Multicultural competence

Engaging in difficult dialogues that are inherent in teaching about

diversity.

By Mary E. Kite, PhD

“Everyone is aware of people who intentionally act out in oppressive ways. But there is less
attention given to the millions of people who know inequities exist and want to be part of the
solution. Removing what silences them and stands in their way can tap an enormous
potential for energy and change.” — Allan Johnson, 2006, p. 125

Psychologists are rightfully concerned about the inequities and injustices that result from the
oppression of social groups, and great strides have been made in understanding the biases
and motivations that result in this oppression. Without question, this attention will and should
continue as much work remains. Yet, echoing Johnson’s point, the authors of the
updated APA Guidelines for the Undergraduate Major: Version 2.0 (2013) draw attention to
the costs of focusing too heavily on the oppression side of the equation in our classrooms
and call for a balanced coverage that also frames diversity issues as problems that can and
should be overcome.

Diversity and Disparities for Millenials

How can we achieve that balance? To begin, it is important to realize that the millennials are
squarely among the millions of people who embrace diversity and that they envision a future
where true equality among racial groups is achieved. A recent MTV Strategic Insights survey
(2014), for example, found that 89 percent of millennials believe everyone should be treated
the same, no matter their race. Similarly, Howe and Strauss (2003) found that millennial
college students see racial diversity as a very important and appealing part of the college
experience. The value students place on racial diversity is supported by research on the
benefits of studying diversity. These include an increased store of scientifically valid
knowledge about human behavior (Trimble, Stevenson, & Worrell, 2003), sharpened critical
thinking skills, and an overall improvement in both personal and cognitive development (see
Dunn, Gurung, Naufel, & Wilson, 2013; Gurin, Dey, Gurin, & Huratado, 2003; Kite &
Littleford, 2014, for reviews).

It is heartening to know that our students are eager to address diversity issues, but a closer
look at how the millennials responded to other questions on the MTV survey reveals that
students are less knowledgeable about the complexities of diversity than it seems at first
glance. Consider, for example, that although 81 percent express support for embracing and
celebrating diversity, 73 percent believe never considering race would improve society and
70 percent support a “colorblind” approach to race. That our students fail to see the
disconnect between celebrating diversity while ignoring color suggests we have our work cut
out for us.

It is also telling that European-American students and millennials of color see this picture
differently; 65 percent of students of color believe white people have more opportunities
today than do members of racial minority groups, whereas only 39 percent of whites endorse
this belief, a finding consistent with other data on disparities between minority and majority
group members’ views of prejudice (see Whitley & Kite, 2010, for a review). Many white
students (48 percent) believe discrimination against white people is a problem equal to
discrimination against racial minority groups, whereas only 27 percent of millennials of color
hold this view. These data are consistent with Prieto’s (2009) point that many of our students
are not sufficiently prepared to address difficult topics such as the experience of being
marginalized or how our society perpetuates prejudice and discrimination.

Defining Multicultural Competence

Addressing that deficiency can appear daunting but, fortunately, much has been written
about how we can better prepare our students for a diverse world (see Dunn et al., 2013;
Gurung & Prieto, 2009; Kite & Littleford, 2014 for reviews). A good starting point is to think
about diversity as a skill that can be taught; our role as instructors, then, is to provide
students with the tools they need to learn those skills. Mio, Barker-Hackett and Tumambing’s
(2012) definition of multicultural competence outlines what these skills should encompass,
including:

1. Developing an awareness of one’s own cultural values and biases.

2. Learning to value others’ worldviews.
3. Developing a set of culturally appropriate interpersonal skills.

Turning again to evidence from the MTV survey, we can see that many of our students lack
this multicultural competence: Only 30 percent of white respondents reported that their
families talked about race, and this percentage rises only to 46 percent among millennials of
color. I see this reflected in my students’ self-reports about their fears and concerns about
discussing diversity. Results from one recent class are typical: 60 percent reported worrying
about offending someone and 28 percent worried about the potential for disagreement.
Addressing such concerns can go a long way toward allaying students’ worries and
establishing a safe place for students to talk about cultural diversity (Gurung & Prieto, 2009).

Discussing Terminology in Your Classroom

In my limited space here, I want to focus specifically on the terminology that is integral to
discussing diversity. In my courses, I present a taxonomy of terminology that has three parts:

• Ethnophaulisms or ethnic slurs.

• Outdated terms, which in today’s language are considered offensive but the speaker
is likely unaware of this.
• Preferred terms, which reflect the language social group members choose to label
their own group, such as Asian-American, blind person or gay.

Most students readily recognize which terms are ethnic slurs, and generally, it is sufficient to
acknowledge that these terms are unlikely to be used in the classroom. Indeed, when these
terms are discussed in academic and many other settings, they are often referred to by their
capitalized first letter because of the discomfort many have about using the full term in any
context.

Addressing the use of outdated terms is also generally straightforward. There are many
examples of such terms, such as the use of “Orientals” to refer to Asians, “mentally retarded”
to refer to the intellectually impaired or “tranny” to describe a transgender person. As
Solomon (2012) notes, “[t]he general population doesn't know that 'midget' is an insult, and
most people who use the word do so without ill intent” (p. 126). I assure my students that if
they happen to use an outdated term, I will recognize that they likely meant no offense and
that I will also provide them with an updated term. Of course, it is also useful to provide a list
of outdated terms and their replacements.

