perspectives. Adoption of the attitude that the person in the front of a classroom is sharing one of many stories to be told replaces the authoritarian teacher/student relationship with what Freire (1970) refers to as the dialogical relationship. This is a relationship where dialogue cannot occur unless the interaction between teachers and students is based on equality. This is not to deny the realities that there are definite power issues and hierarchical tensions in the classroom. The goal, however, is for teachers and students to work together in creating an environment where many opportunities are provided for the group to learn with each other, as opposed to the learners looking to that one individual teacher for the right perspective. 33 The literature suggests that cultural diversity programs are designed to promote feelings of tolerance, unity and acceptance. Diversity programs are a positive force in society. Selman and Dampier (1991) describe how adult education programs are a vehicle for contributing to a better society. Likewise, diversity programs move in the same direction of contributing to a better society. A greater understanding of how a group of diversity facilitators, dealing with very sensitive issues and potentially explosive topics, facilitate their workshop sessions may suggest ways to expand present instructional strategies. Multicultural Education The multicultural education literature reveals many debates and differing points of view attached to multiculturalism. The literature distinquishes between conservative, liberal, radical and a redefined concept of multicultural education. Ghosh's (1996) work describes how multi-cultures means anything that is not white, to conservatives. A liberal version stresses the equality of all races by ignoring differences. A radical definition of multiculturalism claims respect for cultural differences in values, behaviors, ways of learning, and sociological practices. Further, a redefined concept of multicultural education is one that allows for full development of the potential and critical abilities of all regardless of their differences. Multicultural education challenges traditional education whose views reflect dominant world views. If the concept of multiculturalism is to become useful as a pedagogical concept, "educators must redefine it outside a sectarian traditionalism rejecting any form of multiculturalism in which differences are registered and equally affirmed, but at the expense of understanding how such differences both emerge and are 34 related to networks and hierarchies of power, privilege, and domination" (Giroux, 1992, p. 7). Freire (1970) argues that knowledge is co-created and should result in change of its structures. Darder (1991) concurs with Freire's influential theories of critical pedagogy which recognize that no pedagogy is neutral. Ghosh (1996) suggests that pedagogy must be developed around identity, meaning and the politics of difference which implies the social and historical construction of difference. In a pedagogy of cultural politics, the emphasis is on: Developing a discourse which is attentive to the histories, dreams, and experiences that students bring to the schools and give students the opportunity to not only understand more critically who they are as part of a wider social formation, but also to help them critically appropriate those forms of knowledge that traditionally have been denied to them. (Giroux, 1985, pp.39-40) If multicultural education is to play a significantly larger role in fostering environments where differences are respected and not merely tolerated, program design and teaching need "to reflect the experiences and intellectual viewpoints of those who have been historically left out" (Ghosh, 1996, p. 36). A redefined multicultural education also questions authority in the classroom. The educator's knowledge is open for question, examination, critique and, "as a consequence, all forms of discourse represent only one small piece of the larger puzzle that constitutes all possible knowledge at any given moment in time" (Darder, 1991, p. 110). It may be difficult for educators to shift paradigms, stepping back from their role of experts and becoming a learner with the students. It might be equally difficult for students to shift paradigms and think of their 35 teachers as co-learners. Bridging the gaps in these paradigm shifts involves rethinking assumptions about the classroom setting, hooks (1994) offers that entering the classroom with the assumption of building community creates a climate of openness and a sense there is shared commitment to recognize the value of each individual voice. In summary, the literature on multicultural education explores theoretical ways to transform the classroom settings to reflect inclusive learning experiences. Multicultural teaching transposes theory into plans of action by placing the emphasis on individual accountability. Multicultural Teaching The emphasis in multicultural education is on the reliance of a diversity of teaching approaches to better meet learner needs. This literature suggests approaches educators and learners may draw on to support the diversity of perspectives learners bring to the classroom.There is a strong assertion made by authors that to begin understanding our learners, we must begin the process of self-awareness: "Unless we, as educators, understand our own culturally mediated values and biases, we may be misguided in believing that we are encouraging divergent points of view and providing meaningful opportunities for learning to occur when we are, in fact, repackaging or disguising past dogmas" (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 10). Flannery (1994) expresses how we need to begin this process of gaining awareness of our assumptions, perceptions, and biases before attempting to undertand the multitude of learners' perspectives. Gonzalez (1994) notes that, for diversity to be woven into the full fabric of the institution, a starting point for this process is for educators to accept students as individuals. Understanding and valuing diversity acknowledges that people are 36 individuals with unique and complex identities.Taking individual responsibility to overcome distorted perceptions of various groups of people "involves an honest examination of one's goals, values, and priorities as an educator and as a person" (Hayes, 1994, p. 79). Understanding our limitations as educators is a significant contribution in helping us connect with our learners. Critical questionning might reveal in what ways the teaching is making spaces for as many perspectives as possible to be included. Flannery (1994, p. 23) proposes the following questions: Have I allowed differences to exist, accepting them as a valid part of reality rather than trying to place them in competition with each other? Did I include contrary experiences and ways of thinking? Have I had people with different experiences and values review my ideas for bias and limitations? How do I work through feelings of being threatened when opposing viewpoints challenge me? And, finally, do I have what it takes to hear what is said, or do I use reason to dismiss the feedback I receive? Shifting the focus from what Giroux (1992) identifies as the study of others, to the study of individual perspectives may be easier said than done. The option is always there to avoid confronting one's own biases and predjudices and, instead, carry on teaching from a narrow perspective. The alternative also presents itself. Entering the classroom requires that alternative ways of thinking be adopted about our roles as educators. In so doing, supporting one another in this journey is paramount. Given the constraints on both the educators' and learners' time, energy, and resources building communities in our classrooms may not be a priority. Unfortunately, what fails to happen when this conclusion is reached is that not enough time is spent thinking about where our 37 energies have been diverted and we are not any closer to teaching comfortably and competently the diversity of learner populations in our classes. In summary, the time is long overdue to reprioritize, and take responsibility: "as educators, who exert a powerful influence over classroom norms, we ought to make explicit those values that are most often implicit and that profoundly affect all learners" (Wlodkowski & Ginsberg, 1995, p. 11). To teach is to question. To teach is to take risks. To teach is to admit our limitations. Summary of the Literature Review The manager's task is no longer to treat all employees the same and mold them to a monolithic corporate culture; rather it is to see them as individuals (Piturro & Mahoney, 1992). The uncomfortableness that may arise as a result of confronting sensitive issues is difficult to manage. The recommendation from the managing diversity literature is that employees be respected as individuals and not categorized as members of particular ethnic groups. The different training programs described suggest that support from upper management is critical for valuing diversity in the workplace and creating a supportive work environment. The political educators would argue that a workshop is not a substitute for commitment to change. Employers argue that increased understanding of workplace diversity is better than ignorance of these issues. Intercultural communications literature supports that change begins at the personal level. Learning about what we have in common and becoming comfortable with differences are critical in beginning this process of greater awareness and understanding of one's own multicultural identity. The literature suggests that intercultural training programs' intentions are for people to increase understanding of diverse perspectives. Organizations are hesitant about 38 embracing the spirit inherent in intercultural programs, yet recognize that these programs offer solutions in addressing multicultural issues. Information on the influences facilitating or hindering the implementation of diversity, intercultural communication, or cross-cultural programs is not as accessible in the literature as is the information about the specific program goals, content, facilitation techniques, and evaluation methods applied. The literature reinforces how employers want tangible results. On evaluation questionnaires employers, for the most part, are not concerned with what happens after the workshop is over. They want to know the immediate, short-term benefits. Organizations are unwilling to commit to long-term follow-ups. A marriage of the intentions of diversity programs and adult education works. What they have in common is their commitment to social change. The field of adult education emphasizes the uniqueness of the adult learner's experience and how educational programs need to accomodate the multiplicity of perspectives present in the classroom situation. A noticeable gap in the adult education literature, however, is that while much is written about teaching and learning theories, the practice of connecting with the community of learners is not made explicit. To hear the voices assumes that educators are prepared to listen and know how to listen to the diverse perspectives in their classrooms. Multicultural education theories espouse that education needs to reflect the experiences of individuals whose voices have been silenced. The literature suggests that educators are not prepared. Multicultural teaching offers practical approaches on how to put diversity thinking into action. To move from theorizing about confronting diversity in 39 the classroom to doing something about it requires individual action. Such action begins with self-awareness and acceptance of people as individuals. Conceptual Framework Conceptual frameworks are used to link research questions and the literature. Merriam (1995) states how a framework anchors a particular orientation and makes it explicit. Miles and Huberman (1994) concur and add that the conceptual framework specifies what will be studied, and what relationships will be explored. The framework applied in this study describes the relationships between the different levels of program design, intentions and implementation (see Figure 1). This framework is an adaptation of Marshall and Rossman's (1995) conceptual funnel which shows three levels of focus for analysis. These three levels are held together by five program elements. 40 Figure 1 Conceptual Framework: Program Elements Linking Design, Intentions, and Implementation of Diversity Programs 41 At every level there are five constant program elements (evaluation, facilitation, context, goals, and content). The tubular rods connect the elements permeating through the design, intentions and implementation levels. The middle portion (intentions) illustrates the link between program design and implementation. The design of the program is shaped both by upward influences of program design and downward influences of implementation. Figure 1 illustrates the conceptual framework. The research questions correlate to different levels of the framework: The first question is relevant to program design, the second to intentions, and the third to implementation. The three levels of the framework (program design, intentions, and implementation) show the five main program elements from the literature; each is summarized as follows. First, context includes where the programs are delivered, who attends (the entire organization from support staff to senior management, or only senior management, or only front line workers), where the trainer fits within the organizational structure (for example, is the trainer external to the organization as a consultant or internal as an employee of the organization), the duration of the programs, and the type of participation (whether the programs are voluntary or mandatory). Second, content refers to the program materials of diversity programs designed to meet specific client needs. Third, program goals refer to the short-term and long-term workshop goals. Fourth, facilitation implies teaching techniques employed by the workshop diversity facilitators. Fifth, evaluation signals methods used to evaluate workshop sessions, follow-up sessions, and who cares about the results of the evaluation. The first level, program design, focuses on the design of the program. The second 42 level, intentions, looks at the intentions of the programs, and draws in the diversity facilitators' backgrounds. The third level, implementation, refers to a critical analysis of what facilitates or hinders the intentions and implementation of diversity programs. Chapter Two has surveyed a number of different literatures which maintain organizations attempt to create inclusive workplace environments, while educators reflect on learner experiences and histories. Chapter Three is research methodology. CHAPTER THREE RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Chapter Three presents a discussion of the research design, relevance of personal experience, selection of study participants, data gathering strategies, pilot test, data analysis, criteria of soundness and limitations of the study. Research Design To understand program design, intentions, and implementation, a qualitative research design was used. Such design frames the study participants' perspectives through what McMillan and Schmacher (1989) describe as interactive and non-interactive techniques. Interactive techniques refer to one-on-one, in-depth interviews as the main source of data. Non-interactive techniques used in this study include a review of document materials as an additional source of data. Merriam and Simpson (1995) claim that descriptive research is one of the most commonly used methodologies in adult education and training. Drawing on descriptive research is particularly appropriate for this study whose purpose is to provide a rich account of the study participants' lived experiences and reflections on their practice of designing, facilitating, implementing and evaluating diversity programs. Descriptive research searches for deeper understanding and constructs reality as a multi-layered, interactive, and shared social experience (McMillan & Schmacher, 1989; Marshall and Rossman,1995). From the onset, the position taken about this research is that the phenomena studied is highly complex. The literature and the data strongly support this assertion; therefore, the research design is oriented to reflect a humanistic approach to data gathering and analysis of information shared by eleven individuals working in a highly 44 contentious and controversial field of study. Given the sensitive nature of this study, the qualitative approaches and strategies implemented are embedded within a larger frame of reference which attempts to represent data gathering and analysis in a respectful and trustworthy fashion. The section on criteria of soundness will illuminate the details of conducting research in an arena of mutual respect and trust. This research is grounded in the assumption that discussions and research about diversity require paradigm shifts from a conventional paradigm planted in a realist ontology, to a relativist ontology which asserts that there exists multiple, socially constructed realities (Guba & Lincoln, 1989). Stanfield and Dennis (1993) argue that research does not exist in a vacuum and that the practice of research activity reflects the values of society. It requires that we see ourselves situated in the action of our research. Further, emotion and the engagement of self contribute to guiding research and social action. A descriptive and critical analysis of the program design, intentions and implementation of diversity programs compliments the research process, by proposing alternate ways of thinking about imposed institutional and societal barriers. Relevance of Personal Experience Why am I (a white, second generation, Italian-Canadian, heterosexual, able- bodied female member of mainstream society) interested in diversity training researched from a qualitative perspective? Qualitative research appealed to me because of the reciprocity of learning and sharing from each other underlying the qualitative paradigm. I entered the research journey as a researcher and learner. Aware of the academic requirement to present my own analysis and interpretation, there was no formal collobration with the study participants on the analysis. It became that much more critical, 45 therefore, that my role be two-fold: first, as researcher gathering information about diversity programs, and second, as learner listening respectfully to the challenges facing persons teaching diversity programs. I needed to situate myself in the context of the interviews and share my reasons for engaging in this study. First Nations' Classes. My interest in diversity training stems from my participation in two First Nations' classes. In one class, I was the only non-First Nations' member; in the second, the majority were non-First Nations' students. These classes led me to question and reflect on my experiences. I questioned why, in a university context of approximately 30,000 students, there were not more students from the majority culture enrolled in the first First Nations' class. I also questioned why, in the second class, the students from the majority culture resisted the teachings of the First Nations instructor. My participation in the First Nations' classes helped me become aware of some of the assumptions, beliefs and values I have adopted, as a member of the dominant culture. The classes provided the opportunity for me to begin unpacking some of those assumptions. I began to question, and continue to question, what my experiences in the First Nations classes mean in terms of my teaching practices, my role as a learner, researcher and member of society. The classes provided a context for me to confront and challenge my sense of self. I participated in a process where, in the first First Nations' class, we began uncovering our commonalties and our differences, and learning about each other as individual members of that class. If we view the classroom as a microcosm of society, what unfolded in the second First Nations' class mirrored the institutional and societal resistance occurring outside the classroom. My observations and recollections of that particular class bring me to the conclusions that fear of change was, in part, a large 46 motivation for the resistance. Diversity may be welcomed in a programmatic fashion, but not in a holistic sense. Holistically, diversity needs to be approached with the heart and intellect. The intellect feeds into the program needs. Until there is such an acceptance of diversity programs that they will no longer be needed, the work of the heart lags desperately behind. My First Nations' classes challenged my traditional expectations of the classroom. I expected to meet a predetermined set of objectives. Instead, the format of the classes encouraged a collaborative process, where each student identified why they took the class, and what they hoped to gain from participating in it. The instructor wove our individual responses into topics (such as residential schools, racism, research methodology, Elders, and First Nations' languages) for discussion throughout the eight month course. Some may argue that creating an educational environment where all participants are peers may be more difficult in formal institutional settings than in community learning centers or sharing circles. Contrary to the usual experience in university classes but following the tradition of sharing circles, the instructors participated as peers in the classes. Every class member had an equal voice in deciding what direction the course would take. The members of the classes generated ongoing dialogue resulting in an inclusion of a multiplicity of voices for purposes of reaching a better understanding of our cultural selves. The collaborative process of community building and connection was more evident in the first First Nations' class. An outcome for me was that I formed positive relationships which will have a lasting impact. 