View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Literature Review of Multicultural Instrumentation

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Literature Review of Multicultural Instrumentation
Language: English
Authors: Sarraj, Huda, Carter, Stacy, Burley, Hansel
Source: Multicultural Perspectives. 2015 17(4):225-233.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 9
Publication Date: 2015
Document Type: Journal Articles
Information Analyses
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Secondary Education
Higher Education
Descriptors: Literature Reviews, Multicultural Education, Demography, Educational Technology, Curriculum Design, Teacher Competency Testing, Teacher Surveys, Special Education, Self Concept Measures, Self Efficacy, Questionnaires, Attitude Measures, Personality Measures, Educational Environment, Predictor Variables
DOI: 10.1080/15210960.2015.1088307
ISSN: 1521-0960
Abstract: Demographic changes at the national level emphasize a critical need for multicultural education to be included as part of undergraduate education. This critical review of the literature examines 10 multicultural instruments that are suitable for use in K-12 or higher education institutions. This is a novel literature review in that it is the first such review to investigate the contribution of each instrument to five multicultural components in educational settings (e.g., teaching, efficacy, attitudes, school climate, and personality). The results reveal the need for a "back to the basics" approach in instrument development as more emphasis has recently been placed on advanced analyses and less emphasis on item generation and selection. This trend in instrument development has produced some advantages, but also several limitations to existing instruments used in educational settings. Directions for future research and recommendations are discussed.
Abstractor: As Provided
Number of References: 25
Entry Date: 2015
Accession Number: EJ1082569
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFwYzh5MHoiADgZ7w5qmxbqAAAA4zCB4AYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHSMIHPAgEAMIHJBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDDSA75gelY3BcQcvbgIBEICBm4Qtz2I07dTJd9Yugo7QeD3XxuuXx42xYbzNCKPHavebeRbz752De2m_9NoawcbFkLc5V8uiJD6ZwYEP0zGX5HzfoHt4nrwrKe_7nx_Vn1ma-fwT9wRYbCMuT94Ecg6hIBI-8D5Z8-zlIqyCqO3H7NMvUWSiCClXm-kSeco5scPd8SuSkyOvvl-wswpYhzAkxbfJ2gFheZmAdZmv
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0111115430;7mr01oct.15;2019Feb26.13:12;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0111115430-1">Literature Review of Multicultural Instrumentation. </title> <p>Demographic changes at the national level emphasize a critical need for multicultural education to be included as part of undergraduate education. This critical review of the literature examines 10 multicultural instruments that are suitable for use in K–12 or higher education institutions. This is a novel literature review in that it is the first such review to investigate the contribution of each instrument to five multicultural components in educational settings (e.g., teaching, efficacy, attitudes, school climate, and personality). The results reveal the need for a "back to the basics" approach in instrument development as more emphasis has recently been placed on advanced analyses and less emphasis on item generation and selection. This trend in instrument development has produced some advantages, but also several limitations to existing instruments used in educational settings. Directions for future research and recommendations are discussed.</p> <p>Census projections estimate that the United States will become a majority-minority for the first time in the year 2043 with the White population expected to increase at a slower rate compared to other populations (Bernstein, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref1">3</reflink>]). These changes in demographics at the national level are reflected in enrollment at public schools and higher education. According to the Condition of Education 2010 report, a review of several national studies, in the 20 years between 1988 and 2008, the total enrollment of White students in public schools fell from 68% of the total to 55% and Hispanic student enrollment increased 100% from 11% to 22% (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref2">19</reflink>]). Also, from 1976 to 2010, Hispanic student enrollment in higher education drastically increased from 3 to 13%, the rate of Asian and Pacific Islander student enrollment increased from 2% to 6%, African American students increased from 9% to 14%, and White students decreased from 83% to 61% (NCES, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref3">20</reflink>]).</p> <p>The need for multicultural education is evident in the changing demographic in K–12 and higher education institutions. Many universities across the nation recognize the need to prepare students to become multiculturally competent. As a result, the majority of colleges and universities nationally revised their undergraduate degree requirement to include enrollment in at least one multicultural class (Humphreys, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref4">12</reflink>]). With the expansion of multicultural classes across campuses, it is essential to assess students' attainment from these classes in terms of knowledge and skills.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-2">Purpose of the Study</hd> <p>The purpose of this literature review is to provide an overall evaluation of education-related multicultural instrumentation. The reviewed instruments may be used as formative assessment tools to guide instruction in multicultural classes or to shed light on areas where trainees need additional experience. This is the first comprehensive review of these instruments to use the five components (i.e., teaching, efficacy, attitudes, school climate, and personality) of multicultural education to evaluate the learning environment, and it illustrates how multicultural education has benefited higher education institutions.