Georgia Southern University

Digital Commons@Georgia Southern

Electronic Theses and Dissertations Graduate Studies, Jack N. Averitt College of

Spring 2009

Cultural Diversity Awareness of Elementary School

Teachers in Georgia Classrooms
Sohmer Evans Collins

Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd

Recommended Citation
Collins, Sohmer Evans, "Cultural Diversity Awareness of Elementary School Teachers in
Georgia Classrooms" (2009). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 220.
https://digitalcommons.georgiasouthern.edu/etd/220

This dissertation (open access) is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate Studies,
Jack N. Averitt College of at Digital Commons@Georgia Southern. It has been accepted for
inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Digital
Commons@Georgia Southern. For more information, please contact
[email protected].
 CULTURAL DIVERSITY AWARENESS OF

ELEMENTARY TEACHERS IN GEORGIA CLASSROOMS

by

SOHMER EVANS COLLINS

(Under the Direction of Linda M. Arthur)

ABSTRACT

This study determined the extent of cultural diversity awareness of in-service,

elementary teachers in Georgia classrooms. The study also determined if different levels

of cultural awareness existed between teacher groups in relation to their race/ethnicity,

gender, level of education, number of years teaching experience, level of education, and

exposure to or experience with multicultural education training. A group of 305 certified,

in-service elementary school teachers completed the Cultural Diversity Awareness

Inventory, which assessed their beliefs about cultural diversity in five domains: general

cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment,

and creating a multicultural environment. Results indicated that elementary, in-service

teachers are most culturally aware in domain one, general cultural awareness; they are

least culturally aware in domain four, assessment. There was not a significant difference

between teachers’ extent of cultural diversity awareness in the five domains in regards to

race, gender, level of education, years teaching experience, and exposure to or experience

with multicultural education training.

In-service, elementary teachers in Georgia, who are primarily monocultural,

realize that the children they serve have cultures different from their own. Teachers

understand the importance of identifying the ethnic groups of their students and their
 2

families, and they are comfortable in settings with people who exhibit values different

from their own. Additionally, in-service, elementary teachers in Georgia classrooms

believe in creating a multicultural learning environment in which family views are

included in program planning, and they believe in making accommodations for different

cultures and learning styles.

INDEX WORDS: Cultural diversity awareness, Multicultural education, Cultural

awareness, Culturally diverse families, Cross-cultural communication, Assessment,

Multicultural environment, Monocultural

 CULTURAL DIVERSITY AWARENESS OF

ELEMENTARY TEACHERS IN GEORGIA CLASSROOMS

by

SOHMER EVANS COLLINS

M. Ed., Fort Valley State University, 2002

Ed. S., Lincoln Memorial University, 2006

A Dissertation Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of Georgia Southern University in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree

DOCTOR OF EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

STATESBORO, GEORGIA

2009
 4

© 2009

Sohmer Evans Collins

All Rights Reserved

 5

CULTURAL DIVERSITY AWARENESS OF

ELEMENTARY TEACHERS IN GEORGIA CLASSROOMS

by

SOHMER EVANS COLLINS

Major Professor: Linda M. Arthur

Committee: Barbara Mallory

Mary Bennett

Electronic Version Approved:

May 2009
 DEDICATION

This dissertation is dedicated to my family and friends, particularly my mother

and father, Marie E. Evans and Larry L. Evans. Thank you for your support, I could not
have done this without the two of you. You have made me who I am.

I am also dedicating this to my spiritual parents and leaders, Bishop B. F. and

Mother Pauline McKibben. Thank you for instilling in me the right to believe that I am
somebody and for teaching me to believe that I can do all things through Christ who
gives me strength.

To my babies, Romez and Ramirra…I will forever love you! The two of you are
my inspiration.
 7

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I extend my gratitude to my entire family who “prayed me through” this process.

We did not talk much about my progress, but I knew you were rooting for my success. I

am eternally grateful for my two children, Romez and Ramirra, for understanding when I

was busy and trying to take care of their “small things” while I worked. Romez, a senior

in high school, took care of a lot of his senior things alone to free up time for me.

Ramirra, a fifth grader, learned to wash her own clothes and pack her own lunches,

without persuasion from me. She was being thoughtful. They both tried to limit their

knocking on my study door to ask, “Moma, are you busy? Are you at a good stopping

point?”

I am eternally appreciative for wonderful parents who were able to help me when

I fell short with expenses. A change in my marital status resulted in a big budget change

for me. I was still able to move forward because of my parent’s love and belief in

me…and their money. They are certain to continue proudly announcing that I am their

daughter.

I want to especially express my deepest thanks to Lya Snell for helping ease my

mind about SPSS, a program of which I was totally oblivious. Also, I extend my thanks

to Dr. Stephen Jenkins who, though not a member of my chair or a former professor of

mine, helped me with SPSS; he helped me manipulate the program to create charts, and

assisted me with reading the charts that were created.

When I truly felt like giving up because of different aggravations and setbacks,

including SPSS, my friend, Bernard McKibben encouraged me to keep going. Feeling

 8

that I would disappoint others, especially my parents, I did not disclose my fear of not

being able to finish (“on time”) to anyone except Bernard. He pushed me to keep going.

My church family at The Gospel of Christ Holiness Church prayed for my

success. I am thankful that they kept me before the Lord. Our prayer warrior, Sister

Watkins is a powerful woman of God, and I appreciate her labor of love on my behalf.

My colleagues at Jackson Elementary School were supportive. I am thankful to

have such wonderful co-workers who I consider part of my family. Thank you to

Mrs. Cheryl Hilderbrand and Mrs. Sharon Ohonba for allowing me take those days

needed to get work completed. Thank you, Dr. Toni Clark and Jay Ellis, for continuously

asking me about my progress and for encouraging me to move forward.

Finally, I would like to acknowledge my dissertation chair for their tactful and

considerate way of directing me towards the “safest” way to conduct my research.

Dr. Linda M. Arthur, Dr. Barbara Mallory, and Dr. Mary Bennett sensed my passion and

forced me to investigate in a way that would not allow preconceived ideas to interfere

with my findings.
 9

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ...................................................................................................7

LIST OF TABLES.............................................................................................................12

CHAPTER

1 INTRODUCTION ...........................................................................................13

Background of the Study.............................................................................14

Statement of the Problem ............................................................................17

Research Questions .....................................................................................18

Significance of the Study ............................................................................19

Research Procedures....................................................................................20

Summary of the Study.................................................................................22

2 REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .................................................................23

Introduction .................................................................................................23

General Cultural Awareness........................................................................24

Culturally Diverse Families.........................................................................27

Cross-Cultural Communication...................................................................29

Assessment ..................................................................................................31

Creating a Multicultural Learning Environment .........................................34

Summary .....................................................................................................39

3 METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................41

Introduction .................................................................................................41
 10

Research Questions .....................................................................................43

Research Design ..........................................................................................43

Population....................................................................................................45

Sample .........................................................................................................45

Instrumentation............................................................................................46

Data Collection............................................................................................48

Data Analysis ..............................................................................................49

Delimitations of the Study...........................................................................51

Limitations of the Study ..............................................................................51

Summary of the Research Design ...............................................................52

4 RESEARCH FINDINGS .................................................................................53

Introduction .................................................................................................53

Research Questions .....................................................................................53

Research Design ..........................................................................................54

Respondents.................................................................................................54

Demographic Profile of Respondents..........................................................56

Summary of Respondents............................................................................57

Findings .......................................................................................................57

Data Analysis ..............................................................................................58

Summary .....................................................................................................68

5 SUMMARY, RESEARCH FINDINGS, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS,

IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUDING

THOUGHTS ...............................................................................................70
 11

Summary .....................................................................................................70

Research Findings .......................................................................................71

Discussion ...................................................................................................73

Conclusions .................................................................................................80

Implications .................................................................................................81

Recommendations .......................................................................................83

Concluding Thoughts ..................................................................................84

REFERENCES ..................................................................................................................87

APPENDICES

A IRB Approval...................................................................................................98

B Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory .......................................................100

 12

LIST OF TABLES

Page

Table 1 Means, Standard Deviation, and Ratio of Participants for CDAI Scales by Five

Domains ..............................................................................................................59

Table 2 Means, Standard Deviation, and t-Test Values for CDAI Scales by Five Domains

by Race................................................................................................................63

Table 3 Means, Standard Deviation, and t-Test Values for CDAI Scales by Five Domains

by Gender............................................................................................................64

Table 4 Means, Standard Deviation, and F-Values for CDAI Scales by Five Domains by

Level of Education..............................................................................................65

Table 5 Spearman’s rho Correlation of Years Teaching Experience of Participants for

CDAI Scales by Five Domains ...........................................................................66

Table 6 Means, Standard Deviation, and t-Test Values for CDAI Scales by Five Domains

by Multicultural Education Experience ..............................................................67

 13

If we are to achieve a richer culture, rich in contrasting values, we must recognize the

whole gamut of human potentialities, and so weave a less arbitrary social fabric, one in

which each diverse human gift will find a fitting place.

~ Margaret Mead

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Cultural diversity of student population in the United States continues to increase

while the same kind of diversity within the teacher population continues to decrease

(Snyder & Hoffman, 2002). In today’s traditional, elementary, public schools, 83.5% of

teachers are White; 42% of the student population is non-White, including Black,

Hispanic, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native (National Center

for Education Statistics, 2004). The monocultural teaching force is accountable for the

academic success of culturally diverse learners (Grant & Wieczorek, 2000). However,

according to Irvine (1990) and Ladson-Billings (2001), this cultural gap between teachers

and students seems to have more profound academic and social implications for

ethnically and culturally diverse students. Researchers have found that cultural diversity

awareness has a bearing on the academic success of culturally diverse learners (Walker-

Dalhouse & Dalhouse, 2006; Bennett, 1999; Zeichner, 2003; Gollnick & Chinn, 2002).

The purpose of this study was to describe the cultural diversity awareness of

practicing elementary teachers in terms of their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education,

number of years teaching experience, and their experience with or exposure to

multicultural educational training. Using a quantitative method, the extent of cultural

diversity awareness of elementary teachers was examined. In-service, or practicing,

 14

teachers completed a 33-item questionnaire to assess their awareness of cultural diversity.

The goal of this descriptive study was to present basic information profiling the 305

respondents and describing the issues under study.

It is important that several terms or phrases used in this study are clearly

understood, including culture, monocultural, multicultural, cultural diversity,

multicultural education, and cultural discontinuity. Culture, as defined by Merriam-

Webster Online, is the customary beliefs, social forms, and material traits of a racial,

religious, or social group. Merriam-Webster Online defines monocultural as a culture

dominated by a single element, a prevailing culture marked by homogeneity.

Multicultural is defined by Merriam-Webster Online as relating to, reflecting, or adapted

to diverse cultures. As defined by Sleeter (1992), cultural diversity is the differences in

race, ethnicity, language, nationality, religion, etc. among various groups within a

community. According to Banks (2007), multicultural education can be defined as a field

of study and an emerging discipline whose major aim is to create equal educational

opportunities for students from diverse racial, ethnic, social-class, and cultural groups.

Cultural discontinuity, also referred to as cultural mismatch, involves one’s

misinterpretations of cultural styles, communication styles, and behavior patterns

different from their own (Downey & Pribesh, 2004).

Background of the Study

There continues to be a gap in the academic level of performance between White

and non-White, or minority, students (Booker, 2007). The achievement gap is not a new

problem, but one that has long plagued the field of education. In many states, minority

students perform significantly lower than their White classmates on standardized tests
 15

(Borman & Kimball, 2005). The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)

has assessed student reading and mathematics performance since the early 1990s

(National Center for Education Statistics, 2008). Data from the National Center for

Education Statistics (NCES) reveals that in 2007, at the 4th-grade level, Blacks scored,

on average, 25 points lower than Whites in Reading. Hispanics, at the same grade level,

performed 18 points lower than Whites in Reading. In Math, there was a 26 point gap

between Black and White 4th-graders and a 21 point gap between Hispanic and White

4th-graders. Reports reveal that minority students are making gains, but despite those

gains, they are still performing substantially lower than their White counterparts. For

decades, researchers have attempted to pinpoint the main factors that influence the

achievement gap between Whites and non-White students (Myers, Kim, & Mandala,

2004).

One debate about the low performance level of minority students is the issue of

cultural discontinuity (Tyson, 2003). Scholars have argued that cultural discontinuity

between teachers and their students is a significant factor in the underachievement and

failure of minority students (Delpit, 1995; Irvine, 1990; Miron, 1996; Sleeter, 1992).

Cultural discontinuity involves teachers’ misinterpretations of cultural styles different

from their own, teachers’ lack of understanding about how cultural patterns influence

learning, teachers’ negative expectations in regards to behavior and academic progress

among diverse students, and teachers’ lack of providing multicultural learning

experiences (Rower & Koontz, 1995; Downey & Pribesh, 2004; Walker-Dalhouse &

Dalhouse, 2006; Allen & Boykin, 1992). Tyson (2003), states that schools are structured

based on the cultural norms and standards of “mainstream” White middle-class society.
 16

Elements of multiculturalism are often left out of learning tasks and contexts (Bailey &

Boykin, 2001; Boykin & Cunningham, 2001).

According to Roach (2004), the role that culture plays in fostering or not fostering

the intellectual development of minority children is emerging as an arena of considerable

tension and disagreement. Discussions about genetic differences among racial groups

have faded away in policy and research settings, yet the discussion about culture has

become the “hot potato” of the racial learning gap debate (Roach, 2004). While the

student population continues to become more culturally diverse, teaching positions are

being increasingly filled with monocultural, White, middle-class females (Cochran-

Smith, Davis, & Fries, 2004).The National Center for Education Information (2005)

reported that eight out of ten public school teachers are female. In addition to that,

Cochran-Smith, Davis, & Fries (2004), make known that 80-93% of students enrolled in

collegiate education programs are White. Multicultural education scholars have

consistently called for authentic integration of multicultural principles and practices into

teacher education programs (Banks, 2007; Bennett, 1999).

Many prospective teachers have had very little experience with cultural diversity

(Nieto, 2000). Irvine (1990), noted that a lack of cultural synchronization and negative

teacher expectations result in hidden, often unintended, conflict between teachers and

their students, a situation that ultimately leads to lower achievement. There is mounting

evidence that when elements of multiculturalism are incorporated into learning tasks and

contexts, minority students improve in performance, engagement, and motivation (Allen

& Boykin, 1992; Allen & Butler, 1996; Bailey & Boykin, 2001; Boykin & Cunningham,

2001; Hurley 1999).

 17

Statement of the Problem

While the student population continues to become more culturally diverse,

educators are predominately monocultural, resulting in cultural mismatch in classrooms.

In today’s traditional, elementary, public schools, 83.5% of teachers are White, and 42%

of students are non-White (NCES, 2004). In the nation’s largest public school districts,

one-third of the student population is racially and ethnically diverse (NCES, 2004).

Multicultural educational practices needed to address diversity in the classroom are often

minimal or nonexistent because of monocultural educational practices and teachers’ lack

of cultural awareness or cultural discontinuity. Cultural discontinuity includes

misinterpretations of cultural styles, communication styles, and behavior patterns.