47 As a minority participant, my cultural identity was both valued and integrated into the class discussions. I worked toward an awareness and understanding of my cultural identity and an appreciation of First Nations' people. I learned to value my individual herstory, trust my own ideas, listen to one another's perspectives, and respect each other. This experience, where my learner involvement was maximized, was one of the greatest learning outcomes. Unfortunately, the second class represented the negative impact of resistance. Some of the learning outcomes reinforced in that class were narrow- mindedness, intolerance, insecurity, confusion and fear. My experiences in the First Nations' classes have driven me to research contexts in which people are given similar opportunities to gain greater self-awareness. My family relationships have also helped me make sense of why I have become involved in researching diversity programs. Immigrant Daughter. Shaping influences involve growing up with illiterate parents. As a second generation, immigrant daughter of Italian parents, the influence of authority has been defined differently for me. I observed how my parents relied on English speaking neighbours, teachers and store clerks as the authority persons for coping in mainstream society. There are many examples I recall, but will draw on a few very briefly such as trips to the bank where my parents needed the customer service people to fill out forms and inform them of the details of what they were doing. Paying by cheque for groceries at the supermarket meant that my parents trusted the people behind the desk to fill out the cheque for them. Luckily, they always managed to find trustworthy people. To this day, I always wondered if any of the store clerks were tempted to make the cheques payable to their name and take off from work to catch the next flight to Hawaii. I remember how my 48 friends in school had reoccuring panic attacks when showing their parents their report cards. When my teachers handed me my report card, I was responsible for interpreting what the letters and comments meant for my parents. I was tempted to explain that my F in mathematics stood for fantastic work and not a failure. Of course, I could not do that, and besides, my older brother would have been upset after he explained that his A's meant outstanding work! On the one hand, I have been grateful to my parents whose experiences placed them in learner positions. This has significantly influenced how I displace notions of authority or expert by placing myself in a learner position. In my teaching, this has been a beneficial situation. On the other hand, in graduate school, my learner role has not been advantageous. At some point I am expected to have a voice in what I believe about the research study and with some degree of authority. A reoccuring theme in my teaching evaluations indicate that the classroom environment I create is one in which students feel encouraged to share their points of view. I feel that the feedback from the students reflects my facilitative approaches which begin by acknowledging my limitations. The shaping experiences from my personal background and my First Nations' classes have reinforced the need for me to continually question my own set of values, in order to better connect with the the diversity of perspectives in and outside of my classrooms. Selection of Study Participants I relied on the expertise and experience of two diversity trainers I met as a result of attending their workshops for selecting study participants. These trainers were key informants. Their workshops helped me become more familiar with the diversity training programs including the terminology used, reasons why people attend, the voluntary nature 49 of these particular workshops, and trainer backgrounds. These trainers provided me with list of names of other diversity consultants who might be interested in becoming involved with this study. From this pool of names, I sent letters inviting the consultants to consider potential participation in the study. The following criteria proposed by Kirby & McKenna (1989) were used to identify study participants: two to five years work experience; willingness to share experiences; identity as a cultural diversity trainer; a variety of experiences; and, comfortable in sharing the information. That is how I started. This approach is described by Patton (1990) as purposeful sampling. The specific strategy for purposefully selecting my study participants relied on snowball sampling for locating information-rich informants. Originally, I sent out sixteen letters. Three additional study participants were suggested by those who could not participate in the study.Out of this group of nineteen, eleven agreed to participate in this study. From the group of nineteen names, there were eight male trainers on the list (from which 4/8 responded) and eleven female trainers (from which 7/11 responded). In chapters four and five characteristics of the study participants will be discussed. Now, attention is turned to data gathering strategies. Gathering Data The formal ways I gathered data include a pilot-test, in-depth interviews and document review of program materials. Informal ways data was gathered involved my participation in relevant diversity workshops, conferences, study group sessions and topic related masters and doctoral defenses. Discussion follows of why qualitative interviews 50 worked, and how I conducted them. I also explain what was included as document material reviewed. Later on, there is a more in-depth discussion of document analysis. Why Qualitative Interviews? The strength of qualitative interviewing is that one gathers rich, meaningful information which brings out the activities and experiences of the participants (May, 1993; Robson, 1993; Patton, 1990; Slim & Thomson, 1993). On the other hand, the weakness in gathering this kind of information is that there also needs to be a discipline of steering the discussion from one area of focus to another in a somewhat sequential and systematic fashion. The strength of the information gathered reflects a rich resource of trainers' perspectives and thoughts about their training programs on a personal and organizational level. The weakness of the data is that there are places in the transcripts where I could have tightened the discussion more by probing for elaboration or clarification. Slim and Thomson (1993) discuss the importance of prompting and probing with short questions to encourage expansion further in one direction. Despite the scarcity of interview probes, a descriptive research design describes what is, according to Simpson and Merriam (1995). The interviews, therefore, are a reflection of what is important and meaningful to the trainers. Even in parts of the interview where the questions are not directly answered, the participants jump in and redirect the conversation in a direction that is meaningful to them: "It is the interactive nature of the interview that allows us to ask for clarification, to notice what questions the subject formulates, to go beyond the conventional, expected answers to the personal construction of the participants' experiences" (Anderson & Jack, 1991, p. 23). Patton (1990) argues that qualitative in-depth interviewing methods are highly personal and 51 interpersonal. This specific interview approach opens up what is inside people. My understanding of self as a research tool influenced the interactive nature of the interviews. The strengths I brought to the interview situations were my abilities to connect with the participants, to listen very carefully and meaningfully to what they were saying, and to frame the questions in such a manner that the participants felt encouraged to respond in a detailed and comprehensive manner. It was important to me that the interview process became a reciprocal learning situation, and that a trusting, and comfortable environment was created. How Were Interviews Conducted? An interview guide and interview questions (see appendices 3 and 7) were applied during the course of the interviews. The interview guide was prepared to "make sure that basically the same information is obtained from a number of people by covering the same material" (Patton, 1990, p. 283) and to correspond with the program features, design, and implementation components of the conceptual framework. Prior to data collection, a few graduate students were asked the interview questions in order for myself to become more comfortable with the interviewing stages of the research. The interviews were one to one and a half hours long, and they were conducted over a six month period. Each person was interviewed individually. A l l interviews were tape recorded. I was responsible for conducting and transcribing all interviews. The study participants received a written draft of the transcriptions to verify interview content. Arrangements to meet individually to clarify problem areas with the transcription were made, and each study participant was encouraged to bring forth further questions and comments throughout the duration of the research study. 52 At the conclusion of the study, each participant will be sent a summary of the findings and conclusions. Hopefully, through this study the participants will have gained more insight into their own, as well as other participants' approaches to diversity programs. Document Review The document review includes handouts, questions on worksheets (if applicable) asked in large and small group discussions, notation of videotapes and films used (if any), readings, evaluation forms, and other related relevant program material. Discussion follows of how the data was managed, the gravity of confidentiality issues, how the pilot test was conducted, and the transcribing process. Managing Data I adopted the following strategies from Kirby & McKenna (1989) to organize the volumes of data gathered, and to help facilitate analysis of the large amount of data later on in the research process. The files were labelled as: identity, tape, document, transcript, process, and the analysis files. The identity file contained information identifying the study participants. A list of participants, their names and their coded identities were kept in this file. The tape file contains the tape recordings made. The tapes were coded by number rather than name. The coding sheet was also in this file to match the names of the people with their codes. The document file contained original document materials from the trainers materials, while the transcript file contained copies of original data (i.e., transcripts). The process file contained the interview guide, schedules, changes to either, and the pilot test. Comments and reflections on data gathering (how it was organized and handled, what needed to change) were gathered in this file. Finally, the analysis files 53 contained multiple bits of information, ideas and notes grouped together. Similar bits of information and information with identical coding were placed in a single file folder. I have also kept two files (on my computer) labeled methodology diary and feelings diary. In the methodology section of the diary, I recorded the following information: How am I gathering the data? Where am I putting the data gathered? Why am I doing the data gathering the way I am? What are the pitfalls of the data gathered? In the feelings section of the diary I reflect on the following questions: How was I feeling during the interviews? Did anything unusual happen before, during or after the interview? Was I distracted? What influence did my interactive interview style have? What influence did my own set of values/biases have during the interviews? What influence did the gender, age, and cultural backgrounds of the participants have on the way I approached the interviews? Confidentiality In preparing for the interview phase of the research, I was told by some of the diversity consultants who were not participating in the study that confidentiality was a serious concern. They were reluctant to reveal the contents of their programs. They did not want to give away what they were doing. Despite assurances that strict measures are taken in this study to protect their identity, it was not enough for them. There was skepticism in that some described how they had never been approached by academics doing this kind of research and were not sure, therefore, of what they were getting themselves into. They went on to explain how they have participated in quantitative studies filling out questionnaires, but not in any in-depth, qualitative interviews about 54 their programs. The reasons provided for not participating were very useful and reinforced the delicate nature of the area I was studying. It is important to note that for those who did participate there was reluctance, for some, in sharing program materials because of the sensitive nature of the materials. There was legitimate concern that there might be a giving away of what was being done in specific programs. Confidentiality was indeed a serious issue, despite my assurances of strict adherence to not revealing specific workplace contexts. Pilot Test Having had little experience interviewing a group of diversity consultants, pilot testing the interview questions helped prepare me for the interviews. I was able to test my interview skills. How was I coming across, for example? Were the questions too long? Were the questions appropriate? Was I actively listening to the responses or was I too busy worrying about moving on to the next question? Did I involve myself too much or not enough during the interview? What did the interviews feel like? What was my rapport with the participants? Was I able to create a comfortable environment for the participants to share their thoughts about their training programs? Was there trust established? I discovered that pilot testing the interview questions helped humanize the process. The pilot test highlighted how the ordering of the questions did not necessarily work, and how the wording of the questions did not always match the interactive, conversational style approach that was taken in conducting the interviews. The strength of conducting qualitative in-depth interviews is that the questions are designed to serve more as a guide than a predetermined, structured pattern of questions. It was anticipated, as was evident with the pilot test, that each participant shaped and influenced the questions 55 differently. To account for this variation, the questions were revisited after each interview. Please see the contact summary form in Appendix E. The process of pilot testing the interview questions proved to be a valuable experience. It was important to experience the degree of comfort felt using the necessary equipment (tape recorder and dictaphone machine) and to gain confidence in asking the interview questions. The two participants for the pilot test reflected similar work backgrounds as the participants for the study. There was one female trainer of Canadian- Indian origin and one male European-Canadian trainer. The first pilot test that was conducted was less conversational and the emphasis was on asking as many of the interview questions as possible. A review of the transcripts shows that in the first pilot test more questions were asked compared to the second pilot test. This was due, in part, to nerves, confusion and less of a comfort level with participant A than with participant B . By the second interview, there was also a greater familiarity with the questions. Through the pilot testing process, I was also able to test my analysis strategies. I picked out several reoccuring themes and patterns from the transcripts which helped build my confidence, and demonstrate an initial approach to analyzing the data (Marshall & Rossman, 1995). Transcribing Process A review of the transcripts indicates many examples of very long passages of participants' responses. Anderson and Jack (1991) suggest that actively listening to interviews without leaping to interpretations requires immersing ourselves in the interview, and trying to understand the person's story from their vantage point. Further, another way of listening which allows hearing the voices of the study participants instead of my own preconceptions was to attend to the participant's meta-statements: "These are 56 places in the interviews where participants spontaneously stop, and comment about their own thoughts or something just said" (Anderson and Jack, 1991, p. 23). I was responsible for transcribing each interview, which required approximately ninety hours of work. The transcripts range from seven to eighteen single spaced pages of print. During that ninety hours I was able to actively listen to the way in which the questions were answered and record verbatim data. Notation of nonverbal communication with initial insights and comments to enhance meaning in subsequent data analysis were made (McMillan & Schumacher, 1989). Anderson and Jack (1991) suggest that the shift in focus from data gathering to interactive process affects what the researcher regards as valuable information, and that those aspects of the interviews such as the pauses and the laughter invite us to explore their meanings. The pauses between questions, for example, became apparent when transcribing the pilot interviews. What was the relevancy of those pauses? I noted that when the participants were asked direct questions about their experiences there were longer pauses before answering the questions, whereas, when I brought my own experience into the question, the participant answered almost immediately and in some instances jumped in before I finished asking the question. In transcribing each interview, I was able to relisten and reexperience the interview. As I transcribed, I underlined key passages which stood out for me immediately. I also made note of the areas in which the participants took a long time to answer a question. I indicated this by placing a star notation (*) at the beginning of that sentence. I made note of the pauses, the hesitations, the laughter, the coughing, and every um, ugh, and yeah on the tape. I also made a point of illustrating with italic print where I 57 was engaging in sharing with participants some of my experiences. The interview questions were in bold print and the experiential pieces in italic print. Conforming to the original research design, I sent a copy of each transcript to the study participants asking them to review the transcript for content accuracy. I transcribed the two pilot-test interviews, but only sent transcripts out to participants of the study. Out of the eleven transcripts sent, six participants responded with comments. One participant called and left a message on my answering machine thanking me for sending the materials. A second participant I spoke with also thanked me for the material and indicated that in this person's opinion this is real research. A third participant enclosed a note with documents sent, thanking me for the transcript. A fourth participant pointed out two places on the transcript where I had typed in R on the transcript (showing I was speaking) instead of the participant responding to my question. A fifth participant called to thank me for the opportunity to think about some of the questions I raised, and if given the opportunity to answer the interview questions today, the answers might have been different because of the time to reflect. Finally, a sixth participant called noting some editorial changes. I found the transcribing process a very worthwhile experience. Discussion of data analysis, interview analysis, document analysis, criteria of soundness, and limitations of the study follow. Data Analysis Qualitative analysis operates from an inductive research paradigm recognized for providing a richness of contextual descriptions and understanding of the phenomenon investigated (McMillan & Schumacher, 1989; Simpson & Merriam, 1995). Qualitative 58 analysis done in constant interaction with the data formally identifies themes suggested by the data. A thematic analysis approach to the data has brought order to a messy, time- consuming, complicated and fascinating process (Tesch, 1990; Dey, 1993; Marshall & Rossman, 1995). Patton's (1990) themes of qualitative inquiry have been adopted in analyzing the data. This inquiry relies on an inductive content analysis, detailed thick description, in-depth inquiry, direct quotations, researcher's personal experiences, assumptions and perspectives, and attention to process. Within educational research, qualitative research has had a distinctive role in emphasizing paradigm shifts of hegemonic discourses. Interpretative hegemonic discourses, which rely on many interpretations displace dominant, positivist discourses which propose one interpretation (Lather, 1991). The literature on qualitative research stresses that what we bring to the analysis of data are our biases, assumptions, and patterns of thinking. Stanfield and Dennis (1993) offer that adherence to conventional methodology assumes the passivity of respondents and encourages the respondents to conform to the situation already defined by the interviewer. Moreover, this method discourages researchers from sharing their own beliefs and values which is "counter to that required for white scholars to produce more inclusive and less partial and distorted accounts of race, class, and gender relations" (Stanfield & Dennis, 1993, p. 47). Lincoln and Guba (1989) assert that a relativist ontology acknowledges that there exist multiple, socially constructed realities. This reaffirms how a subjectivist epistemology is the path this research study takes in its knowledge construction. "Qualitative data will tend to make the most sense to people who are comfortable with the idea of generating multiple perspectives rather than absolute truth" (Patton, i 59 1990, p. 83). Silverman's (1993) interactionism and humanistic approaches to interviews compliment the ways in which I conducted the interviews: For interactionists, the social context of the interview is intrinsic to understanding any data that are obtained. While positivists aim for a clear- cut distinction between research interviews and other forms of social interaction, interactionists argue that that aim is unobtainable. In this humanistic version of the interviews, both the type of knowledge gained and the validity of the analysis are based on . . . meaningful understanding of the person and wholeness in human inquiry. (Silverman, 1993, p. 95) Stanfield and Dennis (1993) support Silverman's claim by asserting that building more inclusive ways of seeing requires taking multiple views and abandoning the idea that there is a singular reality that social science can discover. Miles and Huberman's (1994) early steps in analysis were adopted by first implementing the "contact summary sheet" (see Appendix E). The summary sheet summarized and focused questions which were used to guide planning for subsequent interviews and organize the analysis stage by sorting through the main concepts, themes, issues, research questions, variables in the initial framework which were most central, and new speculations or hunches suggested. Secondly, Miles & Huberman (1994) propose that coding is analysis, and that codes are tags or labels assigning units of meaning to descriptive information. A start list was created prior to data collection which came from the conceptual framework and research questions. To avoid confusion, frustration, and fatigue, coding was done at the completion of each interview and before entering into the next interview situation. 