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-3">Previous Literature Reviews of Multicultural Competency</hd> <p>In Brown's ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref5">4</reflink>]) literature review of instruments assessing preservice teachers' beliefs and attitudes toward social justice and diversity used before 2001, the majority of those did not report credible statistical properties. Brown ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref6">4</reflink>]) reviewed a total of 12 instruments and, except for two, Brown pointed out the lack of reported reliability and validity information. The findings from Brown's literature review suggest a need for statistically sound measures in education.</p> <p>Dunn, Smith, and Montoya's ([<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref7">7</reflink>]) literature review focused on widely used multicultural instruments in the counseling field (e.g., The Multicultural Awareness Knowledge Skills Survey; D'Andrea, Daniels, & Heck, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref8">6</reflink>]; The Personal Beliefs About Diversity Scale; Pohan & Aguilar, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref9">21</reflink>]). Their review is targeted toward counselors and may not be useful for researchers across disciplines. However, the Multiple Dimensions of Cultural Competence (MDCC) framework proves to be a valuable theoretical basis for instrument development in the counseling field and may be equally beneficial in other fields. The framework breaks down multicultural competency into a three dimensional behavioral model of awareness, knowledge, and skills. Researchers from different fields should look into adopting this framework as a theoretical basis for their multicultural instruments.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-4">Methodology</hd> <p>In September of 2013, Google Scholar, as well as an Academic Complete EBSCO with all individual datasets, were used to conduct this literature review search. The following terms were used: Multicultural, Instruments, Diversity, Surveys, and their synonyms. The EBSCO search yielded more than 100 articles. While the Google Scholar search yielded about 36,200 hits, the majority of the "hits" were not directly related to the field of education. For example, some articles detailing competency in areas other than multicultural were included in the search result. The first step taken was to determine which articles were relevant to the search and which were not. Once relevant articles were selected, the researchers scanned through articles' abstract to determine if they initially met the inclusion criteria. For the articles that met the inclusion criteria, we obtained full text copies through the university library resources to study them closely. Since we were looking for specific reliability and validity information, some articles were eliminated after the full text analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-5">Inclusion Criteria</hd> <p>The reviewed articles had to meet a set of specific criteria before they were included in the review presented here. This is a list of the outlined criteria: first, articles must have been published in peer-reviewed journals. Second, the operational definition of multicultural competency had to be based on a theoretical model or borrowed from scholars within the multicultural field (e.g., The Munroe Multicultural Attitude Scale Questionnaire [MASQUE; Munroe & Pearson, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref10">18</reflink>]] is based on Banks & Banks' [1995] theoretical framework). Third, all the articles reviewed had to have been published between 2001 and 2013.The range was chosen to be representative of current instruments in use and to build on Brown's ([<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref11">4</reflink>]) literature review on educators', staff, and personnel multicultural attitudes and beliefs. Fourth, the purpose and content of the instruments had to be applicable to education and could be used to measure multicultural competency of students, staff, or faculty in a K–12 or higher education setting. Articles included in the study focused on a specific aspect of multicultural education (e.g., dispositions, teaching, and efficacy). Fifth, reliability and validity data had to be reported for the instruments. The internal reliability (i.e., Cronbach Alpha), total variance for exploratory factor analysis, or fit indices for confirmatory factor analysis had to be reported in instrument validation studies for articles to be included in this study.</p> <p>In addition, studies that were not applicable to education were excluded from the review. Also, studies that did not report the validity and reliability scores for developed instruments were eliminated.</p> <p>This review includes basic descriptors such as purpose, target population, operational definition, and special characteristics. Special attention is devoted to analyzing psychometric properties (i.e., reliability and validity analyses). For example, the internal reliability results, as well as the factor loadings and total variance results of exploratory factor analyses, are included. When provided, the fit indices from confirmatory factor analyses are reported. For all analyses, the results based on acceptable cut off values (i.e., root mean square error of approximation [RMSEA], <emph>x</emph> < 0.05; goodness of fit index [GFI], <emph>x</emph> > 0.90; comparative fit index [CFI], <emph>x</emph> > 0.90; incremental fit index, <emph>x</emph> > 0.90; Tucker Lewis index [TLI], <emph>x</emph> > 0.90; Little, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref12">15</reflink>]) are interpreted and their implications discussed.