Teachers often experience cultural discontinuity in the classroom because of their lack of

background knowledge and minimal lived experiences with others having oppositional

cultures.

Studies have been conducted to examine preservice teachers’ sense of cultural

awareness and their feelings towards teaching in culturally diverse classroom settings.

Researchers argue that multicultural educational courses should be included in teacher

education programs to prepare preservice teachers to meet the challenges of cultural

diversity in the classroom. However, there is a lack of research exploring the extent of

cultural diversity awareness among in-service or practicing elementary teachers.

Furthermore, research does not reveal which groups of teachers, in terms of their

race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years teaching, and their experience

with or exposure to multicultural education, have higher levels of cultural diversity

 18

awareness. This information could be useful for school leaders when planning

professional learning or staff development.

School leaders are accountable for their staff and for providing staff development

opportunities for the purpose of improving student achievement and eliminating the

achievement gap, as mandated by No Child Left Behind (Educational Research

Association, 2001). It is worthwhile for school leaders to know the extent of cultural

diversity awareness of teachers in their schools. School leaders can use the data to plan

staff development accordingly, and to maintain a school where cultural identities are

valued and multicultural educational practices are implemented. Therefore, the purpose

of this study was to describe the cultural diversity awareness of practicing elementary

teachers in terms of their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years

teaching, and their experience with or exposure to multicultural educational training.

Research Questions

The overarching question for the research study was:

To what extent are elementary teachers in Georgia culturally aware?

The subquestions were these:

1. To what extent are elementary teachers culturally aware by these five

domains?

A. General Cultural Awareness

B. Culturally Diverse Families

C. Cross-Cultural Communication

D. Assessment

E. Creating a Multicultural Environment

 19

2. To what extent does elementary teachers’ cultural diversity awareness

vary by demographic variables of race/ethnicity, gender, level of

education, number of years teaching experience, and experience with or

exposure to multicultural educational training?

Significance of the Study

This study provides insight about elementary teachers’ cultural diversity

awareness. The study is relevant since the teacher population is more monocultural, while

the student population is more culturally diverse.

There is limited research that reveals the cultural diversity awareness of practicing

elementary teachers. This study contributes to the professional literature by becoming a

resource that describes the extent of cultural diversity awareness among practicing

elementary teachers by five domains. The study reveals the degree to which elementary

teachers have differences in awareness by five domains including, general cultural

diversity awareness, cultural diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment,

and creating a multicultural learning environment. Furthermore, findings reveal whether

or not there are differences in cultural diversity awareness among teachers in regards to

their race, gender, level of education, years teaching experience, and their experience

with multicultural education.

Participants in the study were afforded the opportunity to reflect upon their

awareness of cultural diversity. It is likely that participants, after analyzing and reflecting

upon their cultural awareness, will use the data to maintain and/or enhance culturally

responsive practices. Gay (2002) categorizes culturally responsive practices as

developing a culturally diverse knowledge base, designing culturally relevant curricula,

 20

demonstrating cultural caring while building a learning community, building effective

cross-cultural communications, and delivering culturally responsive instruction.

The researcher benefitted from this descriptive study; it will become the

foundation of future explanatory research involving cultural diversity awareness and

culturally responsive educators. As a school leader in an elementary school, the

researcher has observed incidents in which the teachers’ lack of cultural diversity

awareness has caused conflict in the classroom setting, affecting the academic growth of

minority students. Furthermore, the researcher is an elementary school assistant principal

in a district with only three elementary schools. The three elementary schools have

similar demographics. Teachers in all three elementary schools have participated in book

studies and other staff development programs to extend their knowledge about teaching

culturally diverse students, indicating that school administrators felt it necessary to

educate teachers concerning the matter. The researcher led a book study, Framework for

Understanding Poverty (Payne, 1996), in an elementary school setting in efforts to help

teachers become more acquainted with the lifestyles and cultural patterns of students

different from themselves. This study allows the researcher to provide more information

to school leaders and elementary teachers about cultural diversity, with the endeavor to

improve student achievement and close the achievement gap between White and non-

White students.

Research Procedures

The researcher employed a quantitative method to conduct the study. As the

purpose of this study was to describe the cultural diversity awareness of practicing

elementary teachers in terms of their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of

 21

years teaching experience, and their experience with or exposure to multicultural

education training, the quantitative method allowed the researcher to collect data and

analyze the data to describe the extent of cultural diversity awareness of practicing, or in-

service elementary teachers.

After receiving approval from the IRB, the researcher administered the Cultural

Diversity Awareness Inventory (CDAI) to practicing elementary teachers in three Middle

Georgia school districts, totaling 305 respondents. The survey was administered at each

elementary school during their regularly scheduled faculty meeting. Responses were

collected upon participants’ completion. The survey consisted of 28 items, categorized by

five domains: (1) Cultural Awareness, (2) Culturally Diverse Family, (3) Cross-Cultural

Communication, (4) Assessment, and (5) Creating a Multicultural Learning Environment

Using Multicultural Methods. An additional five items requesting demographical

information were added by the researcher for a total of 33 items.

The researcher collected the responses and analyzed the data using Statistical

Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The researcher carried out t-tests, a one-way

analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Spearman’s rho to compute means and to indicate

sample differences for each of the five domains of cultural diversity awareness, as

indicated by the CDAI, for each of the mediating variables. Mediating variables included

race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years teaching experience, and their

(participants’) experience with or exposure to multicultural education training.

This study was delimited to certified, practicing elementary teachers in Middle

Georgia. Participants in the study were from three districts.

 22

The research is based on self-reported data, which is a limitation of the study.

Findings may not be reflective of school districts outside of Georgia.

Summary of the Study

While the student population continues to become more culturally diverse, the

teaching force is becoming more monocultural (Villegas and Lucas, 2002). The purpose

of this study was to describe the cultural diversity awareness of practicing elementary

teachers in terms of their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years

teaching experience, and their experience with or exposure to multicultural education

training.

This study is relevant because the teacher population in today’s public schools is

becoming more monocultural, while the student population is becoming more culturally

diverse (Villegas and Lucas, 2002). The study contributes to the professional literature as

a resource that makes the extent of cultural diversity awareness of practicing elementary

teachers in Georgia classrooms known.

 23

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

Serious academic and social problems needing urgent and thoughtful attention are

present in today’s classrooms (Banks, 2000). According to Banks (2000), increased

diversification in school population has caused critical problems. While the student

population continues to become increasingly culturally diverse, the teaching force is

predominately White, female, and monocultural (Villegas and Lucas, 2002). The

monocultural teaching force is accountable for the academic success of culturally diverse

learners (Grant & Wieczorek, 2002). However, according to Irvine (1990) and Ladson-

Billings (2001), this cultural gap between students and teachers seems to have more

profound academic and social implications for ethnically and culturally diverse students.

Brown (2007) concluded that non-White, or minority students may be performing

substantially lower than their White classmates because of cultural discontinuity. Cultural

discontinuity involves teachers’ misinterpretations of cultural styles different from their

own, teachers’ lack of knowledge about how cultural patterns influence learning,

teachers’ negative expectations in regards to behavior and academic progress among

diverse students, and teachers’ exclusion of multicultural learning experiences (Rower &

Koontz, 1995; Downey & Pribesh, 2004; Walker-Dalhouse & Dalhouse, 2006; Allen &

Boykin, 1992; Boykin & Cunningham, 2001). It is important that teachers are conscious

of the extent of their cultural diversity awareness in order to meet the challenges of

teaching in culturally diverse settings.

 24

The intention of the review of literature is to convey what the research states

about elementary teachers’ awareness of cultural diversity in five domains: cultural

awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment, and

creating a multicultural learning environment. There is limited research about the extent

of cultural diversity awareness among practicing elementary teachers; therefore, the

review of literature will include information about preservice teachers’ experiences with

students having oppositional cultures. Cotton (2001) identified 55 studies that examined

the impact of various schooling practices on the intercultural knowledge, attitudes, and/or

behavior of teachers and students. However, only 4 of the 55 studies had practicing

teachers as subjects. Furthermore, research that shows a correlation of cultural diversity

awareness between teachers in regards to their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education,

number of years teaching experience, and their experience with or exposure to

multicultural educational is scarce.

General Cultural Awareness

Today’s classrooms are microcosms of the larger society of the United States: a

sea of faces representing a plurality of cultures, races, religions, and ethnicities

(Stallworth, Gibbons, & Fauber, 2006). Teachers are born into a culture and through

socialization processes learn about culture, which ultimately represents our reality and

world view (Cruz-Janzen, 2000; Gollnik & Chinn, 2002). It is important to learn that not

everyone is the same. Ladson-Billings (2001) maintains that teachers should possess high

levels of cultural awareness in order to meet the needs of a diversely populated student

body. Teachers in classrooms often receive training in multicultural issues to ensure that

all students are respected for their own unique sets of differences. In order to facilitate the
 25

successful academic instruction of a diverse student population, teachers must have a

strong cultural awareness or multicultural orientation (Bennett, 1999). The development

of multicultural understanding is measured by the teacher’s depth of cultural self-

awareness, affective response to difference, capacity for cross-cultural relations, and the

degree to which his or her teaching style is multicultural as opposed to Eurocentric

(McFadden, Merryfield, & Barron, 1997). Limited research is available about practicing

teachers’ thinking, beliefs, and understanding of cultural diversity.

Some authors have established the link between teacher’s thoughts, beliefs, and

corresponding behaviors in culturally diverse classrooms (Duff & Uchida, 1997;

Ferguson, 2000; Gay, 2002; Skiba et al., 2000). For example, Duff and Uchida (1997)

examined direct teaching behaviors versus expressed attitudes in a sample of teachers,

finding incongruence. Though the teachers professed certain beliefs and

understandings about cultural diversity, these beliefs were constantly being renegotiated,

and in some cases ignored. According to Manning (2000), many teachers find cultural

differences awkward, and they are uncomfortable discussing it.

Sleeter (1992) studied beliefs about cultural diversity with 30 practicing teachers,

discerning four distinct groups. The first group minimized the relevance of cultural

diversity because they believed all students had an equal opportunity to achieve. The

second group believed multicultural education improved group relations and student

achievement, while the third group saw it as enhancing minority students’ self-esteem

and coping skills necessary to their marginalized positions in society. Group four was

most able to cope with change and more likely to incorporate culturally diverse practices

in the curriculum, but as an additive. They had not restructured their teaching in any way.
 26

Overall Sleeter (1992) concluded that teachers were more likely to assimilate knowledge

about diversity issues rather than reconstruct it. The research of Walker-Dalhouse &

Dalhouse (2006), Ladson-Billings (1994), Manning (2000), and Moore (2007) suggest

that most teachers have concerns about working with diverse student populations and

need to examine their beliefs, broaden their knowledge, and develop abilities for relating

to students from diverse cultures.

Though numerous researchers have concluded that practicing teachers have

negative thoughts about cultural diversity, in a study by Taylor (2000), teachers

demonstrated having more positive beliefs. Taylor (2000) conducted a study in which 45

predominantly white teacher educators completed the Beliefs About Diversity Scale

(BADS). The BADS assessed beliefs about diversity in regards to race, gender, social

class, ability, language/immigration, sexual orientation, and multicultural education.

Teacher educators scored at culturally sensitive levels for all subgroup areas; teachers

were positively sensitive in their overall beliefs about diversity. In a similar study

conducted by McNeal (2005), the multicultural beliefs and practices of two novice

teachers revealed that the two teachers had high levels of consistency between their

intended multicultural practices and their implemented practices. Based on classroom

observations, both teachers illustrated having strong beliefs about the importance of

cultural diversity by implementing the general multicultural practices of critical

pedagogy, real life application, student choice, multicultural literature, individual student

attention, cultural physical adaptation, active learning and cooperative grouping.

 27

According to McNeal (2005), the factors supporting multicultural infusion were the

teachers’ previous experiences with diverse populations and the teachers’ backgrounds

that were similar to their students.

Culturally Diverse Families

For a long time, researchers have known that children’s home environment

contributes greatly to their academic, social, and emotional success in the school. As

early as 1966, researchers (Coleman et al.) suggested that factors outside school are as

influential, or even more, than school processes. Later research proves that, among other

characteristics, effective schools have strong and positive home-school relationships

(Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000). It is important that teachers maintain an understanding that

children will bring the language, behavior, norms, values, and beliefs learned from their

families and communities into the classroom (DiMartino, 1989). According to DiMartino

(1989), teachers need to be aware of cultural differences and recognize that not everyone

will share the same values and beliefs and that “different from” does not mean “less

than.” Dixon and Fraser (1986) suggested that teachers have an understanding of

children’s home life, such as: the language spoken in the home; who constitutes the

family living in the home; and what beliefs and practices are important to the family.

According to Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006), culturally responsive teachers

demonstrate their awareness of culturally diverse family by establishing parent

interaction outside school activities, by seeking parent input in program planning, by

addressing interaction in conferences with parents of different cultures, and by

determining family preferences for ethnic identification.

 28

Hoover-Dempsey and Sandler (1995) argued that the school’s invitation for

parental involvement is a key factor for determining parents’ decisions to become

involved in their children’s education. Too often, teachers blame parents, particularly

minority parents, when there are misunderstandings about attitude and conduct (Dixon &

Fraser, 1986). As a result, teachers often neglect to invite parents to participate in shared

educational decision making. In this case, minority parents feel that professionals

discount their ideas, or they become reluctant to being involved (Dixon & Fraser, 1986).

Dixon and Fraser (1986) stated, “When educators involve minority parents as partners in

their children’s education, parents appear to develop a sense of efficacy that

communicates itself to children, with positive academic consequences.”

In a study conducted by Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006), the Cultural

Diversity Awareness Inventory (CDAI) was used to investigate White preservice

teachers’ beliefs about teaching in culturally diverse classroom settings. The instrument

measured five categories, including culturally diverse family. The instrument was given

to participants before and after their participation in a diversity seminar/practicum. The

results revealed a substantial difference between pre and post test scores about preservice

teachers’ belief that teachers should establish parent interactions outside of school

activities. The post test score was significantly higher than the pre test score. Results also

revealed a significant difference between pre and post test scores, with higher mean

scores shown for the post test, indicating that family views should be a part of program

planning for students.

In another study, similar to Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006), 637

preservice teachers who were enrolled in the student teaching phase of elementary
 29

teacher education programs throughout the southeastern part of the USA were given the

CDAI to determine their level of cultural sensitivity. Davis (1994) discussed the study

that explored the concerns and perceptions of culturally diverse families and the attitudes

of preservice teachers toward students from culturally diverse families. Findings

disclosed that elementary preservice teachers were culturally sensitive in the area of the

culturally diverse family with a mean score of 3.62. It was determined that the preservice

teachers’ multicultural education training contributed to their high levels of cultural

sensitivity. Ongoing staff development and multicultural education training is needed to

help teachers increase their awareness of culturally diverse families (Ladson-Billings,

1994; Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000). There is a need for teachers to understand parental

perceptions and concerns and to involve parents in school affairs if students are going to

be educated effectively (Davis, 1994).