60 The flexibility of a qualitative research design allowed for the start list of codes to change as I delved into the analysis (see Appendix F). Coding the transcripts was done in a variety of creative ways. Miles and Huberman (1984) distinquish between first and second level coding. First level coding attaches labels to groups of words. Second level coding groups the codes into themes or patterns. Inductive analysis, according to Patton (1990), assumes that the patterns, themes, and categories emerge out of the data rather than being imposed on them prior to data collection and analysis. Adherence to the boundaries of inductive analysis were challenged in that prior to data collection an extensive review of the literature and preliminary conceptual framework influenced how I viewed the data. Given this, however, it was anticipated that the analysis would challenge the framework itself and the literature review on which it was based. Interview Analysis Analysis of the interview material consisted of arranging categories according to the main pieces of the conceptual framework, looking for what was common and what was uncommon within categories and between categories, and determining if the categories reflected similar relationships suggested by the framework. The conceptual framework, an illustration of the clusters of categories, reoccuring patterns and themes, informed the analysis phase of the study (Marshall & Rossman, 1995; Kirby & McKenna, 1989; Strauss & Corbin, 1990; Miles & Huberman, 1994; and Merriam & Simpson, 1995). The technical process of what I did with the data involved highlighting key phrases and passages which corresponded to the framework categories. The transcripts show markings with a number of different colored pens; some of the multi-colored transcripts were shared with my research supervisor to help me as I slowly began to 61 synthesize ideas from the research questions, literature, conceptual framework, with my own possible hues of interpretations. The rationale behind the different colored pens was as follows. The red markings indicated the original codes I applied from the conceptual framework. The blue markings indicated new categories that came out of the data. The purple markings began to decipher the main themes from the interviews. Finally, the green markings indicated my interpretations or what I labelled Rita's thoughts. The red and blue markings were made with the understanding that that was where the descriptive story was unfolding. The descriptive story represented what the trainers were saying, whereas the purple and green markings represented the move towards the critical analysis of the transcript. How, for example, was the story from the interview unfolding analytically? Strauss & Corbin (1990) influenced my color coding schema by proposing grouping categories, and generating themes according to descriptive and analytical storylines. Two analytic procedures were implemented: "The first pertains to the making of comparisons, the other to the asking of questions" (Strauss & Corbin, 1990, p. 62). The specific approach to the analysis describes looking at each transcript as an entire document and asking: What seems to be going on here? What makes this document the same or different from the previous one that I coded? The use of questioning, and the analysis of single words, phrases and sentences were used as ways to begin moving from the descriptive and into the critical analysis of the data. Tesch (1990) discusses how data analysis refers to a process of formally identifying themes suggested by the data, and the research questions. Themes reflected over and over again in the data resulted in three groups of categories: Program design, intentions and implementation. 62 General questions raised about the data were as follows. Who teaches the programs? What is the duration of these programs? What is the context where these programs are embedded within? Where, specifically, are these programs delivered? Why are there diversity programs? How are these programs facilitated? What are the intentions of the program design? How are these programs evaluated? How much is done in terms of follow-up evaluations? What facilitates implementation of these programs? What hinders implementation of diversity programs? By continually questioning the data and reflecting on the conceptual framework, I engaged the ideas and the data. Chunks of meaning were identified which related to the research foci and purpose (Marshall & Rossman, 1995, p. 114). The use of interviews as the primary data collection method details practioners' descriptions of their program design, intentions and implementation of diversity programs. The in-depth interviews with eleven study participants allows for triangulation of findings across sources and tests issues of reliability and validity (Marshall & Rossman, p. 46, 1995). Document Analysis Content analysis is also applied in reviewing document program materials. Pattern's (1990) content analysis is the process of identifying, coding, and categorizing the primary patterns in the data. Marshall and Rossman (1995) and Robson (1993) refer to this documentary analysis, commmonly referred to as content analysis, as an indirect, unobtrusive research technique making valid inferences from data to their context. This context is described as including the purpose of the document as well as the institutional, social and cultural aspects. 63 The conceptual lenses I used to review documents were specific program goals, content, evaluation and program design contextualizing the workplace environments I was studying. I chose these conceptual lenses because they reflected relevant program material. Criteria of Soundness The discovery of multiple perspectives is guided by Patton's (1990) techniques for enhancing the quality of qualitative analysis; Marshall and Rossman's (1995) criteria of goodness for qualitative research; and Simpson and Merriam's (1995) issues of validity and reliability as important considerations for the findings of the study to be believed and trusted. Patton (1990) suggests that validity and confidence in the findings can be addressed by triangulating data sources. In this study, the data sources involved a pilot-test interviewing two participants, in-depth interviews with eleven more study participants, transcriptions of the interview material, transcripts sent back to each study participant, document review, and finally, ethical issues and matters of confidentiality were handled by informed consent. "In-depth interviews with multiple informants at each site will also allow us to triangulate findings across sources and test issues of reliability and validity" (Marshall & Rossman, 1995, p. 46). Patton (1990) and Marshall and Rossman (1995) also raise the issue of the credibility of the researcher. The authors claim that because the researcher is the instrument in qualitative inquiry, qualitative analysis extrapolates information about the researcher's personal and professional background. There is a section devoted in the methodology to how I believe my personal experience is relevant to this study. I spent a fair amount of time disclosing how I came to study this area, and what influences were 64 particularly significant in sustaining my interest and commitment in this research. I bring my professional role as an educator in University and Colleges to the research. Teaching Adult Basic Education classes, English as a Second Language classes, Program Planning for Adults classes, and my work in the Human Resources Department as a trainer for newly hired employees of a major department store in Canada have prepared me for this kind of inquiry. This study must respond to criteria against which the trustworthiness of the research can be evaluated. Marshall and Rossman (1995) have adopted Lincoln and Guba's (1989) four constructs that reflect the assumptions of qualitative inquiry. The first construct is credibility. The goal is to ensure that the study participants were accurately identified and described. For this study, key informants with many years of experience as diversity consultants in the field identified other consultants who reflect similar experience and work background. My links with a community of practitioners who teach diversity related topics have reinforced the relevancy of the participants identified for this study. The study's approach to data collection and analysis has been described in detail. The parameters of the study have been defined by the conceptual framework guiding the research. The second construct of qualitative inquiry is transferability. This study's transferability or generalizability to other settings is problematic because of the variation in the work contexts, employer expectations, and who attends the programs. Given the parameters of the conceptual framework, data collection and data analysis, people teaching in this area "within those same parameters can determine whether or not the 65 cases described can be generalized and transferred to other settings" (Marshall & Rossman, 1995, p. 144). The third construct is dependability. Positivist notions of reliability where inquiry could logically be replicated is in sharp contrast with qualitative/interpretative assumptions where the concept of replication is problematic. Marshall and Rossman (1995) point out that it is problematic because of the changing nature of the social world constructed in qualitative inquiry compared to the unchanging world assumed in positivist inquiry. Attempts to account for changes in the research design are created by an increasingly refined understanding of the specific workplace contexts. The flexibility of the research design inherent in qualitative research contributes to the dependability of the study. Finally, the fourth construct is confirmability. This stresses whether the findings of the study can be confirmed by another. What is involved if another wants to reanalyze the data include: Understanding that qualitative studies by their nature cannot be replicated because the real world changes; Keeping thorough notes and a researcher's diary, which records each research design decision and allows others to inspect the procedures used; Also keeping all data in a well-organized, retrievable form, another researcher can reanalyze the data (Marshall & Rossman, 1995); and, paying careful attention to data collection strategies recorded in my research log. Specifically, I discussed how the massive amount of data was organized, managed, and labelled. Further, a disciplined set of diary notes were recorded and described as methodology notes and feelings or personal reflections notes which would facilitate others to draw on 66 the methods I employed to show data was collected, how categories were derived, and how decisions were made in this research study. Simpson and Merriam (1995) sugggest that in addition to triangulation of sources, peer examination ensures consistency. My work has been reviewed at progressive stages by a committee of peers who are practioners in this field of study and graduate students grappling with similar theoretical constructs. Confidentiality was protected. Study groups organized and chaired by my research supervisor have allowed for in-depth discussions of every stage of the research process. Each regular monthly meeting time, which lasts approximately two to three hours, provides opportunity for the group to examine my data and comment on the emerging findings. Simpson and Merriam (1995) also underscore that external validity or the extent to which findings can be generalized to other situations reflects situation-specific conditions in a particular context. Finally, internal validity or reliability strategies involve thick description, multi-sites, and modal comparison. Multi-sites become relevant to the variation of workplace sites described in this study. Few of the study participants interviewed are anchored in one workplace setting due to the consultative nature of their work. Modal comparison describes how typical the program is compared to other programs described. The parameters identified by the conceptual framework suggest that there are commonalities in the program features described. Limitations of the Study The limitations to this study include, first and foremost, that I am researching an area defined as diversity while benefitting from the privileges of being a member of 67 mainstream society. My experiences in the First Nations classes and my personal background of growing up as an immigrant daughter describe how I situate myself in the study and what has driven me to engage in this area. Accepting my learner role as an advantage has had positive implications for the research. I struggled with questions such as, why am I researching this? and, what am I giving back as a result of the research! The questions themselves represent limitations. The First Nations' classes and being an immigrant daughter influenced my approach to the interviews. There is an obvious tension in qualitative research which sets it apart from quantitative work, tension related to the degree personal perspectives and biases are made transparent. I worried that I would be giving away too much if I disclosed why I was interested in doing this research. I concluded that I had an ethical and moral obligation to be up front and honest. As I reflect on the interview process, I realized that the interviews were opportuntities for people to not only share their program expertise, but their humanness. What this research will give back is a confirmation that qualitative work connects us as people. A connectedness through shared experiences. Other limitations will occur at the end of this study when I re-enter society with spoken and unspoken privileges. The enormously challenging work of bringing people together in the workplace around difficult emotional issues is left still to the persons interviewed in this study. My participation in the world of academia limits my understanding of the practice world of study participants. I am limited in a thorough understanding of the specific workplace culture of their organizational contexts. Additionally, the focus of the study is on diversity trainers describing their training programs, and not on the participants of the programs. Participants of the 68 diversity programs might provide descriptions of the implications of these programs once the programs end and the learning from the programs is brought back to the workplace. In-depth interviews with the trainers provided much information but there were limits to how much information can be gathered with only one scheduled interview session. Follow-up interviews over a longer period of time will be recommended for future research. Furthermore, diversity trainers were not observed while conducting their training sessions. Study participants were asked to consider involvement in a research study where few researchers have gone to discover information. Participants who refused participation in this study did so primarily over concerns of confidentiality. They were worried that they might have revealed trade secrets. More research in the practice of diversity programs may reduce some of the trepediation and concerns while keeping strict adherence to the protection of confidentiality. Longitudinal studies where a combination of different groups of people in the organizations are interviewed like administrators, for example, may provide insight into the barriers the data reveals in implementing follow-up diversity programs. This study does describe the perspectives represented of two senior administrators in non-profit organizations. Finally, an entire dissertation study can be devoted solely to the many definitions and perceptions of what is implied by the term diversity. This chapter has presented the appropriateness of using qualitative interviews, and document review. The research design included discussion about the relevance of my personal experience; the selection of study participants; data gathering; data analysis; and limitations to the study. Chapter Four will provide a descriptive analysis of the information gathered. 70 CHAPTER FOUR DESCRIPTIVE ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY PROGRAMS This chapter presents a descriptive analysis of elements identified in the conceptual framework including program design, intentions and implementation. Each element of the framework will be discussed separately. The identified sections of the framework will draw on interview and document review materials. In the previous chapter, it was explained that the document review is applied to the following sections: program design, program goals, program content, and evaluation. The discussion is organized in the following manner. First, there will be a general introduction to the framework. Second, descriptions from interviews and document material is included for program design, intentions and implementation. Third, descriptions of the context, goals, content, facilitation, and evaluation are presented. Please note, the "SP followed by a number" refers to the identification of the study participants. The number corresponds to the number assigned on the transcripts. General Introduction The three major sections of the framework are the program design, intentions and implementation. Each of these major sections influence one another, and are influenced by the planning tools organizing the programs. For example, the design of the program is influenced by the intentions of senior persons in organizational contexts and the degree to which they will implement diversity program goals, content, facilitation approaches and evaluations. The data as well as the literature revealed five constant chunks or variables organizing diversity programs. The programs are organized according to the context 71 diversity programs are delivered in; program goals stemming from consultations with employer expectations and those of the study participants; program content; facilitation approaches; and, evaluations of the programs. Program Design Programs are designed to address specific workplace policies in regards to the organizations' commitment to equity and diversity. The workshops are designed to meet the specific needs of the participants. For the senior administrators, or more specifically the executive directors interviewed, their primary role has been described as bringing back information from training sessions and applying it in their workplaces. The study participants agreed that central to the workshop design is an interactive format, encouraging participants to discuss specific issues from their workplace environments. There are formal and informal ways in which the participants design their programs. Formal design strategies include designing the program within an organizational framework: "I've been into organizations and said, don't spend your money on training because you've got no framework. Develop a policy, develop a context so people understand what your training is related to" (SP 6). Another describes how the design has to match the organization and the expectation of the learners: "We always consult with the organization and we develop the design in consultation with the organization" (SP 2). A majority of the participants expressed how much homework is done prior to the training sessions. The following quotation summarizes a consistent theme of being aware of the workplace context: "95% of the time we'll meet with people or talk with them and get some sort of first hand examples of what is going on" (SP 5). 