</p> <p>Aside from psychometric properties, a review of the variables that were addressed on the instruments is provided. The following variables were discussed in relation to multiculturalism: teaching, efficacy, school climate, personality, and dispositions. To better understand these variables, each of them is briefly defined. In the reviewed studies, multicultural teaching is defined as a continuous process that teachers engage in to examine their attitudes and biases, develop a better understanding of specific cultural groups, and reflect on the effect that awareness and knowledge has on their teaching and interactions with students and their families (Spanierman et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref13">24</reflink>]). Multicultural efficacy refers to a teacher's confidence to effectively teach in multicultural settings. Multicultural school climate is the quality of schooling for diverse students, which includes interpersonal relationships, teaching and learning, and the overall school, as an organization that ensures equity and success for students (Marx & Byrnes, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref14">16</reflink>]). Multicultural personality consists of personality traits that determine success in intercultural situations (Van der Zee, Van Oudenhoven, Ponterotto & Fietzer, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref15">28</reflink>]), while multicultural dispositions are values, beliefs, and professional ethics that affect teaching and dealings with students and their families, colleagues, and communities (Gollnick & Chinn, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref16">9</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-6">Results</hd> <p>The literature review search process resulted in 10 articles detailing the development and validation of 10 instruments, as displayed in <bold>Table 1</bold>, which met the inclusion criteria outlined earlier. The instruments are described with an overview of scales and how they pertain to the field of education. The instruments were categorized by the variables covered within each instrument.</p> <p>Table 1. Multicultural Competency Measures</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Name</td><td>Type of instrument</td><td>Participants</td><td>Analysis</td><td>Validity</td><td>Reliability</td><td>Framework</td><td>Notes</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>MTCI (Prieto, 2011)</td><td>11 items, paper-and-pencil, five-point Likert scale, two subscales</td><td>Higher education, faculty</td><td>EFA, CFA</td><td>Cross-validation</td><td>Coefficient alpha = 0.87 and 0.72 for two constructs</td><td>MDCC (Sue et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr25">1982</xref>)</td><td>RMSEA = 0.08, CFI = 0.92</td></tr><tr><td>MSES (Utley, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr27">2011</xref>)</td><td>73 items, seven factors</td><td>General and special education teachers of CLD students</td><td>EFA</td><td>88% variance</td><td>Coefficient alpha for seven factors ranged between 0.86 and 0.97</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>MES (Guyton & Wesche, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr11">2005</xref>)</td><td>35 items</td><td>Pre-/in-service teachers</td><td>EFA</td><td>N/A</td><td>Coefficient alpha = 0.89</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>MDI (Thompson, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr26">2009</xref>)</td><td /><td>Preservice and counseling candidates</td><td>EFA, two-way ANOVA, paired <italic>t</italic>-test, one-sample <italic>t</italic>-tests</td><td /><td /><td>Based on NCATE and INTASC recommendations</td><td /></tr><tr><td>MTCS (Spaniermn et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr24">2011</xref>).</td><td>16 items, six-point Likert scale, two-factor solution</td><td>In-service teachers</td><td>EFA, CFA</td><td /><td>Total alpha level is.88</td><td>Based on MDCC (Sue et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr25">1982</xref>)</td><td>Addresses social desirability concerns</td></tr><tr><td>RACD (Johnson & Kang, 2006)</td><td>20 items, four-point Likert scale, five factor component</td><td>Resident assistants</td><td /><td>Five-factor solution accounts for total variance of 53%</td><td>Total alpha = 0.73</td><td /><td>RMSEA = 0.080</td></tr><tr><td>MPQ-SF (Van der Zee et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr28">2013</xref>).</td><td>40 items, five-point Likert scale, five components</td><td>General</td><td>EFA, CFA</td><td>48.31% total variance</td><td>Ranged from 0.72 to 82 for subcategories</td><td /><td>CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.066</td></tr><tr><td>MSCI (Marx & Byrnes, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr16">2012</xref>)</td><td>22 items, five-point Likert scale</td><td>High school students</td><td>One-way ANOVA</td><td>Known-group method</td><td>Coefficent alpha =.94</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td>MGUDS-S (Fuertes et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr8">2000</xref>)</td><td>15 items, three-factor structure, six-point Likert scale</td><td>Undergraduate students</td><td>CFA</td><td>Convergent validity with the MGUDS-S (1999) was performed</td><td>Coefficient alpha for six constructs ranged between 0.59 to 0.82</td><td>UDO framework (Miville et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr17">1999</xref>)</td><td>CFI = 0.95</td></tr><tr><td>MASQUE (Munroe & Pearson, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr18">2006</xref>)</td><td>18 items, six-point Likert scale, three factors</td><td>College students</td><td>EFA</td><td>46.66% variance</td><td>Coefficient alpha = 0.8</td><td>Banks & Banks' (1995) framework</td><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>3 <emph>Note</emph>. MTCI = Multicultural Teaching Competencies Inventory, EFA = exploratory factor analysis, CFA = confirmatory factor analysis, ANOVA = analysis of variance, MDCC = Multiple Dimensions of Cultural Competence, RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation, CFI = confirmatory fit index, MSES = Multicultural and Special Education Survey, CLD = Culturally and Linguistically Diverse, MES = The Multicultural Efficacy Scale, MDI = The Multicultural Dispositions Index, MTCS = The Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale, RACD = The Resident Assistant Cultural Diversity Questionnaire, MPQ-SF = Multicultural Personality Questionnaire-Short Form, MSCI = Multicultural School Climate Inventory, MGUDS-S = Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale Short Form, MASQUE = The Munroe Multicultural Attitude Scale Questionnaire, NCATE = National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education, INTASC = Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium, UDO = Universal-Diverse Orientation.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-7">Teaching</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0111115430-8">Multicultural Teaching Competencies Inventory (MTCI)</hd> <p>Prieto developed this instrument for use with faculty in higher education institutions to examine awareness and knowledge of faculty's ability to deal with culturally diverse students (2012). The instrument utilizes a five-point Likert scale across two subscales. The Acquired Cultural Knowledge subscale represents the majority of the items on the instrument, while the Sensitivity to Student Culture subscale consists of only four items of the total 10 items of the entire inventory. The framework of MTCI is based on the Multiple Dimension of Multicultural Competence (MDCC) framework (Sue et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref17">25</reflink>]); hence, the definition employed in the study is grounded on MDCC framework. For item generation, the researcher matched competencies outlined in the definition of cultural competencies to items on the instrument. The validation analyses indicate high internal consistent reliability coefficients (i.e., Acquired Cultural Knowledge, 0.87; Sensitivity to Student Culture, 0.72). The confirmatory factor analysis revealed acceptable fit; RMSEA = 0.08 and CFI = 0.92. It appears that the instrument would benefit from future revisions focused on refining the items, which in turn would generate better fitting models and address the skill dimension of the theoretical model.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-9">The Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale (MTCS; Spanierman et al., 2011)</hd> <p>Spanierman and colleagues ([<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref18">24</reflink>]) developed the MTCS to assess the multicultural competence of pre and in-service teachers. The 16 items on the scale span across two subscales: multicultural teaching skills and multicultural knowledge. Similarly to Prieto's MTCI ([<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref19">23</reflink>]), this instrument employs the MDCC model (Sue et al., [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref20">25</reflink>]). The statistical analyses for the instrument revealed a relatively high internal reliability coefficient of 0.88 for the scale and the fit indices obtained from confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) indicate an acceptable fit range; RMSEA = 0.05, CFI = 0.95. The statistical analyses reveal that the MTCS instrument successfully measures the constructs it was intended to measure. The instrument provides educators with a sound instrument to measure in service teachers' multicultural knowledge and skills.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-10">Multicultural and Special Education Survey (MSES; Utley, 2011)</hd> <p>Utley's ([<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref21">27</reflink>]) MSES bridges the gap in the literature by identifying the in-job training and professional development needs of general and special educators who work with culturally and linguistically diverse students using a validated quantitative measure. The MSES is an extensive measure of 73 items and an alternating five- and six-point Likert scales measuring a total of seven factors. While some of the measured factors were culture specific (i.e., cultural knowledge), other factors were general to the teaching profession (e.g., teaching strategies, monitoring and evaluation procedures, curriculum and materials); these factors outline that culturally responsive teaching is embedded in good teaching. All of the items developed for the survey were based on empirical studies in the areas of multicultural or bilingual protections under Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act and special education. The statistical analyses indicated a high reliability and validity scores. The test–retest reliability yielded a subject agreement of 79%, while exploratory factor analysis (EFA) resulted in factor loadings that ranged from 0.67 to 0.94. This survey offers educators a unique tool for identifying the multicultural professional development needs of special education teachers.