Cross-Cultural Communication

A complex problem for American school concerns the education of students

whose primary language is not English, and students who are learning English as a

second language are clearly faced with more than learning the grammar of a new

language (Fillmore, 1983). According to Goldenberg (1996), language-minority students,

particularly those who are Spanish-speaking and from low-income backgrounds,

generally do not do well in U. S. schools. Teachers of language-minority students face

the daunting task of simultaneously building literacy, developing written expression

ability, and enhancing English language growth (Gersten, 1996). Lee’s (1998) study

examined language-minority parents’ views on bilingual education, and the majority of

the parents supported bilingual education in U.S. schools.

 30

By federal mandate, and in many places, by state law, schools are required to

identify students from non-English-speaking homes who might have difficulty with

English and determine, by formal assessment, whether the students need special linguistic

or instructional help in school (Fillmore, 1983). Schools are required to provide services

for students who do not know English well enough to profit from classroom instruction

given in English. Despite pockets of success, Krashen and Biber (1988) believe that the

overall picture for students’ success is troubling. Krashen and Biber (1998) found that

Spanish-speaking students, even when taught and tested in Spanish, still score at the

thirty-seventh percentile. Eighty-five percent of Hispanic fourth and eighth graders read

in English at a basic level or below, meaning they cannot demonstrate understanding of a

text written at their grade level (Mullis, Campbell & Farstrup, 1993). This could be a

result of low engagement in English. Arreaga-Mayer and Perdomo-Rivera’s (1996)

findings show low levels of oral engagement and academic talk among at-risk language-

minority students in mainstream classes. Their data suggest that teachers’ inordinate

emphasis on whole-class instruction and individual seat-work severely limits these

students’ opportunities to talk, ask and answer questions, read aloud, and otherwise

actively engage in learning language and content. Certainly, how teachers organize their

classrooms has important consequences for students’ learning opportunities and their

achievement (Villegas & Lucas, 2002).

Teachers of language-minority students must simultaneously assist students to

build literacy, develop written expression ability, and enhance English language growth

(Gersten, 1996). Gersten (1996) asserts that this task can be increasingly complicated

during the years that language-minority students make the transition from instruction that
 31

has been provided primarily in their native language, to instruction that is provided

primarily in English. The years when language-minority students make the transition

from specialized bilingual programs to mainstream English language instruction are often

extremely problematic for their teachers (Ramirez, 1992). According to Ramirez (1992)

these are also the years when teachers most often refer students for help from the special

education system or other compensatory programs.

In Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse’s (2006) study, differences were found

between preservice teachers’ pre and post tests response to cross-cultural communication

issues using the CDAI. Preservice teachers indicated that they were less uncomfortable

with people who speak non-standard English after participating in a diversity

seminar/practicum. The post test also revealed that preservice teachers were least likely

to correct students without modeling or providing an explanation. More preservice

teachers, as indicated by the CDAI, thought that regular curriculum should include ESL

for non-English speaking students after participating in a diversity seminar/practicum. In

another study by Davis (1993), preservice teachers revealed higher levels of sensitivity to

cross-cultural communication after being involved in multicultural education training.

The highest sensitivity score was “Regular curriculum should include ESL for non-

English speaking children.” It can be concluded that professional learning, including

multicultural education training, can encourage cultural sensitivity or cultural awareness

in terms of cross-cultural communication.

Assessment

Assessment systems afford teachers the opportunity to determine whether

students have learned the intended content. Student assessments, according to the
 32

Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment (2007), allow the teacher to do more

than assign a grade; student assessments assist teachers with exploring how to improve

student learning and monitor student learning throughout the course of instruction.

According to the Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment (2007), there are

benefits of student assessment, such as: improves student learning; identifies

instructional, course, and assignment challenges; improves instruction by identifying

what instructional adjustments may be needed; ensures grading is reflective of students’

learning towards objectives; and makes grading more systematic. Importantly, student

assessment systems should be fair (Stobart, 2005). Stobart (2005) argues that fair

assessment cannot be considered in isolation from both the curriculum and the

educational opportunities of all students. According to Stobart (2005), fair assessment

systems, unlike traditional standardized testing, refrain from testing or assessing students

based on “mainstream” standards.

Although traditional standardized testing is typically used for measuring student

progress, for accountability, classification purposes, and reporting procedures, the blanket

use of traditional test measures needs to be reconsidered for use with the growing number

of culturally diverse students and students who are English Language Learners (Spinelli,

2008). Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006) contend that assessment systems in

culturally responsive settings consider students’ cultural and language differences.

Although attempts are made to accommodate cultural and linguistic differences, few of

the standardized assessment instruments used to determine eligibility for classification

are available in languages other than English (Spinelli, 2008). Additionally, Ortiz and

Yates (2001) maintains that most assessment personnel (teachers) have little or no
 33

training in test administration in any language other than English nor have they been

trained how to understand or interpret the interaction of disabilities and linguistic,

cultural, and other student characteristics.

In Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse’s (2006) study, preservice teachers showed a

significant difference in how they responded to questions about assessment on the CDAI.

There was a significant difference found between pre and post test scores with the post

test showing the lower score and suggesting that preservice teachers were less likely,

after participating in multicultural education training, to refer students whose learning

difficulties appeared to be cultural and language related.

In many cases, students with cultural differences or students with limited English

proficiency perform poorly on traditional testing instruments and is subsequently

misidentified as having a learning disability (Ortiz & Graves, 2001). Problems associated

with inappropriate classification and placements include the following:

• being denied access to the general education curriculum;

• being placed in separate programs with more limited curriculum that may impact

the student’s access to post-secondary education and employment opportunities;

and

• being stigmatized as a misclassification may negatively impact students’ self-

perception and perceptions of others. (U.S. Department of Education, 1997)

Informal assessments, such as curriculum-based assessment, performance-based

assessment, portfolio assessment and dynamic assessment, can provide important

information about students with cultural and linguistic differences (Frisby, 2001).

Informal measures are more motivating than other types of assessment because they
 34

engage students in realistic uses of literature and content-area concepts and promote

transfer or generalizability of learning from facts and procedures to applications in

meaningful contexts (Pierce, 2002). Curriculum-based procedures focus on measuring

mastery of goals, objectives, and criteria embedded in school-adopted curriculum, and

allow frequent collection of student performance data to assess instructional effectiveness

(McConnell, 2000). Performance-based assessment is particularly appropriate for English

language learners because it provides an opportunity for students to demonstrate a variety

of language, literacy, cognitive, social, and motor skills (Frisby, 2001).

According to Farr and Trumbull (1997), portfolio assessments are tools used to

facilitate communication between teachers and parents and have been successful among

students with cultural and linguistic differences. With portfolio assessments, authentic

samples of students’ work are collected over time, and portfolios can focus on work

products based on students’ culture and native language. The use of dynamic assessment

is beneficial for students with culturally and linguistically different backgrounds due to

the fact that it is characterized by approaches using guided support or direct participation

by the evaluator interacting with the student with the intent of determining students’

learning potential, their responsiveness to instruction, and metacognitive processes

(Bialystok, 2001). Teachers must be trained how to use these types of assessments to

ensure academic success for all learners.

Creating a Multicultural Learning Environment

In a multicultural learning environment, the goal is to maximize multiculturalism.

Too often teachers with multicultural classrooms still maintain that they do not need to

include multicultural education in their instruction (Cruz-Janzen, 2000; Gollnik & Chinn,
 35

2002). It is difficult for them to understand that multicultural education is really just

about the lives of children and their families within and outside their classrooms. The

goal of multiculturalism, or cultural diversity awareness in the classroom, is to create

equal educational opportunities for students from diverse racial, ethnic, social-class, and

cultural groups (Banks, 2000). Banks (2000) maintains that the goal of multiculturalism

also includes helping students to acquire the knowledge, attitudes, and skills needed to

function effectively in a pluralistic democratic society and to interact, negotiate, and

communicate with people from diverse groups in order to create a civic and moral

community that works for the common good. This goal, often considered a complex task,

is most likely to be accomplished by culturally responsive teachers (Montgomery, 2001).

With high levels of multiculturalism, school leaders can hope for culturally

responsive teachers who believe that culture deeply influences the way children learn

(Cabello & Burstein, 1995); therefore, they make the effort to ensure that classroom

instruction is conducted in a manner that is responsive to their students’ home culture.

According to Ladson-Billings (1994), culturally responsive teachers understand the

notion of cultural relevance, which moves beyond language to include other aspects of

student and school culture. Ladson-Billings (1994) ascertains that culturally relevant

teaching is a pedagogy that empowers students intellectually, socially, emotionally, and

politically by using cultural referents to impart knowledge, skills, and attitudes. Gay

(2002) believes that culture encompasses many things, some of which are more important

for teachers to know than others because they have direct implications for successful

teaching and learning. Villegas and Lucas (2002) affirm that culturally responsive
 36

teachers understand the importance of being in sync with all cultures and are able to plan

and deliver culturally responsive instruction, meeting the needs of all students.

Researchers, Ladson-Billings (2001), Gay (2002), and Villegas and Lucas (2002)

put forward the characteristics of culturally responsive teachers. Ladson-Billings (2001)

identified three propositions relevant to culturally responsive teachers: culturally

responsive teachers focus on individual student’s academic achievement (e.g., clear

goals, multiple forms of assessment), have attained cultural competence and help in

developing student’s cultural competence, and develop a sense of sociopolitical

consciousness. Gay (2002) expanded on those frameworks of Ladson-Billings (2001) by

identifying five essential elements of culturally responsive teaching, including the idea

that culturally responsive teachers develop a cultural diversity knowledge base; design

culturally relevant curricula; demonstrate cultural caring, and build a learning

community; establish cross-cultural communications; and establish congruity in

classroom instruction.

Villegas and Lucas (2002) expanded even further the works of Ladson-Billings

(2001) and Gay (2002), and identified six characteristics that define culturally responsive

teaching. Villegas and Lucas (2002) make known that cultural responsive teachers as

those who are socio-culturally conscious, recognize that there are multiple ways of

perceiving reality and that these ways are influenced by one’s location in social order;

have affirming views of students from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds,

see resources for learning in all students rather than viewing differences as problems to

overcome; see themselves as both responsible for and capable of bringing about

educational change that will make schools responsive to all students; understand how
 37

learners construct knowledge and are capable of promoting learners’ knowledge

construction; know about the lives of their students; and use their knowledge about

students’ lives to design instruction that builds on what they already know while

stretching them beyond the familiar.

According to Montgomery (2001), culturally responsive teachers examine and

reflect upon their attitudes and practices. Culturally responsive teachers understand

that separating one’s own lived experiences from the act of teaching is an arduous, yet a

sometimes necessary task (Palmer, 1998). Additionally, culturally responsive teachers

seek to help students become more aware of their individual origins and those of others to

appreciate the contributions of all groups to the richness of the classroom experience

(Gay, 2000). In culturally responsive classrooms, students learn to accept themselves

with all of their strengths and limitations, and they learn to see others as having equaled

worth and dignity regardless of their differences (Brown, 2007).

According to Gay (2002), culturally responsive teachers build communities

among learners in which the welfare of the group takes precedence over the individual,

and the teacher creates reciprocity in the classroom, in which students and teachers

become partners to improve student learning. Creating partnerships and a climate that

establishes mutual support, helpfulness, and interdependence between students and

teachers is created more easily when teachers use praise and affirmation in

communicating with all students, are physically close to their students, and use student

recommendations to facilitate cooperation (Kuykendall, 2004). Both Gay (2002) and

Ladson-Billings (2001) explain how culturally responsive teachers use cultural

scaffolding—that is, students’ cultures and experiences—to expand their intellectual

 38

horizons and academic achievement. Rather than making different types of learning

(cognitive, physical, and emotional) discrete, Howard (2003) maintains that culturally

responsive teachers deal with them simultaneously. Howard (2003) also asserts that

culturally responsive teachers demonstrate cultural caring by matching instructional

techniques to students’ learning styles.

According to Ladson-Billings (2001), Gay (2002), and Villegas and Lucas

(2002), culturally responsive teachers construct curricula that are culturally relevant and

deliver culturally responsive instruction. These teachers are conscious of the power of

curricula as an instrument of teaching and use it to help convey important information,

values, and actions about ethnic and cultural diversity (Bigler, 1999). They also make

changes as necessary to ensure that a culture-fair curriculum is implemented. According

to the curriculum research by Anderson (1990) and Wilbur (1991), a culture-fair

curriculum includes many facets. First, the culture-fair curriculum acknowledges and

professes the contributions of many cultural groups. Second, a culture-fair curriculum

affirms similarities and differences among and within groups of people. Anderson (1990)

argues that teachers must value the varied perspectives that children bring with them into

the classroom, and teachers must respect children’s preferences to work autonomously or

cooperatively. Third, students benefit when their experiences, needs, and interests are

incorporated into learning activities. Ladson-Billings (2001) maintains that culturally

responsive teachers understand that hands-on projects, student presentations, student

demonstrations, and real-life applications of content are all vital in creating a

multicultural learning environment.

 39

Summary

The student population in the United States continues to become more

culturally diverse (Zeichner, 2003). The monocultural teaching force, dominated by

White females, is experiencing cultural mismatch between themselves and their students.

Monocultural teachers are also dealing with the issue of cultural discontinuity, which

involves misinterpretations of cultural styles, communication styles, and behavior

patterns. According to Reed (1998), teachers are entering culturally diverse classrooms

with negative beliefs, expecting low performance and underachievers, expecting little to

no parental involvement, and expecting to refer many students for alternative educational

programs. To promote positive beliefs and attitudes towards teaching in culturally diverse

classrooms, teachers can benefit from knowing the extent of their cultural awareness in

each of the five domains: (1) Cultural Awareness, (2) Culturally Diverse Family, (3)

Cross-Cultural Communication, (4) Assessment, and (5) Creating a Multicultural

Learning Environment. Preparing teachers for diverse classrooms and helping teachers

reveal their assumptions and biases about diversity are responsibilities that must be taken

into consideration (Moore, 2007).

One goal of multiculturalism is to increase cultural diversity awareness among

teachers. School leaders can hope for teachers with high levels of multiculturalism

because they are most likely to become culturally responsive practitioners. Culturally

responsive teachers, according to Ladson-Billings (2001), Gay (2002), and Villegas and

Lucas (2002) create learning atmospheres in which students and teachers feel respected

by and connected to one another. Culturally responsive teachers understand the cultural

characteristics and contributions of different ethnic groups. Culturally responsive teachers

 40

construct curricula that are culturally relevant and deliver culturally responsive

instruction (Ladson-Billings, 2001; Gay, 2002; Villegas and Lucas, 2002). For the most

part, according to Ladson-Billings (2001), there are higher levels of academic success in

culturally responsive classrooms.

 41

CHAPTER 3

METHODOLOGY

Introduction

One way educators meet needs of diverse student population is through the

implementation of culturally responsive practice in schools with diverse students.