72 Finally, one other participant compares the intentions of the design to watching a mini series on television: Is that mini series designed to change the world? No, it's not. Is it designed to hold people's attention while the series is on? Yes, it is. Is it designed to bring about some change? Sure it is but it's going to vary from individual to individual. (SP 11) Informal design strategies evoked the following responses. "It is not possible to predict what might trigger certain reactions in people" (SP 7). Another comments, "design is a flexible model always fluid in its ability to adapt and accomodate the clientele present in the diversity programs" (SP 3). Still another described, "the strategy I have is to get people to start talking, for me to listen and then develop it from there" (SP 4). One more participant describes, "when we work with this kind of stuff from a workplace context we can say how would you interpret this? What is going on here? What are some of the things that we need to ask?" (SP 5). The following are excerpts from various documents describing program design (To protect confidentiality, program materials cannot be specifically referenced): Working with the organization to isolate some of the concerns and issues, programs are designed to bring about change in the workplace and community organizations by drawing on the experiential knowledge of the participants; applying an employee-centered approach to understanding diversity in the workplace; analyzing what it means to value diversity; looking at ways to make the workplace a friendlier, more respectful, and 73 accepting environment; and training individuals in non-profit community based organizations to become multicultural, multilingual volunteers. The design section has provided a number of examples supporting formal and informal ways in which the study participants design their programs. Discussion of the intentions of influencing factors shaping diversity programs follows. Study Participants' Intentions and Characteristics Acknowledging study participants' characteristics is critical in a thorough understanding of influences shaping the intentions of diversity programs. This section includes first, descriptions of the study participants' cultural and educational backgrounds. Second, their personal motivations for becoming involved in their work. Third, program descriptions of the intentions of diversity programs. The participants have undergraduate and graduate degrees in Health Sciences, Social Sciences, Law, Social Work, Adult Education, English and French as second languages, Language Pedagogy, Counselling Psychology, Sociology, and/or Liberal Studies. The study participants identified themselves as belonging to the following ethnic or cultural groups: Chinese-Spanish-Canadian; Chinese-Canadian; White European- English, member of the dominant culture; Jewish South-African-Canadian; European- Canadian; Mixed European; Jewish West-Indian-Canadian; and/or, English-Irish. Study participants' motivation for doing this kind of work is rooted in their beliefs that change is possible: " I strongly believe in the possibility of a really positive impact from this" (SP 3). "You have to feel committed in order to make any change" (SP 11). "The rewards outweigh the disadvantages or we wouldn't keep on doing it" (SP 9). 7 4 Participants offered the following personal reflections as motivating influences in their work: I get a lot from this work. It gives me a lot personally. It allows me to contribute in a way that is important to me which is to try and make this environment we live in a better place. It always encourages me to see the people who continue against enormous odds. (SP 6) Another adds, There are all sorts of ways in which we connect. We work together, we learn together but there is very little chance for people actually to sit down and talk as whole human beings. Who they are as members of families and citizens in communities. I don't think you can move forward with a lot of these other ideas unless you actually have people getting to know each other. (SP 8) One other participant stated that "Peoples' reactions to me solely on the basis of how I looked were really shaping for me and contribute a lot to my motivation continuing this work and the hope that goes with that" (SP 3). One participant comments on the subtle racism prevalent in Vancouver after having been away from it for some time. The racism observed "featured the use of humor, over compensation, excusing, very gentle but very persuasive" (SP 1). In fields such as social work, there was a questioning attitude about which groups of children were represented in the workload and which ones were not: "Where were the kids from the other cultural backgrounds other than Native kids?" (SP 2). 75 Another participant spoke about motivation dervived from observations and comments workshop participants make: The best part is working with people and seeing when somebody has said 'I've just had this insight.' Those are good moments. Those are really great moments when people start to do the questioning, or answering the questions for themselves. (SP 5) A related comment was, "It really triggered people's interests and got them involved because it was challenging" (SP 7). Yet, another study participant stated, We have people who will not admit to themselves or others that they have biases of any kind. When they go through the training they find themselves seriously questioning how they approached their human relations, their personal relations. And, so that person is coming from a place of just not being aware at all that there were any issues to a place of awareness. (SP 10) Further to the issue of motivation, one participant discusses the significance of past experiences with teachers: Think of the teachers that inspired you. I think of the people that believed that you could learn. Think of the people who really had patience, who really got the group motivated. Think of these people as models. (SP 4) Program Intentions Given the confidential nature of the research and proprietary concerns about program content and practice, data is lacking on specifics of program components. 76 Therefore, it is difficult to provide a clear picture of what a diversity program might look like. The character of these programs is such that they are always changing depending on the context, and the specific needs of those participating in the workshops. The interview data suggests a clearer understanding of the process involved. The intentions of the program are shaped by what some of the participants describe as training having a dual purpose. One is the immediate workplace setting. Two, the bigger picture is the impact of the training on society. On a scale from least to most ambitious intentions, the range varies from raising awareness in the workplace, to making a difference in society. The participants commented that there is a plan in place in delivering the programs, but that the variation in these kinds of training programs is dependent on specific factors such as the length of the program and the context in which these programs are delivered. The intentions of the program are to provide us with the skills to enable us to deal more effectively with diversity. One participant suggests, "that because we are often not equipped to deal with diversity, this does not mean that only bad people are required to attend diversity training programs" (SP 6). Others noted that the programs will not make a difference unless individuals search for themselves, and recognize that there are areas of personal development they need to spend the time working on. "There are not many opportunities for people to talk as whole human beings" (SP 8). The intentions of the programs, woven through the following remarks, "are to provide the context for people to get to know each other, learn from one another and connect with each other" (SP 8). Some participants describe how the intention of their programs is to design and promote it in such a way that "this is how you can do better for your business" (SP 3). Another comments, "We start with the business rationale, we move to understanding our customers to communicating across language differences" (SP 10). The intentions of other programs are anchored in "developing scenarios of critical incidents that relate to their workplace for the learning tools that we use" (SP 9). One participant suggests that the intentions of the program are influenced by the belief that "you can make some change and that you're moving towards some greater good and you're helping society move in this way" (SP 1). Still another describes that "we start with a point of carrying all these seeds of racism and sexism and many of the isms" (SP 2). Further, one study participant talks about "looking for congruency between our personal development and the policy" (SP 3). In summary, program intentions include providing a set of skills to better work with diversity issues, having people recognize their individual roles in the diversity arena, creating an environment for people to connect as a community, promoting diversity to justify the business rationale, and giving people learning tools to help them transfer what they learned in the workshop back in the workplace. Implementation This section on implementation raises what participants describe as shaping factors either facilitating or hindering implementation of follow-up diversity programs. Given that the workshop sessions are relatively short in duration, the biggest barrier to more diversity programs in the workplace is commitment. Some participants expressed how they struggle with feelings that if organizations are more committed they will give more time for the training programs. At the same time, the trainers recognize that the 78 organization, in its own way, is doing what it can within a training framework. The barriers are identified as "needing to change structures, policies, curriculum, everyday moments and training is one piece" (SP 8). The same participant comments: The difficulty with this training is it's not the kind of cookbook stuff. You can't just have this recipe and this is how people will respond. It's not that simple because you're dealing with people's basic attitudes, and values. (SP 8) Many of the participants describe that the hierarchical nature of organizations hinders future implementation of diversity programs: "What you get is a tendency for managers to dominate the conversation and line staff who don't feel empowered or esteemed anyway would then not speak because the manager is there" (SP 9). The bottom line the participants describe is what drives organization: "If organizations cannot see the results, they do not want to invest more money and time into future diversity programs" (SP 3). Another adds, "Employers have to see the benefit to the organization or they won't support it because they are not in that position to implement some sort of ideological agenda" (SP 11). The lack of leadership from senior management and those in the power positions hinders the efforts of the programs. One participant summarizes the sentiment by expressing that the employer who views it as, "oh, that multiculturalism thing, that employer is much less supportive than the employer that says, this is not that multiculturalism thing that operates separate from the organization" (SP 10). In general, a dominant theme was that the facilitation of these programs is dependant, in part, on strong support systems. The participants describe the need for support systems in place from co-trainers, and those in the power positions of 79 organizations. One participant expresses, "I think support systems become essential. If you're going to be effective you have to have an effective support system" (SP 6). Some participants described how what facilitates implementation of the programs is to have the whole organization involved. One participant sums it up best: People in corporations they want to do one group and leave another group out. You can't do that unless you have inclusion of all the folks in the corporation. It has to be everyone from the janitors to the senior management. A l l these folks at the same table. (SP 4) Implementation of diversity programs are highly contentious. The data and the literature suggest that the leadership of senior management facilitates or hinders the continuation of the programs. Attention is now turned to the five elements organizing the planning process of diversity programs. Context The parameters of the context are decribed in the following terms: (1) study participants' perceptions of their roles as diversity trainers; (2) the workplace contexts in which their programs are delivered; (3) program duration; (4) the voluntary or mandatory nature of programs; (5) the study participants' role as internal or external member to the organization; (6) program participants. The study participants were asked if they idenitified themselves as diversity trainers. The responses illuminate the fact that this is a difficult area to define and the term, for the most part, is used in a general way. One participant best summarizes the confusion surrounding the term diversity: "On the one hand, it's such a new term. On the 80 other hand, it's such a jargonish term filled with a lot of vague notions" (SP 2). Participants said they did not necessarily identify with being labelled as cultural diversity trainers. Instead, they identify with descriptors such as consultants in the area of organizational change, training and development consultants, program designers, intercultural communications specialists, teachers, facilitators, adult educators, feminist adult educators, executive directors in non-profit organizations and trainers. The majority work as consultants who deliver training programs in a number of different organizational contexts, such as educational institutions, non-profit organizations, municipalities, school boards, hospitals, telecommunications, the financial industry and the insurance industry. Some work with private sector organizations, and others with public sector organizations. Those who identify as executive directors have participated in series of training programs and apply the new awareness, knowledge, and skills back in their organizations. One director said the training programs "made me realize there was some work to do. I want to be able to offer community-based service that mirrors the needs of my community" (SP 1). Their formal responsibilities include hiring and supervising the staff who teach multicultural programs in their organization, building policies, offering opportunities for training, and encouraging employees to participate in training sessions. The length of the programs vary. Workshop sessions consist of two hours, half- day, one day, two day, and three day sessions. Some programs do two week periods of observation followed by one day and two day workshop sessions, and a distance learning component equivalent to 30 course hours following the workshop. The most common 81 form of training is described as one day, two day, and three day but there is contract work which requires longer periods of training. The contracts dictate the timeline: I would get contracts where you might be given a couple of days. So it's very short-term, very succinct and the other projects where you're working for three, four, five and six months. You're meeting with people on an ongoing basis. (SP 6) Most of the time the training programs are not mandatory. The organization offers the programs and the employees can attend if they choose. Participants discussed how they sometimes do mandatory training, but that is not always a preference for them. They do not like the implications around mandatory training. One participant describes how it becomes important, then, to look at the organizational culture and look at the employer's motivation around that training: Mandatory training means spending lots of energy dealing with that initial hurdle. The most beneficial groups are the groups who come in willingly. They may not know what exactly the training is about but at least they are predisposed to wanting to attend the program. (SP 9) The study participants generally agree with the idea that if you start with groups of people who want to be there, then that group can take back the message to their co- workers and there is value in supporting those people who can be change agents. The study participants who hold administrative positions are internal members of the organization. The remaining participants are, for the most part, external employees of the organization. Work contexts, for the most part, are contract driven and project based. 82 Who attends the programs also varies according to the workplace context. There are those who the participants describe as having more responsibilities towards the organization like supervisors, senior management, managers, and CEOs "who have gone through extensive learning and training themselves and have come to a place of commitment to move the organization in that direction" SP 1. Finally, there is also training with line employees, faculty members, teaching assistants, business groups from different countries, community groups, and volunteer members from the community. Content The content is defined as having two components: an education component and a training component. The education part involves information sharing and increasing knowledge. The training portion is described as practicing skills, techniques and developing strategies to apply back in the work environment. The content is specific and tailored to meet the needs of the clients. A summation of the interview themes reveals that the program content focuses on harassment issues, human rights issues, needs of access and equity, examination of personal values and how that relates to one's community, workplace, home and society, valuing diversity, intercultural communication, increasing awareness, resolving conflict at the workplace, institutional and personal biases, reviewing policies, procedures and practices, and teaching effectively across cultures. Document material describes the following as related content: Self-assessment, cross-cultural questionnaires used to provide participants with a starting point to begin thinking about one's own culture and background; Reading materials examined to discuss communication barriers, assumptions, communicating across languages and cultures, and changing understandings of adults as learners. Workshop topics, also from the document materials define the following: Workplace diversity; cross cultural awareness; cross cultural communication skills; culturally responsive customer service; volunteerism, dealing with racism at the workplace; building bridges; valuing diversity; personal and organizational change; community outreach; biases, assumptions and stereotyping; intercultural communication skills; culture-general communication skills; context- specific communication skills, harassment and human rights issues. There is a wide spectrum of content in diversity programs. Program goals reflect the specificity of topics taught at the different workplace settings. Program Goals Goals of the various programs described in the document materials include: (1) community-based service; (2) developing a context in which people can situate themselves historically and philosophically; (3) gaining a broader understanding of the strengths and value that the diversity of backgrounds can bring to an organization; (4) developing intercultural communication skills; (5) developing awareness and ability to analyze our actions and the impact of our behavior; (6) identifying one's cultural values; (7) increasing awareness of the miscommunication which results when imposing one's own set of values to interpret another's behavior; (8) reducing the fear of working with people you have never worked with 84 before; (9) creating an environment where people feel honored and respected for the differences in their backgrounds; (10) helping organizations become more open and inclusive and reflective of the larger community; (11) gaining new knowledge and practicing skills in working with customers from diverse backgrounds; (12) developing strategies for resolving conflict at the workplace; describing and clarifying our personal framework; (13) becoming aware of how our personal framework impacts on the workplace; acknowledging oneself and others as cultural beings; (14) communicating