Theoretical Model Overview

This study introduces a new way of conceptualizing student perspectives on diversity. Grounded in traditional theories, this study introduces a more comprehensive model of how diversity is perceived. In contrast to diversity models that measure development in a linear fashion, this theory views perspectives as fluid and dynamic, influenced by infinite variables including but not limited to: gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, personal or religious beliefs, culture, socio-economic status, parental influence, peer influence, sexual orientation, first-generation college status, ability, openness to learning/willingness for self-critique, pre-college experiences and college experiences. Student identities and perspectives regarding diversity are socially constructed, multiple rather than singular and shaped by issues of privilege and power (Torres, Howard-Hamilton & Cooper, 2003). Findings have led to the development of The Dynamic Diversity Paradigm Inventory, an instrument that measures student perspectives on various social justice issues. A number of theories were used in forming this theoretical model. Meritocracy in higher education, as positioned by Trow (1992), captures the salience of the assimilationist thought posited by Chavez (1991). In other words, assimilation implies that the salience of race, gender, ability, religion, nationality and class is non-existence; assimilation is color-blind. The logic persists that merit is also color-blind. Focusing on the merit of one's work and developing policies and programs based on merit will achieve diversity. Students assessed as having Meritocratic values focus on achievement rather than on issues such as race or gender. They may have a structural/functionalist view of diversity and see current social systems as effective.

The Postmodern view asserts that diversity is fluid, without boundaries, bringing groups out of the margins (Bloland, 1995). Postmodernism brings into scope a broader conceptualization of what diversity is positing that diversity is an epistemology of a plurality of voices from all groups (Tierney, 1993), defined by race/ethnicity, nationality, geography, gender, sexual orientation, ability, religion, socioeconomics, educational attainment and political views. Diversity has become so inclusive that it is diffuse, almost diluted back to a melting pot of mankind (Schlesinger, 1999). Students assessed as having a Postmodern perspective have a broad definition of diversity and value harmony, but may not have critical knowledge of issues of privilege, power or stratification.

The Critical Post Modernism (CPM) (Tierney, 1993) view of diversity advances the postmodern conception, articulating the specific and relative importance of each element that defines diversity. CPM seeks to develop a "critical consciousness" of the interrelations between individuals, and to make other's language one's own language in uncovering forms of oppressive behaviors (Tappan & Brown, 1996), such as racial/ethnic categorizations. Students relating to the Critical Postmodern perspective define diversity broadly but view power and privilege critically. This perspective includes Critical Race Theory (CRT) (Crenshaw, Gotanda, Peller & Thomas, 1995; Delgado and Stefancic, 2001a, 2001b), which was used to address the persistence of race (and ethnicity) as the crux of diversity. CRT recognizes that the social construction of race is insidious in today's social actions and therefore, race should not be relegated to the margins as several legal contentions have successfully or unsuccessfully argued (e.g. Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger) (Legal Information Institute, Cornell University, 2005). CRT seeks to uncover the coded elements of racism and associated power and privilege within the politicized discourse of diversity.