Attitudes Toward and Knowledge of Affirmative Action in Higher Education

199 Pages·2017·4.17 MB·English

by  Erika Ann Carr

WWeesstteerrnn MMiicchhiiggaann UUnniivveerrssiittyy
SScchhoollaarrWWoorrkkss aatt WWMMUU
Dissertations Graduate College
12-2007
AAttttiittuuddeess TToowwaarrdd aanndd KKnnoowwlleeddggee ooff AAffiffirrmmaattiivvee AAccttiioonn iinn HHiigghheerr
EEdduuccaattiioonn
Erika Ann Carr
Western Michigan University
Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations
Part of the Bilingual, Multilingual, and Multicultural Education Commons, Disability and Equity in
Education Commons, and the Higher Education Commons
RReeccoommmmeennddeedd CCiittaattiioonn
Carr, Erika Ann, "Attitudes Toward and Knowledge of Affirmative Action in Higher Education" (2007).
Dissertations. 841.
https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/dissertations/841
This Dissertation-Open Access is brought to you for free
and open access by the Graduate College at
ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion
in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of
ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please
contact [email protected].
ATTITUDES TOWARD AND KNOWLEDGE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN
HIGHER EDUCATION
by
Erika Ann Carr
A Dissertation
Submitted to the
Faculty of The Graduate College
in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the
Degree of Doctor of Philosophy
Department of Educational Leadership, Research and Technology
Dr. Andrea Beach, Advisor
Western Michigan University
Kalamazoo, Michigan
December 2007
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
ATTITUDES TOWARD AND KNOWLEDGE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION IN
HIGHER EDUCATION
Erika Ann Carr, PhD.
Western Michigan University, 2007
Affirmative action has become an increasingly important topic in higher
education because colleges and universities are key battlegrounds regarding how
affirmative action policies are enacted. Senior-level higher education administrators have
historically taken the lead in shaping affirmative action policies in higher education, and
knowing their own community’s standpoints on the policies could assist them in deciding
how to proceed in defending affirmative action in the face of increasing opposition.
This study measures individuals’ attitudes toward and knowledge of affirmative
action within one university in the state of Michigan, where affirmative action was
banned through a state-wide election in November 2006. An invitation to participate in a
web-based survey was sent out to a random sample of faculty, staff, graduate students,
and undergraduate students. Five-hundred and twenty university community members
responded.
The web-based survey was a modification of Echols’ (1997) Echols Affirmative
Action Inventory (EAAI), which measured respondents knowledge of and attitudes
toward affirmative action. The modified survey questions were divided into six sub­
categories: definitions, knowledge of affirmative action, attitudes of affirmative action,
perceived impact of affirmative action, support of affirmative action, and demographics.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
The study found that personal definitions did vary somewhat by various
demographic groups. However, in general the definitions were more positive in nature
than they were negative meaning they are supportive of affirmative action than opposed.
Attitude level was significantly related to race, party affiliation, and direction of vote.
Knowledge level was found to be significantly different based on race, education level,
position at the university, direction of vote, party affiliation, and age. Both support level
and impact level of affirmative action were found to be significantly influenced by
certain demographic variables. Additionally, knowledge, attitude, and impact combined
were found to significantly influence support level. Overall, support for affirmative
action among university community members was higher than that of the overall
population in the state.
The findings here can be used by higher education leaders in states that have not
banned affirmative action to consider how to impact the knowledge and attitudes of not
only their own institutions but the population at large.
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
UMI Number: 3293159
INFORMATION TO USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy
submitted. Broken or indistinct print, colored or poor quality illustrations and
photographs, print bleed-through, substandard margins, and improper
alignment can adversely affect reproduction.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if unauthorized
copyright material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion.
®
UMI
UMI Microform 3293159
Copyright 2008 by ProQuest Information and Learning Company.
All rights reserved. This microform edition is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code.
ProQuest Information and Learning Company
300 North Zeeb Road
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Copyright by
Erika Ann Carr
2007
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS
“And let us run with endurance the race that God has set before us” - Hebrews 12:1
Thanks to God for leading me and guiding me all of my life and providing me
with the endurance to finish this race. Thank you to my husband and superman who has
sacrificed as much as I to see this goal achieved. I appreciate and love you for all that
you are. To my parents who have continued to support me without question and whom
have always been and continue to be in my comer - thanks for teaching me everything I
needed to know about life. To Justin for being a brother and a friend. To my father and
mother-in law for loving and supporting me as much as their own daughter. To Sonya
for her avid enthusiasm and excitement in all aspects of life and for being a great Sister.
To Dr. Andrea Beach, not just my chair, but my mentor, role model, advisor, coach,
friend, and everything I needed her to be when I needed her to be it. To Dr. Sue Poppink
and David Glenn for their wisdom and assistance on my committee. To Dr. Mark Orbe