effectively in a global economy; and, (15) developing strategies and solutions for working in multicultural classes. The enormity of program goals challenge facilitation approaches and techniques. Facilitation Modeling the behavior they expect from their participants of their programs is an important beginning in facilitating the workshops. Interview themes suggest that study participants plan a combination of experiential activities, case studies, simulation games, critical incidents, small and large group discussions, videos, inventories, true-false questions, and role-playing in their programs. A common example of a simulation game used by many of the study participants is barnga. I was provided with a description of the game by one of the study participants. B A R N G A is a simulation game. It places people in a situation where they experience the shock of realizing that in spite of many similarities, people from other cultures have differences in the way they do things. Players 85 learn that they must understand and reconcile these differences if they want to function effectively in a cross-cultural group. (SP 9) Handouts include glossary of diversity and employment equity terms; framework for cross cultural understanding; definitions of culture; values clarification; communication barriers; and unpacking assumptions. Most of the study participants teach in team situations and model a diversity of perspectives in front of the classroom. The following were described as important elements in facilitating discussions from the interview themes: Create an environment for debate (SP 6); create an environment where people understand that at any point they can withdraw from participating (SP 10); facilitate with the expectation that there will be a continuum of attitudes present (SP 2); define ground rules to guide discussions (SP 3); provide opportunities for small and large group discussions (SP 5); engage the workshop participants in experiential activities (SP 9); encourage workshop participants to recognize personal voice (SP 4); create learning opportunities (SP 8); record information on flipcharts to share with the large group (SP 7); and, clarify the purposes of each activity and exercise (SP 11). In facilitating these kinds of programs, study participants described how they go into the sessions expecting a whole continuum of attitudes in every group. The data reveals how it is very important to get a sense of what the feelings in the group are and to bring them up immediately. One study participant expressed how "trainers try to balance peoples' concerns and fears with organizational policy and guidelines around how people 86 intend to work in the workplace" (SP 6). In facilitating the sessions one participant describes: What we try to do is give two messages: one is, here is the place we speak the unspeakable but I will not allow you to hurt another person in this room because by doing that you will not be respective of other peoples' place. Two, given that guideline, we have to talk about our fears, concerns, terrors, separations and isolations. (SP 2) It becomes evident from the supporting quotations that facilitating highly sensitive diversity topics demands that the facilitators are aware of their own sense of connectedness with the workshop participants. In summary, there are no set rules to guarantee the successful faciliation of these programs. Instead, the study participants described the guidelines that govern their classroom environments. These guidelines draw the boundaries of what is acceptable and what is not acceptable in the context of the workshop. During the course of a workshop, the study participants are never certain of the kinds of emotional responses the discussions might evoke. From what the study participants described, facilitation requires a heightened sensitivity and experience in dealing with the kind of unpredictability that dominates diversity programs. Evaluating the impact of diversity programs reinforces the volatile nature of these types of programs. Evaluation There was general agreement that evaluations are difficult to do and an effective way of evaluating short-term and long-term effects of the training has not been found. As one participant stated, "diversity programs challenge more than our intellectual, cognitive 87 abilities which are easier and more quantifiable to evaluate. You can't evaluate training walking out of the room" (SP 2). A reoccuring theme in all of the transcripts was that it is difficult to measure the impact of the training. Another participant commented, "can I climb inside that person's mind and see to what degree they have improved?" (SP 10). It is difficult to evaluate the training in isolation. What needs to happen, the participants agreed, is that the evaluations are part of a bigger organization picture and all the individuals within the whole organization need to be interviewed to understand the impact of the training. Very often employers, the study participants add, are not interested in the results of the training; therefore, they will take it upon themselves to reflect on what went well during the workshop and what needs to change. Money and time appear to be the biggest barriers to why follow-up evaluations are not implemented. Follow-up evaluations are not done because trainers are very rarely called back to do further training. Other barriers include lack of support and commitment from employers. If employers are not committed at a personal level, it will be difficult for those individuals to promote the continuation of diversity programs. Training in itself is not enough. Policies need to be in place to support the training. One study participant illustrates the point in the following scenario: If you teach somebody how to set limits with a [client] who's been racist towards them and you've got a system in place that doesn't support you challenging the [client], you're not going to take the risk no matter what you've been taught. There's no policy in place to support the staff saying to a [client], I don't have to put up with this. In order for the training to 88 have a long-term effect, the training needs to be supported within the whole organizational framework. (SP 6) Study participants described how it is difficult to evaluate these types of training programs. They discussed how when you are testing skills and knowledge, you are testing something fairly concrete. One study participant asked, "How do you test for introspection and changes in self-awareness?" (SP 2). Another described: what you're after in the three hours is the one day. What you're after in the one day is the one month. What you're after in the one month is the two years. What you're after in the two years is only a small bite. What you're after in the two years is the long-term. The long-term process is a ten year process which then has to go into an evolutionary mode and continue ad infinitum to keep addressing the issues. (SP 2) The first thing to be cut from training is the implementation of a full scale evaluation to assess whether the training works: "Unless you are with a group over the long-term it is difficult to assess skill change or development" (SP 9). Evaluation questionnaires, administered at the end of workshop sessions, ask for feedback on the following: (1) usefulness of the workshop; (2) the degree to which participants will be able to apply what they have learned back in the work environment; (3) the facilitators' contribution to the learning experience; (4) the participants' learning experience; (5) the workshop meeting the requirements of the stated objectives; (6) the aspects of the workshop that worked; (7) the 89 aspects of the workshop that did not work; and, (8) on the satisfaction of the physical arrangements of the room. In summary, this chapter has described program elements of the conceptual framework from a combination of interview and document materials. The data revealed how the study participants design their programs applying formal and informal strategies. Program intentions are described in terms of the process involved. Intentions are broken into two major components: (1) intentions of the program as they relate to the workplace context; (2) the intentions of the workshop as they relate to the creation of a more tolerant, respectful society. Implementing diversity programs requires policies in the workplace to support what the programs are trying to do. Facilitation requires a sensitivity to preparing for the unexpected. As the study participants alluded to, the best they have to work with are workshop guidelines to bring some order to the myriad of possibly contentious issues discussed. Finally, given the complexities inherent in each of the program elements, evaluation brings to the forefront that present evaluations are not adequately assessing the long-term impact of these programs. 9 0 CHAPTER FIVE CRITICAL ANALYSIS OF DIVERSITY PROGRAMS Chapter Five presents a critical, analytical discussion of my interpretations of the information gathered. The lenses I look through to draw my interpretations are influenced by the literature review, conceptual framework, research questions, data analysis and hunches I had prior to and during the research process about what possibly facilitates or hinders the implementation of diversity programs. Program Design The conceptual framework (see Figure 1 in Chapter Two) illustrates the five main program elements the study participants work with in designing their programs. The elements are captured within each large circle to exemplify the specifics that characterize the programs. Each element is contained within its own circle and interconnected to the larger design, intentions, and implementation circles. The literature review and the data suggest the cyclical nature of what is involved with the planning and designing of diversity programs. The framework has changed during the analysis. Originally, the bottom circle represented program features, and the middle circle was program design. The analysis supported that program design influences and is influenced by the intentions and implementation of diversity programs. If I were to squish, or more appropriately condense, the diagram into its different layers, the implementation section would overlay on top of the program design and the intentions section would be between implementation and program design. The diagram, in its squished state, reinforces what the literature and the data have shown. The illustration tries to capture that the bigger picture represented in the implementation 91 phase is not the goal of organizations. The goal is to stick with what is at the bottom of the diagram. Program design is something employers can fit into their organizational frameworks. Where the programs are delivered, what is being taught, what the goals of the program are, what the facilitation process is (although here and with evaluation more of the fuzzy, unpredictable areas come out), and how the programs are evaluated are where I think organizations stop. The data and literature are consistent in echoing Ottoson's (1995) comment that "happy sheet evaluations conducted at the end of a workshop, . . . often full of praise and participants' intentions to apply their learning, are the last substantive comments which educators can use to trace the application of learning" (Ottoson, 1995, p. 2). Cervero and Wilson (1994) alludes to the unpredictability and uncertainty of the planning process: "Planners must invariably act in worlds in which the outcomes of their intentions cannot be known with certainty before they embark on specific courses of action" (Cervero & Wilson, 1994, p. 178). The literature and the data suggest that organizations do not seem to make the link that the restraints of their workplace contexts hinder the facilitation of what the trainers intend to do with diversity programs. It is easier to "blame" those people teaching the programs. It is much more difficult for organizations to take responsibility in initiating and creating workplace environments which embrace the whole of what diversity programs represent: A major problem with planning and design is that it is hidden work. This creates an economic problem where educators within organizations are not given sufficient time to plan, and outsiders are almost never paid for all the 92 time they put into the design of an event. (Arnold, Burke, James, Martin & Thomas, 1991, p. 33) The quotation leads me to conclude that organizations are concerned with what is immediate, quick, and "doable" in the time the diversity facilitators are alloted for their workshops. What Arnold, Burke, James, Martin & Thomas (1991) stress is that organizations do not value what counts as "hidden work." Intentions The original intentions of diversity programs are influenced by the spectrum of attitudes and perspectives present in a workshop context. The study participants are dealing with content matter where peoples' socialization is questioned both in the workplace and the transferance of workplace attitudes in society. The data indicated that there are a number of influences shaping program intentions such as peoples' emotional thinking; the influence of organizations fostering a corportatist agenda, and in the process a devaluing of humanistic values; the influence of never knowing with certainity what may trigger audience participants' responses; the influence of putting oneself out as a trainer in this area and dealing with the continual backlash and oppositional forces confronting the intentions of the programs; and finally, the influence of seeing so little change, such small incremental changes and movement despite enormous efforts to ignite change at a personal, organizational, and societal level. These influences make defining the boundaries of specific program goals, facilitation approaches and evaluation strategies problematic in that the program content is not limited to the immediately identifiable expectations underlying many educational workshops. 93 One way to characterize the purpose of most workshops is the following: As a temporary educative system, the workshop provides people concerned about a common problem with an opportunity to come together to share their own and others' knowledge and experience and to develop and practice new capabilities under the leadership of a person who can orchestrate the process so that the limited time available is used efficiently and the desired outcomes are achieved. (Sork, 1984, p. 5) The strengths of the definition reinforce the workshop as an opportunity for people to come together, practice and develop newly acquired skills with the guidance and leadership of the workshop facilitator. The limitations of the definition are that in diversity discussions the workshop participants may not all share the same level of concern about creating a more equitable and welcoming workplace environment. The data and the literature strongly suggest that regardless of whether participation is voluntary or mandatory, senior managers are often not enthusiastic about workplace diversity. Further, how do you achieve the desired outcome of increasing awareness of the diversity in our communities and workplaces if there is resistance to acknowledging a problem exists in the first place? Brookfield (1986) claims that we cannot specify, in advance, course objectives for complex and sophisticated forms of learning. This does not mean, however, that the concept of purpose is abandoned altogether: "The concept of purpose remains central to our understanding of what constitutes education. However, general purposes need not always be translated into sets of closely specified objectives" (Brookfield, 1986, p. 214). The purposes of the diversity programs in this study vary. 94 There are programs whose purpose reflects the intentions of a "rational, needs- based approach to planning" (Sork & Caffarella, 1989, p. 235). These particular programs cater to a specific clientele whose contexts dictate that the purpose is to work with organizations to establish effective intercultural skills with the business and academic communities. The specified goals and objectives are identified within a more clearly defined program format. The purpose of the workshop becomes directly relevant to the needs of the clients. Other diversity programs are designed with the intentions of allowing for a synthesis of the most significant program features to "construct an interpretative framework within which to order discussion around a series of major themes" (Malan, 1987, p. 17). The variation in the programs is an extension of the differing clientele in each workplace context. Implementation What does change look like? "Change must deal with more than implementation; it should involve sustained and intensive effort to create the conditions for people to change how they deal with change. The process involves both interpersonal (between individuals) and intrapersonal (within individuals) dimensions" (Ghosh, 1996, p. 36). I strongly agree with Ghosh's (1996) description that the conditions need to be created for people to change. The following three excerpts provide some insight into the challenges of creating conditions to foster change. One participant describes: The difficulty with this training is it's not the kind of cookbook stuff. You can't just have this recipe and this is how people will respond, this is your response to that and so on and so on. (SP 8) 95 The image of recipes illustrates very well that diversity programs are not step by step recipes where (to extend the metaphorical analogy) you add a little bit of awareness training, sprinkle a few readings, stir together the results of what Ottoson (1995) defines as "happy sheet evaluations" and expect instant change and implementation of the programs. Another participant comments about the amount of time devoted to public school education versus training realistically outlining the huge gaps in where the emphasis is directed: We know from the research that the changes public education brings about are very small and incremental over a long period of time and we have people in public education for up to twelve years. We have to ask ourselves are we asking the impossible with the training? (SP 11) The same participant further comments applying the analogy of being a fitness instructor: I'm a fitness instructor; I come in and people come to do a two-day workshop with me. A year down the road, what changes will I have brought about? Well it will be dependent on a number of things. The organization, after I leave, will they build a gym? Wil l they install in their cafeteria health related food or will they continue to sell the same food they sold before? Wil l there be incentives to encourage people to take better care of themselves in a healthful fashion? Or, better still, will I be invited to put on an aerobics class three times a week for people to attend? None of those things have ever happened in the work that I do. (SP 11) 96 Context The context significantly influences the planning, designing, facilitating, evaluating and implementing the variance of programs described in this study. The organizational contexts have an established history, traditions, policies, politics, governing rules, and philosophies which either complement or work against the efforts of the trainers in delivering their programs. The literature is consistant with the data in its assertion that the diversity facilitators, alone, cannot deliver the programs in isolation. They need an organizational framework which supports the implementation of their short-term and long-term goals identified for the specific workplace context. I believe that what the study participants envision their programs doing and what the employers expect often translates into very different assumptions. Since I last interviewed the study participants, six months to a year ago for some, I have had the opportunities to interact with some participants, again, on an informal basis. I was keenly aware of how employers' perceptions about diversity programs have shifted to some degree. On two separate occasions, study participants indicated that there seems to be a shift from employers having "bought into diversity" to now wanting to distance themselves from it because a need for the programs signifies that there are problems the organizations needs to address. I interpret this as meaning that the public image the managing diversity literature raises about diversity making "good business sense" now may be moving towards organizations not wanting to present an image of "needing" such programs. One participant relayed how employers "don't think this stuff is important, anymore." Another described how "sadly, what matters is the realities of the business end and not the human 97 end." I reiterate that the scenarios presented are likely not the case for every organization, and my interpretations are based on a few conversations. I thought, however, that the points raised illustrate some of the huge barriers the study participants find in the world of practice. The prevailing shifts in attitude about where diversity programs//? in the larger organizational plan underscores the unpredictability of this program area. The data suggests that organizational contexts in which these diversity programs are delivered are greatly influenced by traditional paradigms which contrasts with the high level of emotional commitment diversity programs demand. "Organizations are usually studied from either rationalistic or normative perspectives, suggesting that they are immune to emotion" (Fineman, 1993, p. 58). Given the history of institutional settings, the values entrenched and perpetuated by the institutions are raised and discussed in some of the programs studied. The interests of those with power in the organizations may not always be conducive to the long-term goals of diversity programs. It might be politically disadvantageous for employees (with their supervisors present at the workshop) to critique the values of the workplace context in which they work. The hope is that if senior administrators and front-line workers are the group in attendance at the workshop, the administrators are open to listening to alternative ways of thinking about the values shaping their organizations. The literature, data, and my own personal experiences of over ten years in post-secondary education have led me to believe that one of the greatest barriers stemming from institutions is their failure to recognize the obvious. The obvious is that organizations are about people and diversity programs are necessary to reinforce this fact. 98 Diversity facilitators are in a unique position to sensitize and refocus the attention of those in power positions to acknowledge the humanness of the people in their organizations. The phrase money talks seems better suited, however, in characterizing the driving nature of organizational contexts in general, and the contexts in this study. Listening to the people talk before, during, and after the diversity programs are over requires a relearning attitude from those in leadership roles. Such relearning "will not emerge unless an organization is prepared to create an environment in which individual insights and perceptions flourish and are exchanged and channelled toward broader organizational purposes and goals" (CCMD Report Summary, 1994, p. 2). Organizations are facing and will continue to face challenging and difficult times until more is done with the needs expressed from the people talk. Budgetary constraints force organizations to reprioritize according to what makes good business sense. Although organizations seem to agree with having diversity programs in their workplace contexts, the data suggests that organizations are not committed to spending the money necessary to implement and assess long-term programs. Some of the study participants describe how employers are concerned with the bottom-line. Others discussed that while they believe employers could be doing more, they are doing the best they can. Two-hour workshop sessions are a temporary measure to a long-term process, but it is an important beginning. The hope is that the leaders of organizations invest time in rethinking and re- creating organizational environments which complement and more importantly support the overall diversity program purposes, program goals and program content. 