Addressing preferred terms is more complex, in part because understanding when and why
specific terms are used is part of a larger, academic discussion that can be both nuanced
and confusing even for scholars. Consider this statement, posted on the website the
Grammarist: “The term African American… today it is often perceived as carrying a self-
conscious political correctness that is unnecessary in informal contexts. In informal speech
and writing, black is often preferred and is rarely considered offensive” (African American
versus Black, 2014). This statement perhaps raises more questions than it answers (e.g., is
the classroom an informal context?) and has a pejorative tone. Moreover, as Rosenblum and
Travis (2012) note, “[d]eciding what name to use for a category of people is not easy. It is
unlikely that all members of the category use the same name [and] the name members use
for one another may not be acceptable for outsiders to use” (p. 7). As another example,
some individuals within the disabled community advocate for “people first” language because
terms such as “people with disabilities” focuses on the person rather than the disability. Yet,
as Oliver (2012) notes, some disabled people believe that their disability is inseparable from
their self and eschew people first language. Addressing such complexities is well beyond the
scope of most undergraduate diversity courses, but a conversation about the basis for such
discussions can go a long way toward helping students understand the issues.

The “Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association” (2001) provides a brief
but informative discussion of these issues (see pp. 61-76). For example, blacks who are not
from Africa reasonably object to being labeled African-Americans, and not all Africans are
black (so, in the U.S., we probably would not refer to a white South African immigrant as
African-American). Similarly, the use of broad categories such as “Asian” and “Hispanic”
merges people from very different cultures into one. I find it helpful to point out that, in U.S.
culture, we easily recognize the distinctions between the British, the French and the
Germans and do not refer to their citizens collectively as “Europeans.” U.S. students are less
well educated about the differences among people from Cuba, Mexico or Guatemala, but to
citizens of those cultures, the distinctions are certainly meaningful. If instructors have strong
preferences about preferred terminology, they should make students aware of them.
However, instructors should also emphasize that educated people disagree about preferred
terminology, both within and across disciplines; the overarching issue in such discussions is
avoiding bias.

Over the course of several semesters, I have found that explicitly discussing terminology
puts my students more at ease for engaging in conversations about diversity. It also gives
me a chance to talk about my own learning process. For example, I, myself, only recently
learned that “midget” was offensive and have worked to delete the term from my vocabulary.

Letting students know this highlights that learning is a process in which we all engage.
Although a discussion of terminology is only a beginning, it is one straightforward way to set
the stage for engaging in the difficult dialogues that are inherent in teaching about diversity.
For more on developing students’ multicultural competence, I invite you to visit my website,
which includes ready-to-use teaching activities, public service announcements and videos
categorized by diversity-related topic.

References
American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual for the American Psychological
Association (5th ed.). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association.
American Psychological Association. (2013). APA guidelines for the undergraduate psychology major:
Version 2.0. Retrieved from http://www.apa.org/ed/precollege/about/psymajor-guidelines.pdf
Dunn, D. S., Gurung, R. A. R., Naufel, K. Z., & Wilson, J. H. (2013). Teaching about controversial
issues: An introduction. In D. S. Dunn, R. A. R. Gurung, K. Z. Naufel, & J. H. Wilson
(Eds.), Controversy in the psychology classroom: Using hot topics to foster critical thinking (pp. 3-
10). Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association. doi: 10.1037/14038-001.
The Grammarist. (2014). African American vs. black (2014). Retrieved from
grammarist.com/usage/African-American-black/
Gurin, P. Y., Dey, E. L., Gurin, G., & Hurtado, S. (2003). How does racial/ethnic diversity promote
education? The Western Journal of Black Studies, 27, 20-29.
Gurung, R. A. R. (2009). Got culture? Incorporating culture into the curriculum. In R. A. R. Gurung, &
Prieto, L. R. (Eds.), Getting culture: Incorporating diversity across the curriculum (pp. 11-22).
Sterling, Va.: Stylus.
Howe, N., & Strauss, W. (2007). Millennials go to college: Strategies for a new generation on
campus (2nd ed.). Great Falls, Va.: Lifecourse Associates.
Johnson, A. G. (2006). Privilege, power, and difference (2nd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Kite, M. E., & Littleford, L. N. (2014). Teaching about diversity across the undergraduate psychology
curriculum. In D. S. Dunn (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of undergraduate psychology education. New
York: Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199933815.013.012.
Mio, J. S., Barker-Hackett, L., & Tumambing, J. (2012). Multicultural psychology: Understanding our
diverse communities (3rd ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
MTV Strategic Insights (2014). Executive summary. Retrieved from
http://cdn.lookdifferent.org/content/studies/000/000/001/DBR_MTV_Bias_Survey_Executive_Summa
ry.pdf?1398858309
Oliver, M. (2013). What is disability? In K. E. Rosenblum & T.-M. Travis (Eds.), The meaning of
difference (6th ed., pp. 167-171). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Prieto, L. R. (2009). Teaching about diversity. In R. A. R. Gurung & L. R. Prieto (Eds.), Getting culture:
Incorporating diversity across the curriculum (pp. 23-39). Sterling, Va.: Stylus.
Rosenblum, K. E., & Travis, T.M. (2012). The meaning of difference (6th edition). Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Solomon, A. (2012). Far from the tree: Parents, children, and the search for identity. New York: Scribner.
Trimble, J. E., Stevenson, M. R., & Worrell, J. P. (2003). Toward an inclusive psychology: Infusing the
introductory psychology textbook with diversity content. Washington: American Psychological
Association.
Whitley, B. E., Jr., & Kite, M. E. (2010). The psychology of prejudice and discrimination (2nd ed.).
Belmont, Calif.: Thomson-Wadsworth.