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-11">Efficacy</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0111115430-12">The Multicultural Efficacy Scale (MES; Guyton & Wesche, 2005)</hd> <p>In 2005, Guyton and Wesche examined the common instruments of the time and determined that none of them measure teacher's efficacy in multicultural settings; therefore they set out to develop an instrument to fill this need. Their creation measures 35 items across five subscales: experience, knowledge, efficacy, and attitude. These factors are then ranked using a four-point or five-point Likert scale. The internal reliability coefficient for the instrument was 0.89. Although the researchers performed confirmatory factor analysis, the results were not presented in the article. Overall, the instrument fills a unique need in the multicultural education literature by addressing teacher's efficacy within multicultural settings.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-13">The Resident Assistant Cultural Diversity Questionnaire (RACD; Johnson, Kang, & Thompson,...</hd> <p>In their instrument, Johnson, Kang, & Thompson (2011) measured how confident resident assistants are at handling cultural diversity issues. In the RACD's 20 items, the researchers measure a total of five components that ranged from awareness for the need for diversity training to confidence in handling racial conflicts using a 4-point Likert scale. The statistical analyses reveal an acceptable reliability coefficient for the instrument of 0.73. The confirmatory factor analysis reveal the need for further validation studies as the fit indices for the model are merely modest: CFI = 0.977, RMSEA = 0.080, and TLI = 0.970. The study shed light on the multicultural needs of an important segment in our universities and colleges. The instrument is critical for designing training programs for resident assistants in university settings.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-14">Dispositions</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0111115430-15">The Multicultural Dispositions Index (MDI; Thompson, 2009)</hd> <p>The MDI is 22 item instrument that assesses the diversity awareness levels of teachers and counselor candidates. In this measure, the MDI measures cultural competence, professional skills, and commitment constructs using a nine-point Likert scale. The items developed for MDI are based on recommendations from the National Council for the Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) and the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC). The EFA revealed somewhat low factor loadings for three of the items (i.e., 0.301, 0.357, 0.387), while total factor loadings ranged from 0.301 to 0.71. The internal reliability coefficients for the subscales were stronger as they ranged from 0.73 to 0.86. In future revisions, the instrument will benefit from addressing readability concerns and overall clarity of the items.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-16">Miville–Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale Short Form (MGUDS-S; Fuertes, Miville, Mohr, Sedl...</hd> <p>The 15-item MGUDS-S measures attitudes, comfort, and appreciation of diversity and others across three factors using a six-point Likert scale.</p> <p>The MGUDS-S is based on the idea that Universal-Diverse Orientation is achieved when people recognize and accept the differences in others, have an inclusive attitude toward them, and through shared experiences form a connection with them. The results of the statistical analyses suggest excellent reliability: the coefficients ranged from 0.59 to 0.92. The CFA also resulted in good fit indices of CFI = 0.92, non-normed fit index = 0.94, and GFI = 0.92. The MGUDS-S is a good measure of multicultural attitudes for use in non-discipline specific settings.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-17">The Munroe Multicultural Attitude Scale Questionnaire (Munroe & Pearson, 2006)</hd> <p>The MASQUE 18-item, 6-point scale was designed to measure multicultural attitudes of college students. The items of this survey were based on Bank's transformative approach that is divided into three subcategories (i.e., know, care, and act; Banks, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref22">1</reflink>]). The internal reliability coefficient for the questionnaire is 0.80. The EFA resulted in factor loadings that ranged from 0.32 to 0.83. The instrument offers a valuable tool for assessing students' multicultural attitudes.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-18">Personality</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0111115430-19">Multicultural Personality Questionnaire-Short Form (MPQ-SF; Van der Zee et al., 2013)</hd> <p>Van der Zee and her colleagues ([<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref23">28</reflink>]) identified five traits that are related to intercultural success: cultural empathy, open-mindedness, social initiative, emotional stability, and flexibility. The MPQ-SF measures these five constructs in a total of 40 items, using five-point scale. While the range for internal reliability coefficients ranged from 0.72 to 0.81, the exploratory factor analysis resulted in factor loading of 0.30 for some items. The CFA indicated less than optimal fit for the model; CFI = 0.94, RMSEA = 0.06. Overall, the instrument is considered the first in examining personality traits that predicts success in multicultural settings.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-20">School Climate</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0111115430-21">Multicultural School Climate Inventory (MSCI; Marx & Byrnes, 2012)</hd> <p>Using MSCI's 22 items measure, Marx and Byrnes ([<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref24">16</reflink>]) set to measure high school students' perception of the multicultural climate at their schools. The statistical analyses yielded a relatively high internal reliability coefficient of 0.94. The results from EFA were not reported. Further validation studies are needed before the instrument is used in school settings.