99 Content The critical issue here is that the workshop participants may learn the content, but lack supports in the workplace to apply it. The content of diversity programs raises difficult issues that organizations would rather, I believe, not deal with. The study participants teach in organizational contexts restrained by a linear, not cyclical, way of thinking. This encourages doing things that are "safe" and familiar. The power relationships in the workplace dictate that those with less power can do little with what they have learned, if their senior supervisors do not support it. The administrators who hire outside consultants to teach these programs may agree with what the study participants are trying to do. The gap, however, is that most of these trainers are never called back to the workplace to follow-up with what they have started. Many of the participants I interviewed do informal follow-ups on their own time, or meet up with the workshop participants in different contexts. It is there that the study participants have opportunities to informally evaluate the outcomes of the workshops. Without follow-ups, it is difficult to assess the impact of the program. Most of these programs are voluntary. Does this suggest, then, that those persons already committed to and aware of the issues are learning about diversity? Where are those people who may need the programs most of all? The programs studied reveal that the trainers work with organizations to isolate the issues and the specific concerns of the workplace context. The workplace may also isolate and identify problem people who are most in need of the training. Problem people is a very derogatory and negative phrase. It is used here to highlight the point that in some cases where persons are not aware of the impact of their inappropriate behavior, they are 1 0 0 most likely not going to attend the workshop sessions unless made to do so by their employers. The majority of the study participants described how the most uncomfortable, but also the most challenging groups to teach are those where the type of participation is mandatory. In such circumstances, mandatory participation is seen as one more mandatory job requirement. The ideal groups are those where individuals already committed to the issues at a personal level participate in the workshop sessions. They can begin to act as positive change agents in their organizations. The data also unravel the distinction made between the education and training component in the program content. The education component is designed to increase awareness and knowledge; the training component is designed to increase skills, techniques, and strategies to resolve conflict in the workplace. There are some programs whose content looks at the business perspective in a global context. In these programs, the content is designed to provide intercultural adaptibility and intercultural skills. It could be argued that for these programs the training aspect is emphasized, keeping in mind that it is not that simple to draw such distinctions. I suggest that there is a distinction made between programs that deal with long- term goals or the bigger picture and programs which address short-term goals or material covered only in the workshop sessions. Some programs are designed to encourage reflection and awareness about what is going on out there in society, in communities,and at home. These programs, I believe, aim for the larger picture. Their overall purpose is long-term and diversity programs are seen as a small beginning. Programs whose purpose is to increase customer service relations, I believe, apply diversity and intercultural programs as a short-term process. 101 Educational institutions cannot afford (to use the language from the business world) to mirror the mindset of business perspectives. Institutions need to reassert a humanistic agenda. Post-secondary education as a model of higher learning working towards a better society has to re-think the influences institutions perpetuate in valuing a functionalist perspective. There are no right or wrong programs. My personal hope is that educational institutions will take much more of a leadership role different from the goals and purposes of the customer service mentality. Program Goals Fineman (1993) claims that while behavior is observable, inner experience is more difficult to measure and define. The program goals of diversity programs illustrate Fineman's (1993) point. The goals described are not easily observable and the attainment of these goals needs to be observed over long periods of time. To reiterate, some of the goals are to reduce the fear of working with people you have never worked with before; to create an environment where people feel honored and respected for the differences in their backgrounds; to question one's own responses and reactions to situations; and to identify one's own cultural values, to name a few. How do you observe the inner experiences of the workshop participants as they may work towards these goals? The evaluation strategies and approaches are not adequate in assessing the depth that these goals propose. Much has been discussed about the restraints and barriers the trainers face in teaching diversity programs. The goals are an extension of what hinders implementation of these kinds of programs. For example, when the goal is to question one's own reactions to situations, the workshop environment may have provided a safe environment 102 to explore those ideas and feelings. The barrier is in the transference of learning back to the work- place. The goals may be attainable in the workshop, but become problematic if the workplace context does not support the philosophical and practical application of the goals. Kowalski (1988) suggests that evaluations may be designed to assess the extent of changes and the relations of changes to program goals. What is missing with current practices of evaluations are evaluation procedures to match the intent of program goals. Arnold, Burke, James, Martin and Thomas (1991) propose several questions to guide the planning of program goals. These questions are noteworthy in that they reinforce the challenges of teaching diversity programs. They also suggest the possible boundaries one can work within to plan programs which appreciate and value difference. The questions include: Are the goals realistic for the time you have? Is the goal measurable? How would you know if you had done this? Are the goals appropriate to the group? Is there support for the goals? Do the goals address what you want people to feel, know, and be able to do? The authors stress that there always needs to be room for a revised set of goals. Diversity programs require a flexible design. It is not possible to capture the predictable direction the workshop session will take by simply addressing program goals in a sequential fashion. The trainers never know in advance what may trigger highly emotional responses from workshop participants. In sum, facilitating the kind of value- laden information attached to program goals requires much skill and expertise. The interviews revealed personal reflections of a group of dedicated, skilled, humanistic practitioners facilitating challenging program goals. 1 0 3 Facilitation What expertise distinquishes these study participants as diversity facilitators? The interviews suggest that the study participants are highly skilled at facilitating emotionally charged value-laden topics. Most of the study participants described their discomfort with the use of the phrase diversity trainer. A few that did identify with that term did so in a cautious manner. Instead, they saw their roles as facilitating information, discussion, opening dialogue, dealing with discomfort, and most importantly modelling behavior by team teaching. The study participants shared how they apply diversity in action by having a variety of perspectives represented at the front of the classroom. Simmons (1994) raises the questions, who gets hired and why to teach diversity programs? Are white trainers perceived as safer to hire? Are they perceived this way because employers may think that if they hire people who, in their view, might represent the majority culture perspective, these trainers are not likely to raise issues that are seen as too controversial, such as institutional racism? Further, are employers more apt to hire what Simmons (1994) distinquishes as technicians who are described as encouraging tolerant attitudes versus political educators who are concerned with structural change? In my view, the specific literature I cited unfairly dichotomizes the differences between political educators and technicians as trainers. The labelling is problematic in that it is not possible to clearly define where one person, for example, is a technician trainer and another is a political educator trainer. Simmons (1994) fails to recognize the constraints and barriers of the organizational contexts the trainers work in that greatly influence the way in which their programs are delivered. Many study participants spoke about foregoing contracts if there are no policies in place to support the training. The data 104 strongly suggest discouraging employers from having these programs brought into the workplace if there are no follow-up sessions. Every study participant described that it is by their own initiatives that follow-ups with some of the workshop participants are instigated. The barriers the organizations impose by not investing money for long-term diversity programs contextualize the situations the study participants described which is not consistent with the view that Simmons (1994) proposes that trainers are either technicians or political educators. There are also implications to the roles the study participants represent in facilitating the sessions as external or internal members of the organizations. My thoughts are that the trainers who are external members are in an advantageous position. Workshop participants, for instance, may not feel as inhibited to disclose because they may view the facilitator's role as not affiliated with the organization and, therefore, not politically associated with the organization's philosophies and mandate. The limitations of external members is that they may be viewed as parachuting in and out of the organizations, raising important issues and, due to the lack of follow-up programs, not facilitating the diversity discussions started during training. This is where internal members are in an advantageous position. They are in the organizations to assess formally and informally the impact of their workshop sessions. These trainers are more likely to interact with workshop participants on a more continuous basis. The limitation to their internal membership may be linked to the perceptions workshop participants might have of feeling reluctant to disclose information. In sum, the study participants described how creating a trusting, suppportive, and safe environment is critically important to their facilitation process. In many typical 1 0 5 educational programs facilitating discussions is preferable over straight lecturing with minimal interaction from the audience members.The degree to which facilitation in diversity programs differs is in the potential reactions to topics raised. Diversity programs cover a wide range of content, but what remains a constant is that the facilitators attempt to raise peoples' awareness by asking them to critically examine their own subject positions. Facilitators of these programs encourage people to think about their roles in contributing to a respectful workplace and society where differences are appreciated. Much time is spent planning for the unexpected responses diversity programs may elicit in people. Evaluation The multicultural literature finds problems with standard program evaluations. The questions raised by Ghosh (1996) characterize the tensions of evaluation purposes: Do we want to assess what students do or do not know, or do we evaluate how they think and what kind of moral judgements they can make? Who is the evaluation for? Wil l it improve teaching and learning? What, how, and why we assess are linked with our ideas of what knowledge is important, how it is acquired, and why we need to acquire that knowledge? (Ghosh, 1996, p. 116) These questions lend themselves to asking what are evaluations evaluating in diversity programs? Are existing evaluation procedures adequately addressing the goals of diversity programs? Some perspectives within the evaluation, implementation and multicultural education literature show that one dominant assumption about evaluations is that 106 knowledge is quantifiable and measurable. From the perspective of a relativist ontology, this perception does not fit. Lincoln and Guba (1989) argue that the outcome of the evaluation is subject to continuous change and that a good evaluation raises more questions than it answers. The data showed how evaluations are not able to quantifiably measure the explicit and implicit changes workshop participants may experience as a result of the diversity programs. With the support and cooperation from organizations to implement long-term evaluation procedures, the potential exists to generate the kinds of information diversity facilitators want to know to plan, design, and demonstrate effects to organizations for future workshops. Presently, the data shows that what is commonly done to evaluate diversity programs is to distribute a questionnaire which asks general questions about workshop expectations; topics or activities; physical arrangements of the room; appropriateness of facilitation techniques; and suggestions for future workshops. The huge gap in the questionnaires is that they are not designed to measure understanding of or reaction to the content of the workshop. For example, has the workshop participant changed attitudes and /or behaviour? Is the participant more self-aware after a diversity program, and has she/he gained the skills to deal more effectively with a diverse work environment? Are the participants contributing to the creation of a more inclusive work environment? The best intentions of the program design are severly limited if there is not a continuation process established. It is one thing for organizations to agree to having diversity programs delivered; it is a huge leap for these organizations to become committed to the ongoing, continual nature of diversity programs. 107 Diversity programs challenge traditional conceptions of knowledge construction. These programs re-ask the question, what counts as knowledge? What is valued as knowledge? Diversity programs may exist in organizations, but are these programs valued? Is the knowledge from these programs valued? The resistance to formal evaluation procedures reinforces Shadish, Cook and Leviton's (1991) claim that evaluators can offer different or better knowledge. Is this different or better knowledge valued? Organizations have a responsibility to re-evaluate where the newly constructed knowledge from diversity programs fits in their overall organizational framework. In summary, a critical analysis of what contributes to facilitating or hindering the implementation of diversity programs has been presented. In the analysis, the data and the literature strongly suggest that regardless of whether participation is voluntary or mandatory, senior managers often do not demonstrate a commitment to workplace diversity. Further, the achievement and evaluation of desired diversity outcomes are difficult if there is resistance to acknowledging a problem in the first place. 108 CHAPTER SIX SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS The purpose of this final chapter is to summarize, conclude and discuss implications for practice. Summary This study describes and critically analyzes workplace training programs in the areas of diversity, organizational change and intercultural communications. The workplace contexts involve educational institutions, non-profit organizations, municipalities, school boards, hospitals, and telecommunications, financial and insurance industries. The intentions of the programs are similar in that they attempt to promote and encourage change despite the many barriers organizations impose. One of the biggest barriers is the short amount of time organizations allow for the programs. Most of the programs in this study are workshop sessions of two hour, half-day, one day, two day, and three day sessions. The participants Of this study were quick to point out that they do not identify easily with the label of diversity trainer and preferred to be identified as consultants, program designers, intercultural communications specialists, and senior administrators. The study reinforces how future studies researching diversity programs are needed to explore many other diversity related issues. Program design, intentions, and what facilitates or hinders the implementation of these programs were described and analyzed. Document review of program materials was also incorporated. The findings of the study suggest that organizational contexts strongly influence program planning decisions. The program content is specific to the workplace context. 