However, where teacher populations are largely monocultural and White, the educational

system may be based upon primarily upon Eurocentric standards, values, and

expectations (Howard, 1999). A monocultural teaching force is described as one in which

the population of teachers is largely one race and one gender. For purposes of this study,

a monocultural teaching staff was one that was largely White and female. Multicultural

educational practices needed to address diversity in the classroom are often minimal or

nonexistent because of monocultural educational practices and teachers’ lack of cultural

awareness (Grant & Wieczorek, 2002).

Because of gaps in subgroup performance of students on test tests, researchers

have begun to focus on the teaching population.The No Child Left Behind Act requires

schools and districts to focus their attention on the academic achievement of traditionally

under-served groups of children, such as low-income students, students with disabilities,

and students of “major racial and ethnic subgroups” (Educational Research Association,

2001). Focusing attention on underserved students often begins with a focus on

instructional practices in schools where students are underperforming. Many researchers

have considered multicultural educational practices as essential to address diversity in the

classroom, because of richness and stimulation of possibilities in the education of all

children (Howard, 1999). However, Gay (2002) states:

 42

Instead there is a strong resistance to diversity. Individuals are socialized to

devalue, suspect, and pretend to ignore differences, especially those that derive

from class, race, ethnicity, and culture. Much of the socialization equates

differences with deficiencies that should be eradicated. The ultimate goal seems to

be to make everyone believe, value, and act the same. The standard of this

sameness is mainstream, European-American cultural norms. (p. 614)

If teachers are socialized to differences in cultures, then their educational practice

may not be reflective of multicultural educational practices needed to meet diverse

student populations. Cultural discontinuity involves teachers’ misinterpretations of

cultural styles different from their own, teachers’ lack of understanding about how

cultural patterns influence learning, teachers’ negative expectations in regards to behavior

and academic progress among diverse students, and teachers’ lack of providing

multicultural learning experiences (Rower & Koontz, 1995; Downey & Pribesh, 2004;

Walker-Dalhouse & Dalhouse, 2006; Allen Boykin, 1992). These issues may be

addressed by increasing cultural diversity awareness of teachers. However, the degree of

cultural awareness is often unknown. The scant literature on the extent of cultural

diversity awareness of elementary school teachers was the motivation for this study.

The purpose of this study was to describe the cultural diversity awareness of

practicing elementary teachers in terms of their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education,

number of years teaching, and their experience with or exposure to multicultural

educational training. Furthermore, this study identified culturally diversity awareness by

demographics of teachers, including race, gender, and levels of experience. Literature

reveals that when teachers are conscious of the extent of their cultural diversity
 43

awareness, they are more apt to enhance their professional performance (when necessary)

to include multicultural educational practices and are more inclined to ensure that

diversity is recognized and valued in their classrooms and schools.

Research Questions

The overarching question for the research study was:

To what extent are elementary teachers in Georgia culturally aware?

The subquestions were these:

1. To what extent are elementary teachers culturally aware by these five

domains?

A. General Cultural Awareness

B. Culturally Diverse Families

C. Cross-Cultural Communication

D. Assessment

E. Creating a Multicultural Environment

2. To what extent does elementary teachers’ cultural diversity awareness

vary by demographic variables of race/ethnicity, gender, level of

education, number of years teaching experience, and experience with or

exposure to multicultural educational training?

Research Design

The researcher employed a quantitative method to conduct the descriptive study.

According to Creswell (1994), a quantitative approach is context free and the intent is to

develop generalization, relying heavily upon statistical results represented with numbers

and is done to determine relationships, effects, and causes. Additionally, Creswell (2009)
 44

describes quantitative research as a method for testing objective theories by examining

the relationship among variables. These variables can be measured on instruments so that

numbered data can be analyzed using statistical procedures. As the purpose of this study

was to describe the cultural diversity awareness of practicing elementary teachers in

terms of their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years teaching

experience, and their experience with or exposure to multicultural education training, it

was determined that the quantitative method was best for the study. The quantitative

method allowed the researcher to collect data, analyze the data, and present the data

describing the extent of cultural diversity awareness of this group of elementary teachers.

According to Nardi (2006), descriptive research is often the first step in most research

projects and the primary objective for some. The primary objective of this study was to

determine cultural diversity awareness of elementary teachers, which provided a

descriptive portrayal of teachers’ cultural awareness by their demographics.

In the process of conducting a descriptive analysis of the variables, the researcher

was able to provide a profile of the respondents by the demographic items and descriptive

data collected through the administration of the CDAI for the other behaviors and

attitudes measured within each cultural awareness domain (Nardi, 2006). This study

determined the cultural awareness of practicing elementary teachers and analyzed the

awareness by mediating variables of demographics. Mean scores were computed by item

and by aligning the respondents’ mean score to the domains of cultural awareness. The

mediating or control variables were race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of

years teaching experience, and the experience of or exposure to multicultural education

training and the dependent variable is the awareness of cultural diversity; therefore, the
 45

use of t-tests, one-way analysis of variance, and Spearman’s rho were used to describe

how the extent of cultural diversity awareness is affected by demographics of teachers.

The researcher understood the importance of objectivity in this study; for that reason, the

researcher also considered the beliefs of Lichtman (2006), who concludes that the

quantitative approach is the best way to collect data through the process of science.

Population

The population for this study included practicing elementary teachers who were

members of a faculty that represented a primarily monocultural teaching group in a

school with a diversely populated student group. In Georgia, there are 46,461 elementary

teachers, Kindergarten through fifth grade. Of those teachers, 35,510 are White, 10,152

are Black, 222 are Asian, 432 are Hispanic, 53 are American Indian, and 92 are Multi-

Racial. There are 776,152 students enrolled in Georgia schools, Kindergarten through

fifth grade. There are 346,663 White students, 280,694 Black students, 24,506 Asian

students, 91,738 Hispanic students, 1,224 American Indian students, and 31,357 Multi-

Racial students. While the student population is diverse, 76% of the teaching population

is White.

Sample

In order to conduct the investigation, the researcher identified primarily

monocultural faculty in schools where the student population was diverse in three school

districts in Middle Georgia. All of the elementary schools included from District A,

District B, and District C were accredited by SACS and were Distinguished Title I

Schools, having met Annual Yearly Progress for the past six years, at least.
 46

A total of 107 teachers from three elementary schools in District A were included.

Teachers from District B were from four elementary schools, for a total of 101 teachers.

District C included 97 teachers from three elementary schools. All ten schools had similar

demographics. The student population in each school was at least 40% Black and Other,

while the teacher population was at least 90% White.

The researcher used a cluster sampling method to determine the sample size of

305. The cluster sampling method was combined with a stratified sampling method to

ensure an equal proportionate representation of the population.

Instrumentation

The research questions were answered using an instrument, the Cultural Diversity

Awareness Inventory (CDAI), which was published by Gertrude B. Henry, from the

Michigan Reading Association, in October of 1986. The questionnaire originally

consisted of 28 items to which respondents indicated the extent of their agreement or

disagreement to statements in each of the items. The purpose of the CDAI was to

investigate the cultural diversity awareness level of in-service elementary teachers. The

items of the instrument were aligned to five categories: (1) Cultural Awareness, (2)

Culturally Diverse Family, (3) Cross-Cultural Communication, (4) Assessment, and (5)

Creating a Multicultural Learning Environment Using Multicultural Methods, all of

which contributed to identifying cultural diversity awareness.

Since 1986, the questionnaire, has been proven to be reliable and valid, and has

been used by several researchers. The Cronbach’s test of internal consistency evidenced

an alpha coefficient of .90. The test-retest for reliability was established at .66. The CDAI

was tested for content validity by a panel of experts. Based on their analysis, it was
 47

revised and made available in 1995. Larke (1990) used the CDAI to assess the sensitivity

of preservice teachers. The CDAI was used by researcher Davis (1993), to investigate the

cultural sensitivity level of elementary preservice teachers. The CDAI has also been used

by Deering (1997) to explore the influence of a 10-week field experience on the diversity

sensitivity of middle school teacher education students; by Milner, Flowers, Moore,

Moore, and Flowers (2003) to examine the extent to which teacher education programs

were helping future teachers to become more multiculturally competent; by Brown

(2004) to examine the effect of instructional methodology on changes in cultural diversity

awareness; and by Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006) to investigate elementary

teachers’ awareness of cultural diversity.

The researcher chose this instrument because it has been used for decades by

many researchers, it has been tested and retested for reliability and validity, and it has

been made available for use by researchers since 1995. It has proven reliability to

measure cultural diversity awareness.

The instrument used a 5-point Likert-type scale (e.g.; 1 = strongly disagree, 2 =

disagree, 0 = neutral, 3 = agree, 4 = strongly agree) and reverse order intermittently. The

items that used the order as represented above were one, two, six, seven, nine, ten, and

twenty-three through twenty-seven The items that used the reverse order were three, four,

five, eight, eleven through twenty-two, and twenty- eight.

The researcher added a demographics section to the instrument consisting of five

additional items. The added items asked respondents to identify their race/ethnicity,

gender, level of education, and number of years teaching experience (fewer than 3 years,

3 to 9 years, 10 to 20 years, and more than 20 years). The demographic section also
 48

included two items requiring respondents to answer with a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ response. The

two questions were: (1) Did your teaching preparation include a course in Multicultural

Education? and (2) Have you received other training in Multicultural Education?

Data Collection

After receiving approval from the IRB, the researcher began data collection. The

researcher used the Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory (CDAI) as the primary

source for data collection in this study. The researcher and/or a peer assistant, trained to

administer the CDAI, visited ten elementary schools, on separate days, to administer the

instrument. The researcher trained the peer assistant by modeling the administration of

the instrument twice and discussing the procedure. The trainee was instructed to begin

administration by stating the purpose of the study. The trainee was instructed to state that

the completion of the survey was voluntarily, and responses would remain anonymous.

The participants were asked to complete the survey just before the start of their

regularly scheduled, afternoon faculty meeting. The surveys were collected by the

researcher and/or the peer assistant and sealed in an envelope until the data was analyzed.

The researcher chose this procedure for administration because it yielded the best

response rate of 100%. All certified staff was required to attend regularly scheduled

faculty meetings.

In District A, School One, there were 36 certified teachers. Only 29 teachers were

in attendance at the faculty meeting and agreed to complete the survey. The remaining

seven were mailed to the researcher. In District A, School Two, all certified teachers,

which totaled 33, were in attendance at the faculty meeting. All teachers agreed to

complete the survey. In District A, School Three, there were a total of 38 certified
 49

teachers. Only 30 were in attendance at the faculty meeting, and agreed to complete the

survey. The remaining eight responses were sent to the researcher by the principals.

In District B, School One, there were 28 certified teachers. Only 27 were in

attendance at the faculty meeting. All agreed to complete the survey. The researcher

never received a response from the absent teacher. There were 26 certified teachers in

School Two. The researcher received responses from 22 certified teachers at the faculty

meeting, and three surveys were delivered to the researcher at a later date. In School

Three, there were a total of 23 certified teachers. Eighteen surveys were collected at the

faculty meeting, and the remaining five were delivered to the researcher by the principal.

In School Four, there were a total of 26 teachers; all 26 attended the faculty meeting and

completed the survey.

In District C, School One, there were a total of 29 certified teachers. All were in

attendance at the faculty meeting and agreed to complete the survey, but only 28 surveys

were collected.. In District C, School Two, there were 33 certified teachers. A total of 31

surveys were collected at the faculty meeting. The researcher returned to the school at a

later date to collect the remaining 2 from the principal. In School Three, there were 36

certified teachers. Thirty teachers were in attendance at the faculty meeting, and they all

agreed to complete the survey. The researcher returned to the school at a later date to

collect the remaining six surveys.

Data Analysis

Statistical methods were used to analyze the data obtained from the thirty-three

item instrument administered for the purpose of measuring the extent of cultural

awareness of certified, in-service elementary teachers. The data from the thirty-three item
 50

instrument was analyzed using the Statistical Software Package for Social Sciences

(SPSS) software program student version 16.0. The researcher hand-keyed the

information into SPSS. Research question one, “To what extent are elementary teachers

culturally aware by these five domains: A. General Cultural Awareness, B. Culturally

Diverse Family, C. Cross-Cultural Communication, D. Assessment, E. Creating a

Multicultural Environment?” was analyzed using central tendency measures to find the

mean and standard deviation. The researcher reported the means by the five domains.

Research question two, “To what extent does elementary teachers’ cultural

diversity awareness vary by demographic variables of race/ethnicity, gender, level of

education, number of years teaching experience, and experience with or exposure to

multicultural educational training?” was answered by conducting t-tests, a one-way

analysis of variance (ANOVA), and Spearmon’s rho. T-tests were carried out to

determine sample differences among race/ethnicity, gender, and experience with or

exposure to multicultural educational training, across the five domains. In other words to

determine differences in race in domain one, general cultural awareness, the researcher

hand-keyed the data into SPSS and ran a t-test to analyze the data. To determine

differences in race in domain two, culturally diverse families, the researcher hand-keyed

the data into SPSS and ran a t-test. This procedure was repeated for the remaining three

domains. The same procedure was followed to determine differences in gender and

differences in whether the teacher had experienced multicultural educational training.

One-way ANOVA was utilized to determine the differences in responses in each domain

by level of education. To determine differences related to years of teaching experience,

Spearman’s rho was used.

 51

The researcher determined that these procedures were most suitable for this

research study based on the variables used in the analysis. This descriptive analysis

afforded the researcher the opportunity to present more accurate information for separate

variables. According to Creswell (2009), more accurate information for separate variables

can be established when the information is not lost from collapsing variables into

categories.

Delimitations of the Study

This study was delimited to certified, elementary teachers in Middle

Georgia.

Delimitations were:

• The study is delimitated to certified, elementary teachers only in Middle

Georgia.

• The study is delimited to Distinguished Title I Schools.

Limitations of the Study

The researcher administered the Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory to

participants.

Limitation was:

• The study includes a small sample size.

• Data is self-reported.

• Findings may not be reflective of school districts outside of Georgia.

 52

Summary of the Research Design

The researcher employed a quantitative method to conduct the descriptive study.

The Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory was the primary instrument used to describe

the cultural diversity awareness of participants. Individuals who comprise the sample did

have the researchers’ commitment to anonymity. The sample included a total of 305

certified, practicing teachers from ten elementary schools in three separate districts in

Middle Georgia. The researcher and/or peer assistant visited ten elementary schools, on

separate occasions, to administer the survey. Participants responded to the 33-item

questionnaire using a 5-point Likert-type scale. Responses were collected and analyzed

using the SPSS program. The statistical tests, t-test, a one-way analysis of variance

(ANOVA), and Spearman’s rho was used in the data analysis. The study was delimited to

certified, practicing elementary teachers in three, Middle Georgia school districts.

