Diversity in Education
Diversity in Education
  • Overview
  • K-12 Integration, Desegregation, and Segregation Archive
  • K-16 STEM Archive
  • Browse
    • By Method of Analysis
    • By Unit of Analysis
    • By Data Type
    • By Journal Name or Institutional Affiliation
    • By Keyword
    • By Methodology
    • By Region
    • By Research
    • By Scholarship
    • By Sample Type
  • Help
  • Contact Us

Filter

  • Sort by

  • Filtered Search Term

  • Archive

  • Keywords

  • Research Designs

  • Analysis Methods

  • Researchers

When and How School Desegregation Improves Intergroup Relations: The Relationship Between Social Psychology and Social Policy

  • The article discusses how and when desegregation improves intergroup relations by examining the social-psychology research. The contact hypothesis approach is the social-psychological perspective that has been most important in school desegregation research. It critiques early research design.
  • The chapter discusses the nature of the contact and situational factors that are important to Allport’s contact theory, by discussing the research that has built on this theory.
  • Measurement and design issues are factors that influence the usefulness of social-psychological research on social policy.
  • Some of the methodological flaws of this research are discussed (self-selection, correlational rather than causal associations, cross-sectional rather than longitudinal studies, lack of control groups and high attrition in longitudinal studies) as an impediment to social policy implementation.
  • Social psychology research is dated, which limits its usefulness—new research is needed to reflect demographic changes (more, varied minority groups and racial attitudinal changes by majority and minority groups).
  • Intergroup relations research has used an experimental mindset, however minimal groups do not necessarily reflect racial groups, and studies of college students are not representative of K-12 students. Research mainly focuses on micro rather than macro—macro is more policy oriented.
  • More work needs to be done to better understand peer relationships as a factor influencing intergroup relations. Cognitive effects of intergroup relations does not easily translate to policy (too much focus on attitudes/beliefs, not enough focus on behavior).
Skip to toolbar
  • Log In