109 Participation is voluntary for most programs. Participants at the workshop sessions vary from front-line workers only to everyone in the entire organization, from senior management to support staff. The most common form is the front-line workers attending workshop sessions separate from their employers. The senior administrators in this study have gone through the training and implement what they have learned back in their workplace contexts. The attitudes of senior managers play a major role in implementation of diversity programs. Senior members of organizations, committed at a personal level to making their workplace environments friendly, caring, community oriented and welcoming of diversity, are more likely to encourage and support the purposes and goals of diversity programs. Senior management level persons not committed to the issues at a personal level are more likely to buy into diversity for the sake of maintaining a good public relations image or seeing diversity as giving their organizations a competitive edge. The intentions of the programs are influenced by the degree to which the program features are supported within the larger organizational framework. Does the context support the programs? Are program content and program goals congruent with the values of the organization? Are there support systems in place to continue facilitating the kinds of sensitive issues which might arise from these programs? Finally, are organizations committed to in-depth, follow-up evaluations to assess the attitudinal, behavioral and cognitive changes over long periods of time? Conclusions Change is not easy, and the programs in this study reinforce Ghosh's (1996) claim that resistance to change "has many reasons, but underlying them all is the fear of loss: 110 loss of familiarity, loss of turf (power, dominance, organizational influence, even language), loss of familiar structure (in reward system, accountability), loss of future (success no longer guaranteed by being white, male), loss of meaning (reversal of existing principles), and loss of control" (Ghosh, 1996, p.73). To begin dealing with this fear it becomes important for organizations to reprioritize the value they place in embracing the spirit of diversity programs. An entire study can be devoted to defining the specifics of what is meant by the term diversity. The study participants' resistance to identifying themselves as diversity trainers springboards into underlying assumptions of what is meant by diversity. What gets defined as diversity issues and what does not? The programs in this study show that diversity is about opening dialogue. The multicultural education literature stresses how differences are to be seen as advantages, not disadvantages. Policy intervention is necessary to mandate differences be respected. The participants in this study take us into a humanistic world not compatible with the functionalist, linear world of most organizations. I believe the leadership within organizations has to redress the lack of movement in organizations. Where are organizations headed for in the year 2000? The current situation paints a gloomy and dismal picture of how little room there will be, I surmise, for diversity programs in workplace contexts. With budget cuts, the least of senior managements' concerns may be to improve the work relations amongst employees. I do not believe that programs such as diversity programs have been given a chance to show what they can do. This may very well be a naive and unrealistic perception I hold, and I also am very much aware of the study participants who have spent as many as I l l fifteen years in this area working very hard at teaching diversity programs. I still think, however, that more time is needed. Hopefully, one day soon diversity programs will be celebrated, incorporated, acknowledged, valued and validated in organizational contexts whose purposes, at the present time, may still be confusing. As the year 2000 approaches, my optimistic mindset sees the goals of diversity programs reached. My pessimistic mindset weighs heavily and sees too little effort made by those with the power to make changes at an organizational, societal, and personal level. Research in this area is not easy because what is being researched challenges traditional, conventional research models. Diversity programs are not packaged neatly. Researching these programs requires lots of messy, unpredictable work. At the same time, the study participants interviewed exemplify a committed group of individuals working under enormous constraints and resistance creating a paradigm of hope. Teaching diversity intercultural programs requires a different set of approaches, different from approaches valued and acknowledged in current organizational practices. The functionalist paradigm clashes with the humanistic, interpretativist agenda where many different interpretations are valued. These kinds of programs refocus attention on the people in the organizations: "Organizations exist through individual actors. In other words, the social structures which influence organizations are human creations . . . " (Fineman, 1993, p. 11). Diversity programs may be perceived as asking the difficult questions because people's socialization processes are questioned and challenged. 1 1 2 Finally, given the uniqueness of the workplace contexts studied, future studies around the specifics of each workplace and their constraints and politics would be very important information to gather. A thesis study exploring one workplace context, over a period of time, through interviews with the administrators, diversity facilitators, and learners of the workshop sessions would be a recommendation for future studies. Further, another future study could focus solely on non-profit community organizations and learning from their approaches and how these approaches differ from education, health, municipal government and business institutions. In this study, the emphasis is on a broad perspective. The broad scope of this study was to look at the intentions and implications of diversity programs. Future studies in this area might look at specifically who gets hired and why to teach diversity programs. In the section on intentions of program design, I do discuss in brief what I believe characterizes the caring and committed nature of the study participants. Implications for Practice As educators and learners, how do we talk about our commonalities and our differences in a respectful manner? The field of adult education plays an extremely important leadership role in standing out as a field of practice which is philosophically rooted in respecting the experiences and knowledge of adult learners. Having said that, adult education needs to continually learn and relearn how to connect with the experiences of learners it claims to value and acknowledge. The literature on multicultural teaching strongly suggests that in order to hear the voices of the learners in our classrooms, educators need to first recognize that they need to understand their own 1 1 3 limitations, values and biases. Diversity programs introduce ways for educators to connect with the messages they carry with them and bring to the classroom, despite their best intentions in believing they are aware of the diversity of learners' needs and assumptions. This study exposes how diversity programs are about individuals identifying that they are part of this diversity picture. This is not somebody else's problem. When asked to describe how they prepare to teach diversity programs, a number of the study participants commented on how they draw on adopting some of the following principles of effective adult education practice: Valuing and drawing upon the experience of all workshop participants; sharing, debating, discussing and learning with others; respecting and listening to the participants; and, seeing that what the participants are learning is valuable (Arnold, Burke, James, Martin and Thomas, 1991). Recent news events suggest that there is much more work to be done to encourage conversations as an important part of the learning process. A current story in Maclean's magazine, "New lessons in homophobia," describes attempts to sensitize educators to lesbian and gay issues. The B C Teacher's Federation adopted a motion to create materials on battling homophobia: "Opponents relayed, if I was asked to protect and comfort children who were being harassed for whatever reason, I could do that. But if I was asked to teach something I believe is wrong then I can't do that" (Maclean's, March 31, 1997, p. 59). The quotation illustrates, for myself, what someone believes constitutes the wrong reasons to teach something. It is not always easy to listen, respect, communicate, learn from one another, and incorporate points of views which are different from our own. 114 Diversity training programs offer ways to better understand the conversations we have with each other about our similarities and differences as individuals. Freire (1992) defines hope as an ontological need, anchored in practice. The goal of adult education from a Freirian perspective is to raise consciousness. One of the primary goals of diversity programs is to increase awareness. In partnership with the facilitators of diversity intercultural programs, employers of organizations, educators, learners, and community members, adult education will reach diversity goals. Meanwhile, adult education and diversity programs continue, I believe, to influence adults who already are or may someday be in power positions. From these positions they can move organizations in a positive direction and instigate change by reinforcing practices which appreciate, acknowledge, respect, and honor the diversity of peoples' backgrounds present in the organizations. This research exposed how a group of consultants, program designers and intercultural communications specialists design programs to create workplace environments where people feel respected for the differences in their backgrounds. What is at the heart of this research is that diversity programs address difficult questions in that these programs are dealing with highly emotional, value-laden issues. It is difficult to question how one's own values and attitudes impact in the workplace. Diversity programs encourage people to critically examine their own behavior, assumptions, interpretations and interactions not only in the workplace, but how this extends in the community, in society and in the home. These programs present alternative ways of thinking about peoples' interactions in the workplace. In closing, I circle back to my own participation in the two First Nations's classes where fellow students and instructors discussed "the need to understand the culture of being human beings." This is the essence of diversity programs. 116 REFERENCES Amstutz, D.D. (1994). Staff development: Addressing issues of race and gender. Confronting racism and sexism, 61, 39-51. Arnold, R., Burke, B., James, C , Martin, D. & Thomas, B. (1991). Educating for a change. Toronto: Between the Lines and the Doris Marshall Institute for Education and Action. Auletta, G.S., & Jones, T. (1994). Unmasking the myths of racism. Changing college classrooms: New teaching and learning strategies for an increasingly complex world. 165-174. Beaudry, J.S. (1992). Synthesizing research in multicultural teacher education: Findings and issues for evaluation of cultural diversity. Minority issues in program evaluation, 53, 69-86. Bergmann, B. (1996). In defense of affirmative action. New York: BasicBooks. Betcherman, G., McMullen, K., Leckie, N . & Caron, C. (1994). The Canadian workplace in transition. Kingston: IRC Press. Bowser, B.P., Auletta, G.S. & Jones, T. (1993). Dealing with conflict and diversity in the academic community. Confronting diversity issues on campus, 59-78. Brislin, R. & Yoshida, T. (1994). Intercultural communication training: An introduction. London: SAGE. Brookfield, S. (1991). Grounding teaching in learning. Facilitating Adult Learning: A transactional process, 33-56. Brookfield, S. (1986). Understanding and facilitating adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Canadian Centre for Management Development Summary Report, (1994). Continuous learning, 1, Minister of Supply and Services: Canada. C B C Noon News (1997, February 4).[Radio Program]. Vancouver: C B C . Cervero, R . M . (1984). Evaluating workshop implementation and outcomes. Designing and implementing effective workshops, 22, 55-68. Cervero, R . M . & Wilson, A . L . (1994). Planning responsibly for adult education. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. 117 Clark, M.C. (1992). Finding our way in an uncertain world. Adult Learning 4 (2), 16-17. Colin, S.A.J. & Preciphs, T.K. (1991). Perceptual patterns and the learning environment: Confronting white racism. Creating environments for effective adult learning, 50, 61-70. Cross, K.P. (1988). Adults as learners. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. D'Andrea, M . , Daniels, J. & Heck, R. (1991). Evaluating the impact of multicultural counseling training. Journal of Counseling & Development 70 (1), 143-150. Damen, L . (1987). Culture learning: The fifth dimension in the language classroom. Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley. Darder, A. (1991). Culture and power in the classroom. New York: Bergin & Garvey. Darkenwald, G.G., & Merriam, S. (1982). Adult education: Foundations of practice. New York: Harper Collins. Diaz, C. (1992). Multicultural education for the 21st century. Washington, DC: National Education Association. Edley, C. (1996). Racial healing from the grass roots up. U.S. News and World Report 121 (20), 68. Elias, J.L. & Merriam, S. (1980). Philosophical foundations of adult education. Malabar: Krieger Publishing Company. Ellis, C. & Sonnenfeld, J. (1994). Diverse approaches to managing diversity. Human Resource Management 33 (1), 79-109. Enid, L . (1994). Sensitivity trainers and the real thing. New Internationalist. 26-27. Erwin, T.D. (1995). Attending to assessment: A process for faculty. Assessment for learning in higher education, 49-60. Fineman, S. (1993). Emotions in organizations. London: SAGE. Fitznor, L . (1997). Multicultural & antiracist teaching. Canadian Association of University Teachers (CAUT) Bulletin. 44 (4), 5-8. Flannery, D.D. (1994). Changing dominant understandings of adults as learners. Confronting racism and sexism, 61, 17-26. 118 Fox, R.D. (1984). Fostering transfer of learning to work environments. Designing and implementing effective workshops, 22, 25-38. Frankenberg, R. (1993). White women, race matters: The social construction of whiteness. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Continuum Publishing. Freire, P. (1992). Pedagogy of hope. New York: Continuum Publishing. Fullan, M . (1982). The meaning of educational change. Toronto: OISE. Galbraith, M.W. & Zelenak, B.S. (1991). Adult learning methods and techniques. Facilitating adult learning: A transactional process, 103-134. Ghosh, R. (1996). Redefining multicultural education. Toronto: Harcourt Brace. Giroux, H.A. (1985). Critical pedagogy, cultural politics and the discourse of experience. Journal of Education, 167 (2), 22-41. Giroux, H.A. (1992). Curriculum, multiculturalism, and the politics of identity. NASSP Bulletin, 76 (548), 1-11. Gonzalez, J.C. (1994). Once you accept, then you can teach. Teaching from a multicultural perspective, 1-16. Harris, O.D. (1994). Equity in classroom assessment. Teaching from a multicultural perspective, 77-90. Hayes, E. (1994). Developing a personal and professional agenda for change. Confronting racism and sexism, 61, 77-89. Healy, M.A . , Cooper, D. & Fygetakis, E.C. (1991). Evaluating peer interventions. Racism on campus: Confronting racial bias through peer intervention, 56, 67-76. Helms, J.E. (1992). A race is a nice thing to have. Topeka, Kansas: Content Communications. Hemphill, D.F. (1992). Thinking hard about culture in adult education. Adult Learning 3 (7), 8-12. Hodgkinson, C. (1991). Educational leadership. New York: State University of New York Press. hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress. London: Routledge. 119 Jefferson, F. (1989). Multicultural education: diversity in organizations and programming. In C.Woolbright (Ed.), Valuing diversity on campus: A multicultural approach, 63-70. Johnson, R.B. & O'Mara, J. (1992). Shedding new light on diversity training. Training & Development. 45-52. Katz, J.H. (1989). The challenge of diversity. Valuing diversity on campus: A multicultural approach, 1-22. Kowalski, T.J. (1988). The organization and planning of adult education. Albany: New York Press. Leicester, M . (1989). Multicultural education: From theory to practice. England: NFER- Nelson Publishing. Lindeman, E.C. (1926). The meaning of adult education. New York: New Republic, INC. Louis, C. (1994). Sensitivity trainers and the real thing. New Internationalist. 26-27. Lou, R. (1994). Teaching all students equally. Teaching from a multicultural perspective, 1-16. Mackay, R. & Cumming, A. (1995). The formative evaluation of years 1 and 2 of a pilot multicultural/antiracist educational leadership program. In The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation 10. (2), 67-89. Madison, A . M . (1992). Primary inclusion of culturally diverse minority program participants in the evaluation process. Minority issues in program evaluation, 53, 35-44. Malan, T. (1987). Educational planning as a social process. Paris: Unesco, International Institute for Educational Planning. Malarz, L . (1996). Using staff development to create inclusive schools. The Journal of Staff Development 17. (3), 8-11. Marchesani, L.S. & Adams, M . (1992). Dynamics of diversity in the teaching-learning process. Promoting diversity in college classrooms, 52, 9-20. Martin, L .G . (1994). Ethnicity-related adult education cultural diversity programs: A typology. Paper presented at A E R C , Penn State, Ph.D. Martin, L .G . & Gordon, R. (1990). Serving culturally diverse populations, 48, 50-54. 1 2 0 Maurianne, A. & Marchesani, L.S. (1992). Curricular innovations: Social diversity as course content. Promoting diversity in college classrooms: Innovative responses for the curriculum, faculty, and institutions, 52. 85-100. McBeath, R.J. (1992). Instructing and evaluating in higher education: A guidebook for planning learning outcomes. Englewood Cliffs: Educational Technology Publications. McEachin, V . (1992). Employee training programs on ethnic/cultural diversity in corporations and service agencies. Dissertation Abstracts International 52 (10). Mezirow, J. (1991). Transformative dimensions of adult learning. San Francisco: Jossey- Bass. Mills, N . (1994). Debating affirmative action. New York: Delta. Moriarity, P. & Wallerstein, N . (1980). By teaching we can learn: Freire process for teachers. California Journal of Teacher Education, Winter, 39-46. New lessons in homophobia. (1997, 31 March). Maclean's, p. 59. Novogrodsky, C. (1994). Sensitivity trainers and the real thing. New Internationalist, Spring, 26-27. Ottoson, J .M. (1995). Reclaiming the concept of application: From social to technological process and back again. Adult Education Quarterly: A Journal of Research and Theory, 46, 17-30. Ottoson, J .M. (1995). Use of a conceptual framework to explore multiple influences on the application of learning following a continuing education program. The Canadian Journal for the Study of Adult Education, 9 (2), 1-18. Palumbo, D.J. (1987). The politics of program evaluation. Newbury Park: SAGE. Patton, M.Q. (1992). Developmental evaluation: An approach for empowerment-oriented and multicultural programs. Minority issues in program evaluation, 53, 25-27. Pedersen, P. (1988). A handbook for developing multicultural awareness. Virginia: American Association for Counseling and Development. Pedersen, P. (1991). Multiculturalism as a generic approach to counseling. Journal of Counseling & Development 70 (1), 6-11. Piturro, M . & Mahoney, S.S. (1992). Managing diversity: The new multicultural work force requires a simpatico style. Adult Learning 3 (7), 13-15. 121 Ponterotto, J.G. & Pedersen, P. (1993). Preventing prejudice: A guide for counselors and educators. Newbury Park: SAGE. Ross, R. & Schneider, R. (1992). From equality to diversity: A business case for equal opportunities. London: Pitman Publishing. Selman, G. & Dampier, P. (1991). The foundations of adult education in Canada. Toronto: Thompson Educational Publishing, Inc. Shadish, W.R., Cook, T.D. & Leviton, L.C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Newbury: SAGE. Sheared, V . (1994). Giving voice: An inclusive model of instruction-A womanist perspective. Confronting racism and sexism, 61, 27-38. Simmons, E. (1994). Sensitivity trainers and the real thing. New Internationalist, 26-27. Sisco, B. (1991). Setting the climate for effective teaching and learning. Creating environments for effective adult learning, 50, 41-50. Sjoquist, D.P. (1993). Globalizing general education: changing world, changing needs. Directing general education outcomes, 81, 51-57. Smith, J.K. (1989). The nature of social and educaitonal inquiry: Empiricism versus interpretation. Norwood, New Jersey: Ablex Publishing Corporation. Sork, T.J. & Caffarella, R.S. (1989). Planning programs for adults. Handbook of adult and continuing education, 233-245. Sork, T.J. (1984). The workshop as a unique instructional format. Designing and implementing effective workshops 22, 3-10. Stockdill, S.H., Duhon-Sells, R .M. , Olson, R.A. & Patton M.Q. (1992). Voices in the design and evaluation of a multicultural education program: a developmental approach. Minority issues in program evaluation, 53. 17-25. Stockdill, S.H. (1992). Implementing the developmental evaluation approach. Minority issues in program evaluation, 53, 27-33. Taylor, C. (1995). Dimensions of diversity in Canadian business: Building a business case for valuing ethnocultural diversity. Ottawa: The Conference Board of Canada. Tesconi, C.A. (1990). Multiculturalism in education: The importance of meaning. Adult education in a multicultural society. 28-44. 122 Thompson, D. & DiTomaso, N . (1988). Ensuring minority success in corporate management. New York: Plenum Press. Vella, J. (1994). Learning to listen, learning to teach: The power of dialogue in educating adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Vella, J. (1995). Training through dialogue: Promoting effective learning and change with adults. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Wittmer, J. & Myrick, R.D. (1989). The teacher as facilitator. Minneapolis: Educational Media Corporation. Wlodkowski, R.J. & Ginsberg, M.B. (1995). Diversity and motivation: Culturally responsive teaching. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Yanow, D. (1996). How does a policy mean?: Intrepreting policy and organizational actions. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press. Methodology References Anderson, K. & Jack, D.C. (1991). Learning to listen: interview techniques and analyses. Women's words, 11-26. Bogdan, R. & Biklen, S.K. (1994). Early steps in analysis. Qualitative data analysis, 50- 90. Dey, I. (1993). Qualitative data analysis. London: Routledge. Goetz, J.P. & Lecompte, M . (1991). Conceptualizing the research process: Theory and design. In Ethnography and qualitative design, 33-62. Guba, E.G. & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park: SAGE. Kirby, S. & McKenna, K. (1989). Experience research social change: Methods from the margins. Toronto: Garamond Press. Lather, P. (1991). Getting smart: Feminist research and pedagogy with/in the postmodern. New York: Routledge. Lawler III, E.E. & Associates (1985). Doing research that is useful for theory and practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (1989). Designing qualitative research. London: SAGE. 123 Marshall, C. & Rossman, G. (1995) (2nd eds.) Designing qualitative research. London: SAGE. May, T. (1993). Social research: issues, methods and process. Suffolk: Open University Press. McMillan, J.H. & Schumacher, S. (1989) (2nd eds.) Research in education. Virginia Commonwealth University: Harper Collins Publishers. Merriam, S.B. & Simpson, E.L. (1995) (2nd eds.) A guide to research for educators and trainers of adults. Malabar: Krieger Publishing. Miles, M . B . & Huberman, M . (1994). An expanded sourcebook: Qualitative data analysis. London: SAGE. Miles, M . B . & Huberman, M . (1984). Qualitative data analysis: A sourcebook of new methods. London: SAGE. Patton, M.Q. (1990) (2nd eds.) Qualitative evaluation and research methods. London: SAGE. Robson, C. (1993). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practioner- researchers. Cambridge: Blackwell. Silverman, D. (1993). Interpreting qualitative data: Methods for analysing talk, text and interaction. London: SAGE. Slim, H. & Thompson, P. (1995). Listening for a change: Oral testimony and community development. Gabriola Island: New Society. Stanfield, J.H. & Rutledge, D . M . (1993). Race and ethnicity in research methods. Newbury Park: SAGE. Strauss, A. & Corbin, J. (1990). Basics of qualitative research. Newbury Park: SAGE. Tesch, R. (1990). The mechanics of interpretational qualitative analysis. Qualitative research, 113-134. 1 2 5 12 Summary of methodology and procedures. (Must be typewritten in this space). NOTE If your study involves deception, you must also complete page 8. the "Deception Form". A literature review has identified relevant concepts for the study. A conceptual framework will inform the analysis phase of the study. Data for the study will be collected using qualitative, in-depth interviews and document review. The interview guide will be pilot tested. The pilot test sample will be drawn from graduate students in the Adult Education Program Area in the Department of Educational Studies who have experience as trainers of cultural diversity programs. A select sample (n=3) will be interviewed during the pilot test, to gather information about their experiences. The interview guide has been designed to represent the five elements of the conceptual framework. The document review includes all relevant program material. For example, course outlines, assigned readings and examples of questionnaires. Interview sessions will be I to 1.5 hours in duration. All interviews will be tape recorded. The researcher will do all interviews and transcribing. Interviewees will be asked to review transcripts for content accuracy. Participants will receive a summary of the findings of the study. Qualitative analysis will be used to characterize significant themes, or matching patterns of response from the transcripts of the interviews and the document review. DESCRIPTION OF POPULATION 13 How many subjects will be used? 10 subjects How Many in the control group? No control group .-v Who is being recruited and what are the criteria for their selection? An experienced cultural diversity trainer who works as an independant consultant and associates with other consultants of cultural diversity training programs was the source for a list of names. From this pool of names, the experienced trainer asked each of the other cultural diversity trainers if they would be willing to consider potential participation in a research study about their cultural diversity training programs conducted by a fulltime graduate student from the University of British Columbia. The list of names and addresses that were released to the Co-Investigator of this study was released with the permission of each of the trainers who said they will consider potential participation in the study. Please see Appendix-A. The letter provided in Appendix-A is the first contact the Co-Investigator of this study will make with each of the trainers whose names were provided The letter reinforces the trainers expressed interest in agreeing to consider potential participation in the study and goes on to state that the purpose of the letter is to formally invite the trainers to participate in the study. The letter also describes that if the trainers are interested in participating they are to contact the Co-Investigator. If the Co-Investigator does not hear back from the trainers in 10 days time, a call to confirm intentions regarding participation will be made. At the time of the interview, the Co-Investigator will bring two copies of the consent form to the interview and after carefully going through the content of the consent form, the trainers will be asked to sign two copies of the consent form. One copy the trainer will keep, and the other copy the Co-Investigator of this study will keep. The selection criteria include the following. Experience (2-5 years) as cultural diversity trainers; willingness to share their experiences, and identity as cultural diversity trainers. Further, the ideal participant will have a variety of experiences and be comfortable sharing the information. Candidates will be selected to represent the age, gender and race currently found in this group of trainers. 1 2 6 : ; Page 3 15 What subjects will be excluded from participation? This study will be confined to diversity trainers who respond to letter (see Appendix A). 16 How are the subjects being recruited: (If initial contact is by letter or if a recruitment notice is to be posted, attach a copy.) NOTE UBC policy discourages initial contact by telephone. However, surveys which use random digit dialing may be allowed. If you study involves such contact, you must also complete page 9, the "Telephone Contact form". The subjects are recruited by letter (attached-ptease see Appendix A). 17 If a control group is involved, and if their selection and/or recruitment differs from the above, provide details. N/A PROJECT DETAILS Where will the project be conducted? (room or area) Vancouver and vicinity. 19 Who will actually conduct the study and what are their qualifications? Rita Acton, B.A., Diploma in Adult Education, M A Candidate in Adult Education. 20 Will the group of subjects have any problems giving informed consent on their own behalf? Consider physical or mental condition, age, language, or other barriers. No 21 If the subjects are not competent to give fully informed consent, who will consent on their behalf? N/A 22 What is known about the risks and benefits of the proposed research? Do you have additional opinions on this issue? Benefits: a comprehensive description and analysis of cultural diversity training programs will provide a general set of guidelines on how trainers encourage intercultural discussions. A comprehensive understanding of the context, intended outcomes, program features, evaluation process and trainers of diversity programs will offer ways to expand the knowledge base of program planning, teaching and evaluation theories in adult education. The pilot test will provide interviewing experience and a measure of the interviewer's abilities in this regard There are no known risks. 127 23 What discomfort or incapacity are the subjects likely to endure as a result of the experimental procedures? None page 4 24 If monetary compensation is to be offered the subjects, provide details of amounts and payment schedules. N/A 25 How much time will a subject have to dedicate to the project? Participant interview: total of 2 hours. This includes scheduling the interview, participating in the interview, and reviewing transcripts for content accuracy. 26 How much time will a member of the control group (if any) have to dedicate to the project? N/A DATA 27 Who will have access to the data? Only the student researcher and the supervisory committee will have access to the raw data. 28 How will confidentiality of the data be maintained? The sample will be assigned codes and kept in the personal files of the researcher. Individual data will not be available to others. Only group data will be reported. 29 What are the plans for future use of the raw data (beyond that described in this protocol)? How and when will the data be destroyed? Data will be maintained and secure in the investigators' data base and may be used for future study. Another consent from subjects will be required in future studies. 30 Will any data which identifies individuals be available to persons or agencies outside the University? No 31 Are there any plans for feedback to the subject? Interviewees will be asked to review transcripts for content accuracy. Participants will receive a summary of the findings of the study. 128 = pages 32 Will your project use: (check) { } Questionnaires (submit a copy) {X } Interviews (submit a sample of questions (Attached - see Appendix C: interview guide for qualitative interview). { } Observations (submit a brief description) { } Tests (submit a brief description) INFORMED CONSENT 33 Who will consent? (check) {X} Subject { } Parent/Guardian (Written parental consent is always required for research in the schools and an opportunity must be present either verbally or in writing to the students to refuse to participate or withdraw. A copy of what is written or said to the students should be provided for review by the Committee.) { } Agency Official(s) In the case of projects carried out at other institutions, the Committee requires written proof that agency consent has been received Please specify below: { } Research carried out in a hospital - approval of hospital research or ethics committee { } Research carried out in a school - approval of School Board and/or Principal. (Exact requirements depend on individual school boards: check with Faculty of Education Committee members for details.) { } Research carried out in a Provincial Health Agency - approval of Deputy Minister { } Other, specify: 129 CONSENT FORMS ; page 6 34 UBC policy requires written subject consent in all cases other than questionnaires which are completed by the subject (see item #35 for consent requirements) Please check each item in the following list before submission of this form to ensure that the written consent form attached contains all necessary items. If your research involves initial contact by telephone, you need not fill out this section. {X} The consent form must be prepared on UBC Department letterhead (attached-see Appendix B) {X} Title of the project {X} Identification of investigators (including a telephone number). Research for a graduate thesis should be identified as such and the name and telephone number of the Faculty Advisor included {X} Brief but complete description IN LAY LANGUAGE of the purpose of the project and of all procedures to be carried out in which the subjects are involved. Indicate if the project involves a new of non-traditional procedure whose efficacy has not been proven in controlled studies. {X} Assurance that identity of the subject will be kept confidential and a description of how this will be accomplished {X} Statement of the total amount of time that will be required of a subject N/A Details of monetary compensation, if any, to be offered to subjects {X} An offer to answer any inquiries concerning the procedures to ensure that they are fully understood by the subject and to provide debriefing if appropriate {X} A statement of the subject's right to refuse to participate or withdraw at any time and a statement that withdrawal or refusal to participate will not jeopardize further treatment, medical care or influence class standing as applicable. NOTE: This statement must also appear on letters of initial contact. For research done in the schools, indicate what happens to children whose parents do not consent Note: The procedure may be part of classroom work but the collection of data may be purely for research. (Attached • please see Appendix A and Appendix B) {X} A statement acknowledging that the subject has received a copy of the consent form including all attachments for their own records {X} A place for the signature of the subject CONSENTING to participate in the research project, investigation or study and a place for the date of the signature N/A Parental consent forms must contain a statement of choice providing an option for refusal to participate, (e.g. "I consent/I do not consent to my child's participation in this study." Also, verbal assent must be obtained from the child, if the parent has consented {X} If more than one page, number the pages of the consent i.e. page 1 of 3,2 of 3,3 of 3 etc. 130 QUESTIONNAIRES (completed by subjects) page 7 35 Questionnaires should contain an introductory paragraph which includes the following information. Please check each item in the following list before submission of this form to insure that the introduction contains all necessary items. {X} UBC letterhead {X> Title of the project {X} Identification of the investigators (including a telephone number) {X} A brief summary that indicates the purpose of the project {X} The benefits to be derived {X} A full description of the procedures to be carried out in which the subjects are involved {X} A statement of the subject's right to refuse to participate or withdraw at any time without jeopardizing further treatment, medical care or class standing as applicable. Note: This statement must also appear on explanatory letters involving questionnaires {X} The amount of time required to the subject must be stated N/A The statement that if the questionnaire is completed it will be assumed that consent has been given {X} Assurance that identity of the subject will be kept confidential and a description of how this will be accomplished N/A For surveys circulated by mail submit a copy of the explanatory letter as well as a copy of the questionnaire ATTACHMENTS 36 Check items attached to this submission if applicable. (Incomplete submissions will not be reviewed) {X} Letter of initial contact (item 16) (attached see Appendix A) { } Advertisement for volunteer subjects (item 16) {X} Subject consent form (item 34) (attached see Appendix B) < } Control group consent form (if different from above) { } Parent/guardian consent form (if different from above) { } Agency consent (item 33) (X) Questionnaires, tests, interviews, etc. (item 32) (attached see Appendix C, interview guide) {X} Explanatory letter with questionnaire (item 35) (see- Appendix B) { } Deception form (including a copy or transcript of written or verbal debriefing) { } Telephone contact form { } Other, specify: L 133 Appendix 4: Subject Consent Form 1 of 2 SUBJECT CONSENT FORM PROJECT TITLE: Understanding Cultural Diversity Training Programs. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR: Dr. Judith Ottoson Assistant Professor of Adult Education University of British Columbia STUDENT INVESTIGATOR: Rita Acton M . A . (Adult Education) Candidate University of British Columbia Purpose and procedures: The purpose of this study is to gain a greater understanding of five elements of diversity training programs: context, program features, trainers, intended outcomes, and the evaluation process. The results of this research should be of value to trainers, educators, learners, administrators, and future masters and doctoral candidates interested in encouraging meaningful intercultural discussions. A select sample of cultural diversity trainers will be interviewed. Interviews will be conducted at your convenience and last approximately 1 to 1.5 hours. You will be asked to discuss program elements and your experience as a cultural diversity trainer. Participation in this study will require approximately 2 hours of your time. This will include: scheduling the interview, participating in the interview, and reviewing transcripts for content accuracy. Codes will be used to assure individual confidentiality. Only the student interviewer will have access to these codes. Individual data about interviews will not be available to others. A summary of the results of the study will be provided. A l l data collected will be combined and analyzed to describe cultural diversity training programs, as well as analyze specific elements of the programs. Results of this study will be submitted as a thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Master of Arts degree in Adult Education. Appendix 5: Interview Guide INTERVIEW GUIDE Part I: Background -educational background -work background -cultural background -length of time working in the area of diversity -external or internal member of organizational context Part II: Context -description of context training programs delivered in -duration -type of participation Part III: Program Features -description of type of cultural training -content of programs -relevant program materials provided (handouts, readings, discussion questions) -format of programs -frequency of programs -facilitation techniques -for whom is the diversity training designed? -participation voluntary or mandatory -How are the programs evaluated (examples of questionnaires)? -Are there follow-up sessions? Part IV: Program Design -intentions of program -design of the diversity program (trainer or employer) Part V : Implementation -description of trainers' expectations of programs -what programs are trying to accomplish 137 Appendix 7: Contact Summary Form CONTACT S U M M A R Y F O R M Contact type: Interview with: (enter code identity) Phone: Site: (enter code label) Interview date: Today's date: 1. What were the main concepts, themes, issues, and questions? 2 . What people, events, or situations were involved? 3 . Which research questions and which variables in the initial framework were most central? 4. What new speculations or hunches were suggested? 138 Appendix 8: Codes Applied to Analysis PROGRAM FEATURES (PF) CONTEXT (CX) CONTENT (CT) PROGRAM GOALS (PG) FACILITATION (F) EVALUATION (E) PROGRAM DESIGN (PD) INTENTIONS (IN) STUDY PARTICIPANTS' BACKGROUNDS (SPB) IMPLEMENTATION (IM) FACILITATES (FL) HINDERS (HD) 139 Appendix 9: Interview Questions 1 of 2 1. Where do you work as a cultural diversity trainer—employee of the organization or do you work as an independent consultant? 2. Is the work as a trainer full-time or part-time? 3. How long have you been a trainer? 4. How would you describe your role as a trainer? 5. How would you describe your training program? 6. What are your overall training program goals? 7. What do you think is the purpose of your diversity training program? 8. What do you believe influences the kinds of decisions you make for your program? 9. What are you trying to accomplish? 10. Can you describe for me the facilitation techniques you use? 11. What suggests to you that your participants have achieved what you are trying to accomplish in your program? (document review: evaluation forms/questionnaires) 12. How would you describe what cultural diversity training programs are trying to do? 13. Do you design the programs with the intention that your participants will apply what they have learned? 14. To what extent do you feel confident that when the participants of your training return to the workplace they are able to apply what they have learned? 15. To what extent do you feel the employer is supportive of the training program? 16. To understand the context you work in delivering the program do you have some literature? (document review: pamphlets/brochures) 17. Who is responsible for designing the training program—yourself or the organization you work for? 140 2 of 2 18. What is the format of your programs (workshops, seminars, training sessions)? (document review: relevant course material) 19. What is the length of your programs? 20. How often is your program offered? 21. Are there follow-up sessions? If no, do you think follow-up sessions would be appropriate? 22. For whom is the diversity training designed? 23. Is the participation voluntary or mandatory? 24. Who is interested in knowing what happened in the training? 25. What is your educational background? 26. What is your cultural background/ethnicity? 27. I've asked lots of questions, and I thank you for your patience in answering them for me. Is there anything else you would like to comment on?


Citation Scheme:


Usage Statistics

Country Views Downloads
China 7 0
Japan 3 0
United States 1 0
City Views Downloads
Beijing 7 0
Tokyo 3 0
Mountain View 1 0

{[{ mDataHeader[type] }]} {[{ month[type] }]} {[{ tData[type] }]}


Share to:


Related Items