Limitations of the study include the fact that the data is based on self-reported

information from the respondents. Findings may not be reflective of school districts

outside of Georgia.
 53

CHAPTER 4

RESEARCH FINDINGS

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to describe the cultural diversity awareness of

practicing elementary teachers in terms of their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education,

number of years teaching, and their experience with or exposure to multicultural

educational training. The sample for this study included 305 certified, in-service

elementary teachers from three separate school districts in Middle Georgia. Participants

were asked to complete the Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory (CDAI), which is an

instrument proven reliable and valid for measuring cultural diversity awareness

categorized by five domains: (1) Cultural Awareness, (2) Culturally Diverse Family, (3)

Cross-Cultural Communication, (4) Assessment, and (5) Creating a Multicultural

Learning Environment Using Multicultural Methods. The data was analyzed using

Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). The researcher presented descriptive

responses to answer the questions this study sought to answer.

Research Questions

The overarching question for the research study was:

To what extent are elementary teachers in Georgia culturally aware?

The subquestions were these:

1. To what extent are elementary teachers culturally aware by these five

domains?

A. General Cultural Awareness

B. Culturally Diverse Families

 54

C. Cross-Cultural Communication

D. Assessment

E. Creating a Multicultural Environment

2. To what extent does elementary teachers’ cultural diversity awareness

vary by demographic variables of race/ethnicity, gender, level of

education, number of years teaching experience, and experience with or

exposure to multicultural educational training?

Research Design

The descriptive design of this study was quantitative as the data was collected

utilizing an instrument, the CDAI . The data was analyzed to answer the research

questions, using SPSS to conduct t-tests, one-way variances (ANOVA), and Spearman’s

rho correlation test. The survey design was determined to be the most appropriate method

for this study. The CDAI was tested for content validity by a panel of experts and made

available for social scientists in 1995. Several researchers, including Deering (1997),

Brown (2004), and Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006) have used the instrument to

measure cultural diversity awareness in their studies. The researcher administered the

instrument to (N = 305) certified, in-service elementary teachers.

Respondents

The respondents in this study were certified elementary teachers (N = 305)

currently teaching in elementary schools. The schools are located in Middle Georgia,

where the faculty represented a primarily monocultural teaching group in a school with a

diversely populated student group. Respondents were from three separate districts

(N=305).
 55

In District A, School One the student population was 58% White, 35% Black, and

7% other. School Two had a student population of 49% White, 43% Black, and 8% other.

The student population in School Three was 67% White, 28% Black, and 5% other. The

teacher population in all schools in District A, collectively, was more than 90% White.

In District B, School One, the student population was 63% White, 36% Black,

and 1% other. In School Two, the student population was 48% White, 43% Black, and

9% other. In School Three, the student population was 51% White, 39% Black, and 10%

other. In School Four, the student population was 67% White, 31% Black, and 2% other.

The teacher population in all schools in District B, collectively, was more than 90%

White.

In District C, School One, the student population was 6% White, 86% Black, and

8% other. In School Two, the student population was 43% White, 45% Black, and 12%

other. In School Three, the student population was 70% White, 26% Black and 4% other.

The teacher population in all schools in District C, collectively, was more than 90%

White, with the exception of School Three. The teacher population for School Three was

21% White, 78% Black, and 1% other.

There were 308 instruments personally distributed by the researcher and/or a peer

assistant (trained to administer the survey) at a faculty meeting, at each school at the

consent of the principal. Before administering the survey to the certified faculty, the

researcher or peer assistant explained the purpose of the study and reminded participants

that the completion of the survey was voluntary. Extra instruments were left with the

principal or assistant principal for teachers who were not in attendance. Principals or

assistant principals forwarded the completed surveys to the researcher. The researcher or
 56

peer assistant collected 274 responses at the faculty meetings, and 31 completed surveys

were either retrieved by the researcher at a later date or forwarded to the researcher

through the mail.

Demographic Profile of Respondents

There were a total of 308 surveys distributed, and 305 certified, in-service

elementary teachers responded. The response rate was 99%. There were 258 White

respondents (85%) and 47 Black respondents (15%). There were 47 male respondents

(10%) and 281 female respondents (90%). None of the respondents were Hispanic,

Asian/Pacific Islander, or American Indian/Alaska Native, which were other selections

on the instrument.

Respondents’ level of education ranged from Bachelor’s degree to Doctorate’s

degree. A total of 131, or 43% of the respondents had a Bachelor’s degree. A total of 151

of the respondents, or 49% had a Master’s degree. A total of 20, or 7% of the respondents

had a Specialist degree. The total number of respondents with a Doctorate’s degree was

three, or 1%.

The number of years teaching experience ranged between the respondents from

fewer than three years to more than 20 years. Respondents with fewer than three years

totaled 43, which was 14% of all respondents. Respondents with three to nine years of

experience totaled 127, which was 42% of all respondents. A total of 95, or 31% of the

respondents had ten to 20 years of teaching experience. Forty respondents had more than

20 years of teaching experience, which was 13% of the total respondents.

Of the total respondents, 242 indicated that they have had experience with or

exposure to multicultural education courses or training; therefore, 79% of all respondents

 57

have had some type of multicultural education. There were 63 respondents who indicated

that they had no experience with or exposure to multicultural education courses or

training. A total of 21% of all respondents had no type of multicultural education.

Summary of Respondents

All of the respondents (N = 305) in this study were certified elementary teachers

currently teaching in elementary schools. Respondents teach in Middle Georgia School

Districts where the faculty is a monocultural group, while the student group is diversely

populated. More than three-fourths of the respondents were White and female. Ninety-

two percent of the respondents had a Bachelor’s or Master’s degree, with eight percent of

the total respondents having a Specialist or Doctorate’s degree. Most of the respondents

(seventy-three percent) had between three and 20 years of teaching experience. Eighty-

six percent of the respondents had multicultural education; 21% percent of the

respondents had no experience with multicultural education courses or training.

Findings

The Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory (CDAI), proven reliable and valid

for measuring cultural diversity awareness, was administered to certified, in-service

elementary teachers to assess their extent of cultural diversity awareness. The CDAI is a

28 item questionnaire, which is divided into five domains: general cultural awareness,

culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment, and creating a

multicultural environment. Responses to the survey questions on the CDAI were in the

form of a 5-point Likert scale with responses ranging from 1 = Strongly Disagree to 4 =

Strongly Agree (e.g.; 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 0 = neutral, 3 = agree, 4 =

strongly agree) and reverse order intermittently.

 58

Each survey question in each of the five domains of cultural diversity awareness

had a possible rating of one to four. A rating of one denoted that the participant “strongly

disagreed”, while a rating of four denoted that the participant “strongly agreed.” Reverse

order was used, depending upon how the survey question was asked. In such cases, a

rating of one denoted that the respondent “strongly agreed,” while a rating of four

denoted that the respondent “strongly disagreed.” The items that used the reverse order

were three, four, five, eight, eleven through twenty-two, and twenty- eight (see Appendix

B).

A demographic section was added to the survey by the researcher to include

race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, and number of years teaching experience

(fewer than 3 years, 3 to 9 years, 10 to 20 years, and more than 20 years). The

demographic section also included two questions: (1) Did your teaching preparation

include a course in Multicultural Education? and (2) Have you received other training in

Multicultural Education?

Data Analysis

Research Question 1

To what extent are elementary teachers culturally aware by these five domains: general

cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication,

assessment, and creating a multicultural environment?

To respond to research question one, the researcher hand-keyed data from the

surveys into a Microsoft Excel Spreadsheet. Microsoft Excel was used to compute mean

scores and standard deviation. Next the researcher examined the scores and determined

whether the respondents were culturally aware, according to the CDAI scales. In order to
 59

be identified as being culturally aware in each of the five domains, respondents’ mean

score had to be at least half of the possible total.

Specifically, to be considered culturally aware in domain one, general cultural

awareness, teachers must have had a mean score of 10 or greater. To be considered

culturally aware in domains two and three, culturally diverse families and cross-cultural

communication, teachers must have had a mean score of 12. To be considered culturally

aware in domain four, assessment, teachers must have had a mean score of eight. To be

considered culturally aware in domain five, creating a multicultural environment,

teachers must have had a mean score of 14.

Table 1

Means, Standard Deviation, and Ratio of Participants for CDAI Scale by Five Domains

Domains M SD Ratio

General Cultural Awareness 12.33 3.60 62%

Culturally Diverse Families 13.18 3.78 55%

Cross-Cultural Communication 14.52 3.38 61%

Assessment 8.66 3.31 54%

Creating a Multicultural Environment 15.50 4.83 55%

When looking at the measurements by the five domains, respondents could have

scored as high as 20 or as low as five in the area of “General Cultural Awareness.” A

score as high as 24 could have been attained in the area of “Culturally Diverse Families,”

or a score as low as six could have been attained. The highest score in the area of “Cross-
 60

Cultural Communication” could have been 24, while the lowest score could have been

six. Respondents could have scored as high as 16 or as low as four in the area of

“Assessment.” The highest score attainable in the area of “Creating a Multicultural

Environment” was 28, while the lowest score attainable was seven.

The researcher calculated the ratio of each domain by dividing the teachers’ mean

score by the total possible points. This was done to determine in which domain teachers

demonstrated having the most or least cultural diversity awareness. Certified, in-service

elementary teachers were most culturally aware in domain one, which is general cultural

awareness. There were five questions, one through five, included in the first domain of

general cultural awareness (see Appendix B). The questions dealt with cultural

differences between teachers and students and identifying students by ethnic groups. Out

of a possible 20 points, respondents’ mean score was 12.33 points (M = 12.33, SD =

3.60). The ratio was 62 percent.

The second highest domain for which teachers responded being most culturally

aware was domain three, cross-cultural communication. Questions 12 – 17 were in the

third domain (see Appendix B). The six questions in domain three dealt with students’

spoken language and whether or not the use of non-standard English should be corrected

or ignored. Out of a possible 24 points, respondents’ mean score was 14.52 points (M =

14.52, SD = 3.38). The ratio was 61 percent.

The third highest domain was domain two, culturally diverse families, and

domain five, creating a multicultural environment. Six questions, six through eleven,

were in domain two and they involved whether or not teachers should establish parent

interactions outside of school activities. Seven questions (22 – 28) were included in
 61

domain five. The seven questions focused on teachers’ use of multicultural instructional

methods and materials in a multicultural classroom environment (see Appendix B).

Respondents scored within a 55% margin of the total possible points in both domains. In

domain two, culturally diverse families, respondents’ mean score was 13.18 out of a

possible 24 points (M = 13.18, SD = 3.78). In domain five, creating a multicultural

environment, respondents’ mean score was 15.50 out of a possible 28 points (M = 15.50,

SD = 4.83).

Certified, in-service teachers were least culturally aware in the fourth domain,

which was assessment. There were four questions, numbers 18 – 21, in the fourth

domain. The four questions dealt with making modifications for students to accommodate

learning styles, or referring students for testing based on cultural or language differences

(see Appendix B). Out of a possible 16 points, respondents’ mean score was 8.66 points

(M = 8.66, SD = 3.31). The ratio was 54 percent.

In response to research question one, the researcher found that certified, in-service

elementary teachers are culturally aware as measured by the CDAI, categorized by five

domains: general cultural awareness, culturally diverse family, cross-cultural

communication, assessment, and creating a multicultural environment. The mean score in

each domain was at least half of the total possible points, the score needed to be

considered culturally aware. Teachers are aware of the importance of recognizing cultural

diversity among students and their families. Teachers indicated that they believe that

family views should be included in program planning, and adaptations should be made to

accommodate different cultures, learning styles, and languages. Teachers do not believe
 62

that racial statements should be ignored; neither should the use of non-standard English

go uncorrected without an explanation or the modeling of correct usage.

Research Question 2

To what extent does teachers’ cultural diversity awareness vary by demographic

variables of race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years teaching

experience, and experience with or exposure to multicultural educational training?

The data for research question two was analyzed with three types of statistical

tests, depending upon the variable being analyzed. Independent samples t-tests, with a

degrees freedom of 303, were used to determine sample differences between race (Table

2.1), gender (Table 2.2), and experience with multicultural education (Table 2.5). A one-

way ANOVA was used to determine if any significant differences existed between the

respondents based on their level of education (Table 2.3). The one-way ANOVA

included a descriptive analysis, Tukey HSD, and a between group analysis to test for

significant differences at p< .01. Spearman’s rho was the third statistical test used to

determine differences in regards to years teaching experience (Table 2.4). Correlation

was significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

 63

Table 2

Means, Standard Deviation, and t-Test Values for CDAI Scale by Five Domains by
Race

Domains White Black t P

M SD M SD

General Cultural 12.11 3.6 13.55 3.4 -2.55 .011

Awareness
Culturally Diverse 12.99 3.8 14.23 3.7 -2.08 .038
Families
Cross-Cultural 14.31 3.3 15.68 3.6 -2.59 .010
Communication
Assessment 8.70 3.4 8.43 2.5 .526 .600

Creating a Multicultural 15.25 4.7 16.91 5.2 -2.20 .030

Environment
p< .01

An independent sample t-test was conducted on the scale’s scores to determine

statistical differences between White and Black teachers in each of the five domains, and

race was not found to be a factor in cultural diversity awareness of elementary teachers.

There was not a statistically significant difference between the two groups in domains

one, general cultural awareness, t(303) = -2.55, p = .011. The data indicated that there

was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain two, culturally diverse

families, t(303) = -2.08, p = .038. There was not a significant difference between the two

groups in domain three, cross-cultural communication, t(303) = -2.59, p = .010. There

was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain four, assessment,

t(303) = .526, p = .600. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in

domain five, creating a multicultural environment, t(303) = -2.20, p = .030

 64

Table 3

Means, Standard Deviation, and t-Test Values for CDAI Scales by Five Domains by
Gender

Domains Male Female t P

M SD M SD

General Cultural 12.17 4.16 12.35 3.56 -.233 .816

Awareness
Culturally Diverse 12.12 3.38 13.27 3.81 -1.43 .154
Families
Cross-Cultural 14.25 3.20 14.54 3.40 -.410 .682
Communication
Assessment 8.12 2.83 8.70 3.34 -.824 .410

Creating a Multicultural 16.04 4.34 15.46 4.87 .567 .567

Environment
p< .01

An independent sample t-test was conducted on the scale’s scores to determine

statistical differences between male and female teachers in each of the five domains, and

gender was not found to be a factor in cultural diversity awareness of elementary

teachers. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain one,

general cultural awareness, t(303) = -2.33, p = .816). There was not a significant

difference between the two groups in domain two, culturally diverse families, t(303) = -

1.43, p = .154. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain

three, cross-cultural communication, t(303) = -.410, p = .682. There was not a significant

difference between the two groups in domain four, assessment, t(303) = -.824, p = .410.

There was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain five, creating a

multicultural environment, t(303) = .567, p = .567.