for his guidance and encouragement. To my supervisors, Diana Hernandez and Dr.
Martha Warfield, for paving the way for women leaders and for fostering a work
environment conducive of growth and development - thank you for your guidance and
mentorship. To my coworkers for teaching me just as much about myself as about the
work we do. To Sherrie and Ronicka for their friendship and support. To all the
individuals that helped me through this journey, there are more than I could ever write.
Erika Ann Carr
ii
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
AKNOWLEDGEMENTS............................. ii
LIST OF TABLES.......................................................................................................... ix
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................ 1
Theoretical Framework........................................................................ 3
Statement of the Problem ............................................................. 4
Research Questions............................................... 6
Methods ......................................................................................... 7
Significance of the Study.................................................................... 7
Limitations and Delimitations............................................................. 9
Conclusion............................................................................................ 10
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................................................................. 11
A Brief History.......................................................................................... 11
Definitions................................................................................ 11
Origins....................................................................................... 12
Challenges in Employment and Contracts............................ 13
Challenges in Higher Education............................................ 14
The Key Issues...................................................................................... 19
Racism....................................................................................... 19
Racial and Gender Disparities................................................ 20
iii
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table of Contents - Continued
CHAPTER
Diversity.................................................................................... 21
Effectiveness............................................................................ 24
Higher Education’s Response to the Michigan Cases.................... 28
Differences in the Way Institutions are Responding 29
Higher Education’s Reaction................................................. 31
Effects of Eliminating Affirmative Action........................................ 31
Attitudes of Affirmative Action.......................................................... 33
Race/Ethnicity and Gender..................................................... 33
Socio-Economic Status........................................................... 40
Political Ideology.................................................................... 40
Education Level....................................................................... 41
Knowledge of Affirmative Action...................................................... 42
Perceived Impact................................................................................... 43
Symbolic Policy Perspective............................................................... 45
The Actors................................................................................ 46
The Purpose.............................................................................. 48
The Process............................................................................... 49
The Outcomes.......................................................................... 50
The Theories of Action........................................................... 51
Analysis of the Symbolic Perspective................................... 51
iv
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.
Table of Contents - Continued
CHAPTER
Standpoint Theory................................................................................ 52
Overview................................................................................... 52
Standpoint Theory and Research........................................... 54
Symbolic Policy, Standpoint Theory, and Affirmative Action in
Higher Education.................................................................................. 55
Conclusion............................................................................................. 57
III. METHODOLOGY............................................................................................ 58
Research Design.................................................................................... 58
Research Questions.............................................................................. 59
Setting..................................................................................................... 59
Sample Population................................................................................ 59
The Population......................................................................... 60
Power Analysis........................................................................ 63
Survey Instrument................................................................................. 64
Instrument Development........................................................ 65
Validity and Reliability........................................................... 67
The Knowledge Questions...................................................... 69
Attitude vs. Knowledge........................................................... 73
Impact........................................................................................ 74
Support...................................................................................... 74
v
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.