 65

Table 4

Means, Standard Deviation, and F-Values for CDAI Scale by Five Domains by
Level of Education

Domains Bachelors Masters Specialist Doctorate F P

M SD M SD M SD M SD

General 12.13 3.3 12.54 3.8 12.55 3.7 9.00 5.0 1.19 .31
Cultural
Awareness
Culturally 13.24 3.8 13.14 3.9 13.05 3.3 13.67 .58 .042 .99
Diverse
Families
Cross-Cultural 14.36 3.1 14.56 3.7 15.65 2.4 12.33 2.1 1.28 .28
Communication
Assessment 8.89 3.3 8.70 3.4 7.20 2.3 6.67 .57 1.89 .13

Creating a 15.30 4.6 15.72 4.9 15.30 5.8 15.33 4.0 .188 .905
Multicultural
Environment
p< .01

A one-way ANOVA was used to determine significant differences between

respondents in each of the five domains, based on their level of education. The data was

then analyzed using the post-hoc Tukey HSD test to determine specific differences at p<

0.1. There was not a significant difference between the four groups in domain one,

general cultural awareness, F(3,301) = 1.19, p = .313. There was not a significant

difference between the two groups in domain two, culturally diverse families, F(3,301) =

.042, p = .988. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain

three, cross-cultural communication, F(3,301) = 1.28, p = .283. There was not a

significant difference between the two groups in domain four, assessment, F(3,301) =

1.89, p = .131. There was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain

five, F(3,301) = .188, p = .905.

 66

Table 5

Spearman’s rho Correlation of Years Teaching Experience of Participants for CDAI

Scales by Five Domains

Years General Cultural Multicultural

Teaching Cultural Diverse Cross-Cultural Learning
Experience Awareness Family Communication Assessment Environment
N=305

Spearman's Years Teaching Correlation

1.000 -.010 .032 -.015 -.056 .013
rho Experience Coefficient
Sig. (2-
.858 .575 .793 .327 .816
tailed)
General Correlation
-.010 1.000 .186** .191** .229** .302**
Cultural Coefficient
Awareness Sig. (2-
.858 .001 .001 .000 .000
tailed)
Cultural Correlation
.032 .186** 1.000 .331** .190** .354**
Diverse Family Coefficient
Sig. (2-
.575 .001 .000 .001 .000
tailed)
Cross-Cultural Correlation
-.015 .191** .331** 1.000 .062 .252**
Communication Coefficient
Sig. (2-
.793 .001 .000 .283 .000
tailed)
Assessment Correlation
-.056 .229** .190** .062 1.000 .209**
Coefficient
Sig. (2-
.327 .000 .001 .283 .000
tailed)
Multicultural Correlation
.013 .302** .354** .252** .209** 1.000
Learning Coefficient
Environment Sig. (2-
.816 .000 .000 .000 .000
tailed)
 67

The researcher conducted a Spearman’s rho, a correlation bivariate analysis, to

determine what extent the demographic characteristics of years teaching experience had

on the five domains of cultural awareness. The data shown in Table 2.4 indicate no

significant difference between respondents with less than three years, three to nine years,

ten to twenty years, or more than 20 years of teaching experience in each of the five

domains.

Table 6

Means, Standard Deviation, and t-Test Values for CDAI Scale by Five Domains by
Multicultural Education Experience

Domains Yes No t P
Multicultural Multicultural
Education Education
M SD M SD

General Cultural 12.39 3.70 12.10 3.21 .583 .560

Awareness
Culturally Diverse 13.43 3.80 12.24 3.58 2.24 .026
Families
Cross-Cultural 14.65 3.36 14.03 3.41 1.23 .197
Communication
Assessment 8.77 3.23 8.24 3.58 1.14 .257

Creating a Multicultural 15.66 4.8 14.90 5.00 1.12 .269

Environ
P< .01

An independent sample t-test was conducted on the scale’s scores to determine

statistical differences between teachers who have had experience with or exposure to

multicultural education. The comparison was made for each of the five domains. There

was not a significant difference between the two groups in domain one, general cultural

awareness, t(303) = -0583, p = .560). There was not a significant difference between the

two groups in domain two, culturally diverse families, t(303) = 2.24, p = .026. There was
 68

not a significant difference between the two groups in domain three, cross-cultural

communication, t(303) = 1.23, p = .197. There was not a significant difference between

the two groups in domain four, assessment, t(303) = 1.14, p = .257. There was not a

significant difference between the two groups in domain five, creating a multicultural

environment, t(303) = 1.12, p = .269.

Summary

The first research question inquired the extent of cultural diversity awareness of

elementary teachers by the five domains (general cultural awareness, culturally diverse

families, cross-cultural communication, assessment, and multicultural education training)

of cultural diversity awareness determined by the Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory

(CDAI). The means and standard deviation of participants for CDAI scale’s scores

revealed that teachers have acceptable levels of cultural diversity awareness, meaning

that their mean score was at least half of the possible attainable score. Teachers are most

culturally aware in the first domain, general cultural awareness (M = 12.33). It was

determined that teachers are least culturally aware in domain four, assessment ( M =

8.66).

The second research question sought to determine if there were differences in the

extent of teachers’ cultural awareness based on particular demographics: race, gender,

level of education, number of years teaching experience, and experience with or exposure

to multicultural education. A comparison of mean scores revealed that there is not a

statistical significant difference between White and Black teachers in domain one, which

is general cultural awareness. Neither was there a significant difference between White

and Black teachers in the other four domains. There was not a significant difference
 69

between males and females in the five domains. No significant difference was revealed in

the five domains between teachers who have a Bachelor’s degree, Master’s degree,

Specialist degree, or Doctorate degree. No significant difference was revealed in the five

domains between teachers with less than nine years teaching experience, three to nine

years, ten to twenty years, or more than 20 years experience. Teachers who have had

experience with or exposure to multicultural education showed no significantly different

scores than teachers who have not had experience with or exposure to multicultural

education.

Summary of Findings

• Teachers were more culturally aware in the first domain: general cultural

awareness.

• Teachers were second most culturally aware in domain three: cross-

cultural communication.

• Teachers were third most culturally aware in domains two and five:

culturally diverse families and creating a multicultural environment.

• Teachers were least culturally aware in the fourth domain: assessment.

• Demographics of monocultural teaching faculties, including race, gender,

level of education, years of teaching experience, and multicultural training

were not found statistically significant to cultural diversity awareness.

 70

CHAPTER 5

SUMMARY, RESEARCH FINDINGS, DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS,

IMPLICATIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS, AND CONCLUDING THOUGHTS

Summary

The researcher’s purpose for this study was to describe the cultural diversity

awareness of certified, in-service teachers (N = 305). Specifically, the researcher’s goal

was to determine differences in the extent of cultural diversity awareness between

teachers based on their race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years

teaching experience, and their experience with or exposure to multicultural education

training. The first research question sought to determine the extent of cultural diversity

awareness of practicing (certified, in-service) elementary teachers in Georgia classrooms.

The second research question sought to determine statistically significant differences in

the extent of cultural diversity awareness between teachers in regards to their

race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years teaching experience, and their

experience with or exposure to multicultural education.

To answer research questions one and two, the researcher utilized a quantitative

method. The data was collected utilizing a survey instrument, the Cultural Diversity

Awareness Inventory (CDAI). The CDAI measured cultural diversity awareness in five

domains: general cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural

communication, assessment, and creating a multicultural environment. The instrument

was completed by certified elementary teachers (N = 305) from three Middle Georgia

districts, from ten different elementary schools. After receiving consent from the
 71

principals, the researcher and/or peer assistant went to the schools to administer the

survey and collect the responses.

The data was analyzed using SPSS to run t-tests, a one-way ANOVA, and

Spearman’s rho correlation test. Data revealed that practicing elementary teachers have a

satisfactory measure of cultural diversity awareness. Each mean score in each domain

was at least half of the total possible attainable score, which indicates having cultural

diversity awareness. There was not a significant difference found when comparing mean

scores between teacher groups (race, gender, level of education, years teaching

experience, and experience with multicultural education), in the five domains.

Research Findings

The researcher used the CDAI to measure the extent of cultural diversity

awareness of certified, in-service elementary teachers in Georgia. Responses to the

survey questions were in the form of a 5-point Likert scale with responses ranging from

one to four, 1 = Strongly Disagree and 4 = Strongly Agree. A neutral response received a

score of zero. The reverse order was used for some survey items depending upon the way

the item was worded. A demographic section was added to the survey by the researcher

to compare groups. The findings were as follows:

• Teachers were more culturally aware in the first domain: general cultural

awareness.

• Teachers were second most culturally aware in domain three: cross-cultural

communication.

• Teachers were third most culturally aware in domains two and five: culturally

diverse families and creating a multicultural environment.

 72

• Teachers were least culturally aware in the fourth domain: assessment.

• There was no significant difference between White and Black teachers in

domains one, two, three, four, and five: general cultural awareness, culturally

diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment, and creating a

multicultural environment.

• There was no significant difference between male and female teachers in

either domain one, two, three, four, or five: general cultural awareness,

culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment, and

creating a multicultural environment.

• There was no significant difference between teachers in regards to their level

of education in either domain one, two, three, four or five: general cultural

awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication,

assessment, and creating a multicultural environment.

• There was no significant difference between teachers in regards to their years

teaching experience in either domain one, two, three, four, or five: general

cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication,

assessment, and creating a multicultural environment.

• There was no significant difference between teachers who have had

experience with or exposure to multicultural education and teachers who have

not had experience with or exposure to multicultural education in either of the

five domains: general cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-

cultural communication, assessment, and creating a multicultural

environment.
 73

Discussion

The teaching force in Georgia classrooms is becoming predominantly White,

female, and monocultural, while the student population is becoming more culturally

diverse (Villegas and Lucas, 2002). Brown (2007) concluded that non-White, or minority

students perform substantially lower than their White classmates because of cultural

discontinuity. Cultural discontinuity involves teachers’ misinterpretations of cultural

styles different from their own, teachers’ lack of knowledge about how cultural patterns

influence learning, teachers’ negative expectations in regards to behavior and academic

progress among diverse students, and teachers’ exclusion of multicultural learning

experiences (Walker-Dalhouse & Dalhouse, 2006). It is important that teachers are

conscious of their extent of cultural diversity awareness in order to meet the challenges of

teaching in culturally diverse settings.

The majority of recent studies on the extent of cultural diversity awareness have

investigated pre-service teachers. Cotton (2001) identified 55 studies that examined the

impact of various schooling practices on the intercultural knowledge, attitudes, and/or

behavior of teachers and students; however, only four of the 55 studies included in-

service teachers as subjects.

The survey results of 305 certified, in-service teachers from ten schools in Middle

Georgia were analyzed to ascertain their extent of cultural diversity awareness. The data

was gathered using the responses to the Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory (CDAI),

an instrument proven reliable and valid; it has been used by several researchers for more

than twenty years. The analysis of this data provided descriptive information about the

extent of cultural diversity awareness of elementary teachers in five domains: general

 74

cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment,

and creating a multicultural learning environment.

Discussion of Findings from Research Question 1

To what extent are elementary teachers culturally aware by these five domains: general

cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication,

assessment, and multicultural learning environment?

Certified, in-service elementary teachers from ten elementary schools in Middle

Georgia completed the CDAI to determine their extent of cultural diversity awareness.

Participants were predominately monocultural (White and female) teachers who teach in

elementary schools where the student population is culturally diverse. Ladson-Billings

(2001) maintains that teachers should possess high levels of cultural awareness in order

to meet the needs of a diversely populated student body. The development of

multicultural understanding is measured by the teacher’s depth of cultural self-awareness,

affective response to difference, capacity for cross-cultural relations, and the degree to

which his or her teaching style is multicultural as opposed to Eurocentric (McFadden,

Merryfield, & Barron, 1997). This study investigated the aforementioned, plus teachers’

depth of providing diverse assessments based on students’ needs.

The researcher found that elementary teachers have a satisfactory measure of

multicultural awareness across five domains: general cultural awareness, cultural diverse

families, cross-cultural communication, assessment, and creating a multicultural

environment. Teachers revealed that their greatest extent of cultural diversity awareness

is in domain one. Domain one of the CDAI measured teacher beliefs about the

importance of recognizing cultural differences and maintaining a feeling of comfort when

 75

interacting with people who have cultures or beliefs different from their own. The

findings of this study differ from the research of Walker-Dalhouse & Dalhouse (2006),

Ladson-Billings (1994), Manning (2000), and Moore (2007) who suggest that most

teachers have concerns about working with diverse student populations and need to

examine their beliefs, broaden their knowledge, and develop abilities for relating to

students from diverse cultures.

Teachers are aware of many racial groups in the USA, and understand that in their

profession, they are expected to interrelate with students and parents who have cultures

and languages different from their own. Teachers of language-minority students face the

daunting task of simultaneously building literacy, developing written expression ability,

and enhancing English language growth (Gersten, 1996). The researcher found that

teachers are second most culturally aware in domain three, which deals with cross-

cultural communication. The data from this study confirmed that teachers believe in

providing learning opportunities that promote the success of non-English speaking

students and students who use non-standard English. On the contrary, data from Arreaga-

Mayer and Perdomo-Rivera (1996) suggest that teachers’ inordinate emphasis on whole-

class instruction and individual seat-work severely limits non-English speakers’

achievement. The literature states that eighty-five percent of Hispanic fourth and eighth

graders read in English at a basic level or below, meaning that they cannot demonstrate

understanding of text written at their grade level.

The researcher found that teachers are third most culturally aware in domains two

and five. Domain two deals with teacher beliefs about interacting with diverse families in

social events outside of school requirements, and considering parents’ input in program
 76

planning. Domain five deals with teacher beliefs about creating a learning environment

that emphasizes different cultures and beliefs.

Having a high level of cultural diversity awareness in domain two supports the

research of Teddlie and Reynolds (2000), who proved that effective schools have

teachers who establish strong and positive home-school relationships. The results of

teachers’ responses also reveal that teachers are aware of the importance of welcoming

parental involvement. The literature maintains that a school’s invitation for parental

involvement is key for determining parents’ decisions to be involved in their children’s

education (Hoover-Dempsey & Sandler, 1995).

Furthermore, in regards to domain five, teachers’ responses indicated that they

make adaptations in program planning to accommodate the different cultures between the

students in their classrooms. Ladson-Billings (2001) and Gay (2002) argue that teachers

who are culturally aware construct curricula that are culturally relevant and deliver

culturally responsive instruction by modifying the curriculum to meet the needs of all

learners. The data collected by the researcher proves that elementary teachers in Georgia

classrooms demonstrate cultural responsiveness by matching instructional techniques to

students’ learning styles (Howard, 2003).

The researcher found that teachers are least culturally aware in domain four,

assessment. Though the data disclosed that teachers have a considerable measure of

cultural awareness in this domain, it was the least, meaning that teachers least believe that

testing accommodations should be made to standardized assessments. The data also

revealed that teachers are more apt to refer students to be evaluated for learning

difficulties due to the students’ cultural and/or language differences. This finding is
 77

comparable to the study of Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse (2006), who concluded that

teachers (pre-service) who do not participate in multicultural educational courses are very

likely to refer students whose learning difficulties appear to be cultural or language

related. The literature also states that in many cases, students with cultural differences or

limited English proficiency perform poorly on traditional testing instruments, and as a

result, they are misidentified as having learning disabilities (Ortiz & Graves, 2001). Data

from this study reveals consistency with the findings of Walker-Dalhouse and Dalhouse

(2006) and Ortiz and Graves (2001).

Discussion of Findings from Research Question 2

To what extent does elementary teachers’ cultural diversity awareness vary by

demographic variables of race/ethnicity, gender, level of education, number of years

teaching experience, and experience with or exposure to multicultural educational

training?

Certified, in-service teachers demonstrated having no area of significant

difference in their extent of cultural diversity awareness in the five domains ( general

cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication, assessment,

and creating a multicultural environment) of the CDAI, in regards to their race/ethnicity,

gender, level of education, number of years teaching experience, and experience with or

exposure to multicultural educational training.

Domain one involved teacher beliefs about having a culture different from some

of the children they serve and preferring to work with children and parents with similar

cultures. According to the literature, most prospective teachers have had little experience

with cultural diversity (Nieto, 2000). The literature also suggest that most teachers have
 78

concerns about working with diverse student populations and need to examine their

beliefs, broaden their knowledge, and develop abilities for relating to students from

diverse cultures (Manning, 2000; Moore, 2007; Walker-Dalhouse & Dalhouse, 2006).

The researcher found that there was no significant difference in the extent of

cultural awareness between the teacher groups in domain two, culturally diverse families.

Certified, in-service teachers had comparable levels of cultural awareness with respect to

culturally diverse families. The data revealed that teacher participants believe in

becoming acquainted with culturally diverse families at the beginning of their interaction

and including family views of school and society in the school’s yearly program

planning. DiMartino (1989) ascertains that teachers need to be aware of cultural

differences and recognize that not everyone will share the same values and beliefs.

Teachers from this survey are in favor of DiMartino’s (1989) beliefs. In addition to that,

teachers believe that they should have an understanding of children’s home life, such as:

the language spoken in the home, who constitutes the family living in the home, and what

beliefs and practices

are important to the family (Dixon & Fraser, 1986).

In relation to domain three, there was not a significant difference in the extent of

cultural diversity awareness between the teacher groups. White and Black teachers, male

and female, had similar levels of cultural diversity awareness concerning their beliefs

about the instructional practices for non-English speaking students, as well as those who

use non-standard English. Likewise, teachers with different levels of education and

various years teaching experience had similar levels of cultural diversity awareness in

domain three. All teacher groups, whether with or without exposure to multicultural
 79

education training, felt that English should be taught as a second language to non-English

speaking students as part of the school’s curriculum, which is a dimension of cultural

diversity awareness. By federal mandate, schools are required to identify students from

non-English-speaking homes and determine, by formal assessment, whether the students

need special linguistic or instructional help in school (Fillmore, 1983). Teachers must

assist non-English speaking students to build literacy, develop written expression ability,

and enhance English language growth (Gersten, 1996). Teacher participants’ responses

indicated their support of and compliance to federal mandates; however, the literature

contradicts their responses, reporting that non-English speaking students, even when

taught and tested in their own language (Spanish), still score at the thirty-seventh

percentile.

In relation to domain four, assessment, there was not a significant difference in

the extent of cultural diversity awareness between teacher groups. All teacher groups,

categorized by race, gender, level of education, number of years teaching experience,

level of education, and exposure to or non-exposure to multicultural education training,

had comparable levels of cultural diversity awareness in domain four. All teacher groups

indicated having the lowest level of cultural diversity awareness in this domain, meaning

that teachers have a lack of belief about providing fair assessment systems (Stobart,

2005). According to Stobart (2005), fair assessment systems, unlike traditional

standardized testing, refrain from assessing students based on “mainstream” standards.

Teachers in this study revealed that they are apt to refer students for testing based on

cultural and/or language differences. Providing alternative assessment systems can allow

these teachers, and others, to do more than assign grades, but assist with exploring how to
 80

improve student learning and monitor student progress (Division of Instructional

Innovation and Assessment, 2007). Teachers did not demonstrate understanding that

traditional standardized testing is typically used for measuring student progress, for

accountability, classification purposes, and reporting procedures; nevertheless, the

blanket use of traditional test measures needs to be reconsidered for use with the growing

number of culturally diverse students and students who are English Language Learners

(Spinelli, 2008).

The researcher found that there was no significant difference in the extent of

cultural diversity awareness between teacher groups in domain five, creating a

multicultural environment. Teachers had high levels of cultural diversity awareness in

this domain. Teachers believe that they should create equal educational opportunities for

students from diverse racial, ethnic, social-class, and cultural groups, which is critical in

multicultural learning environments (Banks, 2000). Teacher participants also believe that

culture deeply influences the way children learn (Cabello & Burstein, 1995); therefore,

they make the effort to ensure that classroom instruction is conducted in a manner that is

responsive to their students’ home culture. Additionally, teacher beliefs are parallel to the

beliefs of Villegas and Lucas (2002), who believe that teachers should plan and deliver

culturally responsive instruction to meet the needs of all learners, and provide

opportunities for students to share cultural differences in the learning environment.

Conclusions

The researcher analyzed the findings from this study to conclude:

1. Certified, in-service (practicing) elementary teachers are culturally aware in

five domains: general cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-

 81

cultural communication, assessment, and creating a multicultural

environment.

2. Practicing elementary teachers mostly believe it is important to identify the

ethnic group of the children they serve, and they are not uncomfortable in

settings with people with dissimilar cultures and beliefs.

3. Practicing elementary teachers believe that teaching English as a second

language should be part of the school curriculum. Teachers also believe that

children should be corrected, with explanations and models, when non-

standard English is used.

4. Practicing elementary teachers believe least in making adaptations to

standardized test to accommodate learning differences between students in

fear that doing so does not allow adequate peer comparisons.

5. The extent of cultural diversity awareness is not related to gender, level of

education, or number of years teaching experience.

6. Teachers who are exposed to multicultural education are no more culturally

aware than teachers who are not exposed to multicultural education.

7. Teachers who teach in Distinguished Title I schools may have more cultural

diversity awareness than teachers who teach in schools where students are

underachieving and AYP is not met.

Implications

This study indicated that practicing (certified, in-service) elementary teachers in

Georgia have cultural diversity awareness, as measured by the CDAI, in five domains:

general cultural awareness, culturally diverse families, cross-cultural communication,

 82

assessment, and creating a multicultural environment. However, in-service teacher

participants demonstrated that their lowest level of cultural awareness is in domain four,

assessment. This implies that there is a need for training teachers how to provide fair

assessment systems that consider students’ cultural and language differences.

Furthermore there is a need to train teachers how to accommodate students with cultural

and linguistic differences to deescalate teachers’ choosing to refer students for

evaluations to determine learning difficulties based on their cultural or language

differences alone.

The extent of cultural diversity awareness between the teacher groups did not vary

by demographic variables including race, gender, level of education, number of years

teaching, and experience with or no experience with multicultural education, in domains

two through five of the CDAI. This indicates that certified, in-service teachers in Middle

Georgia school districts have satisfactory measures of cultural diversity awareness in

regards to being mindful of cultural diverse families, practicing cross-cultural

communication skills, providing appropriate assessment systems, and creating

multicultural learning environments. Practicing teachers in Middle Georgia are not in

need of multicultural training aimed to establish cultural diversity, but should maintain

and enhance their cultural diversity awareness throughout their professional practice.

This can be done by participating in professional development activities that focus on

creating and maintaining a multicultural learning environment. Teachers can participate

in book studies, enroll in collegiate courses, or visit other classrooms to observe teachers

who demonstrate cultural responsive practices.

 83

Recommendations

A quantitative study afforded the researcher an opportunity to avoid subjectivity

in the study. By employing a quantitative method, the researcher was able to collect data

using a survey instrument and develop generalizations relying heavily upon statistical

results. The researcher recommends that the design of future studies include a mixed

method, in which both quantitative and qualitative approaches are conducted. The

quantitative approach, according to method expert, Creswell (2003) incorporates

interviews to experiments as a manipulation check and perhaps as a way to discuss

directly the issues under investigation and tap into participants’ perspectives. A

researcher may observe teachers in their classrooms, and examine teacher-student

interaction in order to compare teacher responses to their actual behavior. A qualitative

design in a study such as this one can assist with substantiating validity.

The use of the Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory (CDAI) as a preliminary

indicator for measuring the extent of cultural diversity awareness of certified, in-service

elementary teachers was utilized by the researcher. Future studies need to consider using

more than one reliable and valid instrument for data collection. A particular instrument to

consider is the Beliefs about Diversity Scales (BADS). The BADS measures beliefs and

attitudes in the following areas: (a) race, (b) ability, (c) social class, (d) gender, (e) sexual

orientation, (f) language and immigration, and (g) multicultural education. This

instrument allows for measuring teacher beliefs about more diverse factors among

student populations. Additionally, the 39-item instrument includes 16 items that measure

teachers’ personal beliefs about diversity and 23 items that measure teachers’

professional beliefs about diversity.

 84

The literature supports that the teacher population is becoming more

monocultural, White and female, while the student population is becoming more

culturally diverse. The literature maintains that cultural discontinuity between White

teachers and minority students affects student achievement; therefore the researcher

targeted schools with monocultural (White, female) faculty and diverse student groups.

During the study, the researcher discovered schools where the teacher population was

majority Black, while the student population was majority White and Hispanic. An

investigation into cultural discontinuity in this aspect is recommended for future studies.

This study was conducted in distinguished, Title I elementary schools, meaning

that students in the selected schools are achieving and demonstrating success. I

recommend that this study be conducted in elementary schools, with similar teacher-

student populations, where students are underachieving. Furthermore, I recommend this

study be conducted in secondary educational settings to determine the extent of cultural

diversity awareness of secondary teachers in Georgia.

Concluding Thoughts

Based on the researcher’s experiences, lived and read, the researcher began this

process with some bias towards the subject under study. The researcher was made aware

that the teaching force was becoming more monocultural while the student population

continued to become more culturally diverse. Furthermore, the lack of student

achievement among minority students had been linked to cultural mismatch or cultural

discontinuity. Researchers indicated that a factor for the under achievement of culturally

diverse students included monocultural teachers’ lack of knowledge base, low levels of

expectations, and misinterpretation of such students’ cultural patterns. This concept

 85

motivated the researcher to launch an investigation to determine the extent of cultural

diversity awareness of certified, in-service teachers in Georgia classrooms.

During the study, the researcher began to shift paradigms as more studies were

analyzed and data was collected for this particular study. The researcher had assumed,

based on experience and previous literature, that teachers would demonstrate having low

levels of cultural diversity awareness. As the data was collected and analyzed, the

researcher began to think that a significant difference would be found between teachers

based on their years experience and whether or not they had experience with or exposure

to multicultural education courses and/or training. The researcher assumed that teachers

with 20+ years experiences would have lower levels of cultural diversity awareness

because more than likely, during their collegiate studies, multicultural education courses

were not offered. Furthermore, the researcher presumed that teachers who had

experienced multicultural education courses/training would have statistically significant

higher levels of cultural diversity awareness. That was not determined by the researcher

during this investigation.

Also, during the study, the researcher thought about the fact that the data collected

was self-reported data from teachers in Distinguished Title I schools. Perhaps these

teachers have been socialized to be culturally aware teachers, meaning that these teachers

have learned from each other through collaboration about the importance of identifying

different ethnic groups of the students they serve. It is possible that these teachers have

been trained and/or molded to meet the needs of diverse learners by creating multicultural

learning environments.
 86

After conducting the study, the researcher realizes that there is no

significant difference in the extent of cultural diversity awareness between teacher

groups. The researcher believes that teachers should continue their professional practices

with the idea that changes in the student population will continue; student groups will

become more and more diverse. Teachers should maintain cultural diversity awareness

and seek ways to enhance their awareness to meet the needs of all students. Teachers

should be provided professional development opportunities that promote general cultural

awareness, strategies for interacting with culturally diverse families, cross-cultural

communication skills, implementing fair assessment systems and creating multicultural

learning environments to ensure student success.

 87

References

Allen, B. A., & Boykin, A. W. (1992). African-American children and the educational

process: Alleviating cultural discontinuity through prescriptive pedagogy.

School Psychology Review, 21, 586-596.

Allen, B. A., & Butler, L. (1996). The effects of music and movement opportunity on the

analogical reasoning performance of African American and White school

children. Journal of Black Psychology, 22(3), 316-328.

Anderson, S. E. (1990). Worldmath curriculum: Fighting Eurocentrism in mathematics.

Journal of Negro Education, 59, 349-359.

Arreaga-Mayer, C., & Perdomo-Rivera, C. (1996). Ecobehavioral analysis of instruction

for at-risk language-minority students. Elementary School Journal, 96, 245-258.

Banks, J. A. (2000). The social construction of difference and the quest for educational

equality. Education in the New Era. Alexander, VA: Association for Supervision

and Curriculum Development.

Banks, J. A. (2007). Educating citizens in a multicultural society. New York: Teachers

College Press.

Bailey, C. T., & Boykin, A. W. (2001). The role of task variability and home contextual

factors in the academic performance and task motivation of African American

elementary school children. Journal of Negro Education, 70(1-2), 84-95.

Bennett, C. (1999). Comprehensive multicultural education: Theory and practice.

Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy and cognition.

Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press.

 88

Bigler, R. S. (1999). The use of multicultural curricula and materials to counter racism in

children. Journal of Social Issues, 55(4), 667-766.

Booker, K. C. (2007). Dismantling educational inequality: A cultural-historical approach

to closing the achievement gap. The Journal of Negro Education, 76(2), 188-189.

Boykin, A. W., & Cunningham, R. (2001). The effects of movement expressiveness in

story content and learning context on the analogical reasoning performance of

African American children. Journal of Negro Education, 70(1-2), 72-83.

Borman, G. D., & Kimball, S. M. (2005). Teacher quality and educational equality: Do

teachers with higher standards-based evaluation ratings close student

achievement gaps? The Elementary School Journal, 106(1), 3-21.

Brown, E. L. (2004). What precipitates change in cultural diversity awareness during a

multicultural course: The message or the method? Journal of Teacher Education,

55(4), 325-340.

Brown, M. R. (2007). Educating all students: Creating culturally responsive teachers,

classrooms, and schools. Intervention in school and clinic, 43(1), 57-62.

Cabello, B., & Burstein, N. (1995). Examining teachers’ beliefs about teaching in

culturally diverse classrooms. Journal of Teacher Education, 46, 285-294.

Cochran-Smith, M., Davis, D., & Fries, K. (2004). Multicultural teacher education:

Research, practice, and policy. In J.A. Banks & C.A.M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook

of research on multicultural education (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Coleman, J.S., Campbell, E. Q., Hobson, C. J., McPartland, J., Mood, A. M., Weinfield,

F. D., & Yourk, R. L. (1966). Equality of educational opportunities. Washington,

DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

 89

Cotton, K. (2001). Fostering intercultural harmony in schools: Research findings.

Oregon: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory.

Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research designs: Qualitative and quantitative approaches.

Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Creswell, J. W. (2009). Research designs: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods

approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Cruz-Janzen, M. (2000). From our readers: Preparing preservice teacher candidates for

leadership in equity. Equity & Excellence in Education, 33(1).

Davis, L. E. (1993). An investigation of the cultural sensitivity level of elementary

preservice teachers. Paper presented at Mid-South Educational Research

Conference. New Orleans, LA.

Davis, L. E. (1994). Preservice teachers and culturally diverse families: How do they

perceive one another? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Mid-South

Education Research Association. Nashville, TN.

Deering, T. E. (1997). Preparing to teach diverse student populations: A British and

American perspective. Educational Research, 39(3), 342-350.

Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York:

New Press.

DiMartino, E. C. (1989). Understanding children from other cultures. Childhood

Education, 66, 30-32.

Division of Instructional Innovation and Assessment (2007). Why assess student

learning? Instructional Assessment Resources. The University of Texas at

Austin.
 90

Dixon, G. T., & Fraser, S. (1986). Teaching preschoolers in a multicultural classroom.

Childhood Education, 62, 598-605.

Downey, D. B., & Pribesh, S. (2004). When race matters: Teachers’ evaluation of

students’ classroom behavior. Sociology of Education, 77(4), 267-282.

Duff, P., & Uchida, Y. (1997). The negotiation of teachers’ sociocultural identities and

practices in postsecondary EFL classrooms. TESOL Quarterly, 31(3), 451-486.

Educational Research Association. (2001). No child left behind: A special report of

President George W. Bush’s education plan with relevant discussion questions

educational leaders should ask. Concerns in Education FGK23985. Arlington,

VA: EDRS (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED455601).

Farr, B. P., & Trumbull, E. (1997). Assessment alternatives for diverse classrooms.

Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.

Ferguson, A. A. (2000). Bad boys: Public school in the making of Black masculinity.

Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Ferguson, R. F. (1998). Teachers’ perception and expectations and the Black-White test

score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

Fillmore, L. W. (1983). Language minority students and school participation: What kind

of English is needed? Journal of Education, 143-156.

Frisby, C. L. (2001). Handbook of multicultural assessment. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Gay, G. (2000). Multicultural teacher education for the 21st century. Teacher Educator,

36(1), 1-16.

Gay, G. (2002). Culturally responsive teaching in special education for ethnically diverse
 91

students: Setting the stage. Qualitative studies, 15(6), 613-629.

Gersten, R. (1996). Literacy instruction for language-minority students: the transition

years. The Elementary School Journal, 96(3), 227-244.

Goldenberg, C. (1996). The education of language-minority students: Where are we, and

where do we need to go? The Elementary School Journal, 93(3), 353-361.

Gollnick, D., & Chinn, P. (2002). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society (6th ed.)

Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.

Grant, C. A., & Wieczorek, K. (2002). Teacher education and knowledge in the

‘knowledge society’: the need for social moorings in our multicultural schools.

Teachers College Record, 102(5), 913-935.

Hoover-Dempsey, K. V., & Sandler, H. M. (1995). Parental involvement in children’s

education: Why does it make a difference? Teachers College Record, 97,

310-331.

Howard, T. C. (1999). We can’t teach what we don’t know. New York: Teachers College,

Columbia University.

Howard, T. C. (2003). Culturally relevant pedagogy: Ingredients for critical teacher

reflection. Theory in Practice, 42(3), 195-202.

Hurley, E. A. (1999). The interaction of culture with math achievement and group

processes among African American and European American students. Paper

presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research

Association. New Orleans, LA.

Irvine, J. J. (1990). Black students and school failure: Policies, practices, and

prescriptions. New York: Greenwood Press.

 92

Krashen, S., & Biber, D. (1998). On course: Bilingual education’s success in California.

Association for Bilingual Education: Sacramento, CA.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African-American

children. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ladson-Billings, G. (2001). Crossing over to Canaan: The journey of new teachers in

diverse classrooms. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Larke, P. J. (1990). Cultural diversity inventory: Assessing the sensitivity of preservice

teachers. Action in Teacher Education, 12(3), 23-30.

Lee, S. K. (1998). The linguistic minority parents’ perception of bilingual education.

Paper presented at the Annual International Bilingual/Multicultural Education

Conference. Dallas, TX.

Lichtman, M. (2006). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide. Thousand

Oaks, California: SAGE Publications, Inc.

Manning, M. L. (2000). Understanding diversity, accepting others: Realities and

directions. Educational Horizons, 77-79.

McConnell, S. R. (2000). Assessment in early intervention and early childhood special

education: Building on the past to project into our future. Topics in Early

Childhood Education, 20(1), 43-48.

McFadden, J., Merryfield, M., & Barron, K. (1997). Multicultural and

global/international education: Guidelines for programs in teacher education.

Washington, DC: American Association of Colleges of Teacher Education.

McNeal, K. (2005). The influence of a multicultural teacher education program on

teachers’ multicultural practices. Intercultural Education, 16(4), 405-419.

 93

Milner, H. R., Flowers, L. A., Moore, E., Moore, J., & Flowers, T. A. (2003).

Preservice teachers’ awareness of multiculturalism and diversity. The High

School Journal, 87(1), 63-70.

Miron, L. F. (1996). The social construction of urban schooling. Cresskill, NJ: Hampton

Press.

Montgomery, W. (2001). Creating culturally responsive, inclusive classrooms. Teaching

Exceptional Children, 33(4), 4-9.

Moore, F. M. (2007). Preparing elementary preservice teachers for urban elementary

science classrooms: Challenging cultural biases toward diverse students. Journal

of Science Teacher Education, 19(1), 85-109.

Mullis, I., Campbell, J., & Farstrup, A. (1993). NAEP 1992 reading report card for the

nation and the states. Washington, DC: Department of Education.

Myers, S. L., Jr., Kim, H., & Mandala, C. (2004). The effect of school poverty on racial

gaps in test scores: The case of the Minnesota basic standards test. The Journal

of Negro Education, 73(1), 81.

Nardi, P. (2006). Doing survey research: A guide to quantitative method. Boston, MA:

Pearson Education, Inc.

National Center for Education Statistics (2003-2004). Number and enrollment of

traditional public and public charter elementary and secondary schools and

percentages of students, teachers, and schools, by selected characteristics: 2003-

2004. Retrieved July 1, 2008 from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/.

National Center for Education Statistics (2008). Results of the NAEP 2007 Assessment.

Washington, DC: Institute of Education Science, U.S. Department of Education.

 94

Nieto, S. (2000). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural

education (3rd ed.). New York: Longman

Ortiz, A. A., & Graves, A. (2001). English language learners with literacy related

disabilities. International Dyslexia Association Commemorative Booklet.

Baltimore: International Dyslexia Association.

Ortiz, A. A., & Yates, J. R. (2001). A framework for serving English language learners

with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Leadership, 14(2), 72-80.

Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Payne, R. K. (1996). A framework for understanding poverty. Texas: aha! Process, Inc.

Pierce, L. (2002). Performance-based assessment: Promoting achievement for English

language learners. Washington, DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual

Education.

Reed, D. F. (1998). Speaking from experience: Anglo-American teachers in African

American schools. Clearing House, 71(4), 224-30.

Ramirez, J. D. (1992). Executive summary: Longitudinal study of structured English

immersion strategy, early-exit and late-exit transitional bilingual education

programs for language-minority children. Bilingual Research Journal, 16, 1-62.

Roach, R. (2004). The great divide. Black Issues in Higher Education, 21(6), 22-25.

Rowser, J. F., & Koontz, T. Y. (1995). Inclusion of African American students in

mathematics classrooms: Issues of style, curriculum, and expectations. The

Mathematics Teacher, 88(6), 448-453.

Skiba, R. J., Michael, R. S., Nardo, A. C., & Peterson, R. (2000). The color of discipline:

Sources of racial and gender disproportionality in school punishment.

 95

Bloomington, IN: Education Policy Center.

Sleeter, C. (1992). Keepers of the American dream: A study of staff development and

multicultural education. Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

Snyder, T. D., & Hoffman, C. M. (2002). Digest of education statistics 2001.

Washington, DC, US Department of Education, National Center for Education

Statistics.

Spinelli, C. G. (2008). Addressing the issue of cultural and linguistic diversity and

assessment: Informal evaluation measures for English language learners. Reading

and Writing Quarterly, 24, 101-118.

Stallworth, B. J., Gibbons, L., & Fauber, L. (2006). It’s not on the list: An exploration of

perspectives on using multicultural literature. Journal of Adolescent and Adult

Literacy, 49(6), 478-489.

Stobart, G. (2005). Fairness in multicultural assessment systems. Assessment in

Education, 12(3), 274-287.

Taylor, P. A. (2000). Preservice teachers and teacher educators: Are they sensitive

about cultural diversity issues? Paper presented a the Annual Meeting of the

Association of Teacher Educators. Orlando, FL.

Teddlie, C., & Reynolds, D. (2000). International handbook of school effectiveness

research. London: Falmer.

Tyson, K. (2003). Notes from the back of the room: Problems and paradoxes in the

schooling of young black students. Sociology of Education, 76(4), 236.

U. S. Department of Education. (1997). 19th Annual Report to Congress on the

Implementation of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act. Retrieved

 96

December 19, 2008, from http://www.ed.gov/offices/OSERS/OSEP/

Villegas, A. M., & Lucas, T. (2002). Preparing culturally responsive teachers. Journal

of Teacher Education, 53(1), 20-32.

Walker-Dalhouse, D., & Dalhouse, A. D. (2006). Investigating white preservice teachers’

beliefs about teaching in culturally diverse classrooms. The Negro Educational

Review, 57(1-2), 69-84.

Wilbur, G. (1991). Gender-fair curriculum research report. Wellesley: Wellesley

College Research on Women.

Zeichner, K. (2003). The adequacies and inadequacies of three current strategies to

recruit, prepare, and retain the best teachers for all students. Teacher’s College

Record, 105, 490-519.

 97

APPENDICES
 98

APPENDIX A

IRB Approval Document

Georgia Southern University

Office of Research Services & Sponsored Programs
Institutional Review Board (IRB)

Phone: 912-478-0843 Veazey Hall 2021

P.O. Box 8005
Fax: 912-478-0719 [email protected] Statesboro, GA 30460

To: Sohmer Evans Collins

650 St. Andrews Drive
Jackson, GA 30233

CC: Charles E. Patterson

Associate Vice President for Research

From: Office of Research Services and Sponsored Programs

Administrative Support Office for Research Oversight Committees
(IACUC/IBC/IRB)

Date: February 2, 2009

Subject: Status of Application for Approval to Utilize Human Subjects in Research

After a review of your proposed research project numbered: H09179 and titled “Cultural
Diversity Awareness of Elementary Teachers in Georgia Classrooms”, it appears that
(1) the research subjects are at minimal risk, (2) appropriate safeguards are planned, and
(3) the research activities involve only procedures which are allowable.

Therefore, as authorized in the Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects, I
am pleased to notify you that the Institutional Review Board has approved your
proposed research.

This IRB approval is in effect for one year from the date of this letter. If at the end of
that time, there have been no changes to the research protocol; you may request an
extension of the approval period for an additional year. In the interim, please provide the
IRB with any information concerning any significant adverse event, whether or not it is
believed to be related to the study, within five working days of the event. In addition, if
a change or modification of the approved methodology becomes necessary, you must
notify the IRB Coordinator prior to initiating any such changes or modifications. At that
time, an amended application for IRB approval may be submitted. Upon completion of
 99

your data collection, you are required to complete a Research Study Termination form to
notify the IRB Coordinator, so your file may be closed.
Sincerely,
Eleanor Haynes
Compliance Officer
 100

APPENDIX B

Cultural Diversity Awareness Inventory

General Instructions: Please read each item carefully and mark the appropriate space or
write your response in the appropriate space. Please respond to all statements.

A. Demographic Information

Race/Ethnicity
_____ White
_____ Black
_____ Hispanic
_____ Asian/Pacific Islander
_____ American Indian/Alaska Native

Gender
_____ Male
_____ Female

Level of Education
_____ Bachelor’s
_____ Master’s
_____ Education Specialist
_____ Doctor’s

Years Teaching Experience

_____ Less than 3 years
_____ 3 to 9 years
_____ 10 to 20 years
_____ Over 20 years

Did your collegiate program include a Multicultural Education course?

_____ Yes _____ No

Have you had other training in Multicultural Education?

_____ Yes _____ No
 101

Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements by circling the appropriate letters following the
statement.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree

SD D N A SA

I Believe…

1. my culture to be different from some of the children I serve. SD D N A SA

2. it is important to identify immediately the ethnic group of the

children I serve. SD D N A SA

3. I would prefer to work with children and parents whose cultures

are similar to mine. SD D N A SA

4. I would be uncomfortable in settings with people who speak

non-standard English. SD D N A SA

5. I am uncomfortable in settings with people who exhibit values

or beliefs different from my own. SD D N A SA

6. in asking families of diverse cultures how they wish to be

referred to (e.g., Caucasian, White, Anglo) at the beginning
of our interaction. SD D N A SA

7. other than the required school activities, my interactions with

parents should include social events, meeting in public, places
(e.g., shopping centers), or telephone conversations. SD D N A SA

8. I am sometimes surprised when members of certain ethnic

groups contribute to particular school activities (e.g., bilingual
students on the debate team or Black students in the orchestra). SD D N A SA

9. the family’s views of school and society should be included

in the school’s yearly program planning. SD D N A SA

10. it is necessary to include on-going parent input in program planning. SD D N A SA

11. I sometimes experience frustration when conducting conferences

with parents whose culture is different from my own. SD D N A SA

12. the solution to communication problems of certain ethnic groups

is the child’s own responsibility. SD D N A SA

13. English should be taught as a second language to non-English

speaking children as a regular part of the school curriculum. SD D N A SA

14. when correcting a child’s spoken language, one should role

model without any further explanation. SD D N A SA
 102

Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements by circling the appropriate letters following the
statement.

Strongly Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly

Disagree Agree

SD D N A SA

I Believe…

15. that there are times when the use of non-standard English should
be ignored. SD D N A SA

16. in a society with as many racial groups as the USA, I would

expect and accept the use of ethnic jokes or phrases by some
children. SD D N A SA

17. that there are times when racial statements should be ignored. SD D N A SA

18. a child should be referred for testing if learning difficulties

appear to be due to cultural differences and/or language. SD D N A SA

19. adaptations in standardized assessments to be questionable

since they alter reliability and validity. SD D N A SA

20. translating a standardized achievement or intelligence test

to the child’s dominant language gives the child an added
advantage and does not allow for peer comparison. SD D N A SA

21. parents know little about assessing their own children. SD D N A SA

22. that the teaching of ethnic customs and traditions is NOT

the responsibility of public school programs or personnel. SD D N A SA

23. it is my responsibility to provide opportunities for children

to share cultural differences in foods, dress, family life, and/or
beliefs. SD D N A SA

24. Individualized Education Program meetings or program

planning should be scheduled for the convenience of the parent. SD D N A SA

25. I make adaptations in programming to accommodate the

different cultures as my enrollment changes. SD D N A SA

26. the displays and frequently used materials within my setting

show at least three different ethnic groups or customs. SD D N A SA

27. in a regular rotating schedule for job assignments which

includes each child within my setting. SD D N A SA

28. one’s knowledge of a particular culture should affect one’s

expectations of the children’s performance. SD D N A SA