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-22">Variables</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0111115430-23">Teaching</hd> <p>As seen in <bold>Table 2</bold>, several instruments are set to measure the multicultural teaching competency of educators at the K–12 and higher education levels. A close investigation of these instruments indicates that they examine only two of the three dimensions of multicultural competence (i.e., MTC and MTCI measure knowledge and skills dimensions). On the other hand, MSES measures multicultural teaching aptitude and skills associated with special education teachers. While there is a great overlap between these instruments, a need still exists for one that measures all three dimensions of the MDCC model.</p> <p>Table 2. Manipulated Variables</p> <p> <ephtml> <table><thead><tr><td>Variable addressed</td><td>Instruments</td><td>Population</td><td>Framework used</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td /><td>MTCI</td><td>Higher education faculty</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Teaching</td><td>MSES</td><td>General and special education teacher</td><td>MTCI and MTCS are based on Sue et al.'s (<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="bibr25">1982</xref>) framework</td></tr><tr><td /><td>MTCS</td><td>In-service teachers</td><td /></tr><tr><td /><td>MES</td><td>Preservice teachers</td><td>Based on emerging themes from the literature</td></tr><tr><td /><td>RACDQ</td><td>Resident assistants</td><td /></tr><tr><td>School Climate</td><td>MSCI</td><td>High school students</td><td /></tr><tr><td>Personality</td><td>MPQ-SF</td><td>Employees</td><td /></tr><tr><td /><td>MGUDS-S</td><td>General</td><td>MGUDS-S uses UDO framework (1999)</td></tr><tr><td>Dispositions</td><td>MASQUE</td><td>College students</td><td>MASQUE uses Banks & Banks' framework (1995)</td></tr><tr><td /><td>MDI</td><td /><td /></tr><tr><td /><td>Preservice teachers and counseling candidates</td><td /><td /></tr></tbody></table> </ephtml> </p> <p>4 <emph>Note</emph>. MTCI = Multicultural Teaching Competencies Inventory, MSES = Multicultural and Special Education Survey, MTCS = The Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale, MES = The Multicultural Efficacy Scale, RACDQ = The Resident Assistant Cultural Diversity Questionnaire, MSCI = Multicultural School Climate Inventory, MPQ-SF = Multicultural Personality Questionnaire-Short Form, MGUDS-S = Miville-Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale Short Form, MASQUE = The Munroe Multicultural Attitude Scale Questionnaire, MDI = The Multicultural Dispositions Index, UDO = Universal-Diverse Orientation.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-24">Efficacy</hd> <p>One of the instruments reviewed in this paper (i.e., MES; Guyton & Wesche, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref25">11</reflink>]) examined multicultural efficacy. In both instruments, the researchers developed questions that examine the degree of confidence the participants possess toward certain skills. These instruments create a starting point for future researchers to include an efficacy dimension for context specific instruments in the education field.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-25">Attitude</hd> <p>The focus of three of the instruments (i.e., MDI, Thompson, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref26">26</reflink>]; MASQUE, Munroe & Pearson, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref27">18</reflink>]; MGUDS-S, Fuertes et al., [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref28">8</reflink>]) was on measuring participants' attitudes toward diversity and comfort with differences. These attitudinal frameworks emphasized empathy and comfort with differences. The instruments provide critical insights into participants' views toward others.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-26">School Climate</hd> <p>Only one instrument (i.e., MSCI; Marx & Byrnes, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref29">16</reflink>]) focused on school climate within multicultural context. School climate is a complex construct with many factors influencing it and thus it is not included in most multicultural instruments. However, there is a need to extend the multicultural literature into school climate especially at the college level.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-27">Personality</hd> <p>One of the instruments (i.e., MPQ-SF; Van der Zee et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref30">28</reflink>]) reviewed examined specific traits that are associated with success in multicultural settings. The concept of associating multicultural competency to traits that participants may naturally possess while others do not is a novel concept. This instrument helps educators understand personal factors that may impede the learning process in multicultural classes.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-28">Limitations</hd> <p>As with any study, there were some limitations for this literature review. The instruments included in the review are from primary studies in which the researchers developing the instruments published the articles. There are no articles in which critiques of the instruments were discussed. This limitation stemmed from lack of these types of articles. Also, only two databases were used in the search (i.e., EBSCO, Google Scholar). In the future more databases would be included in the search.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-29">Discussion</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0111115430-30">Teaching</hd> <p>There is a push in teacher education programs to prepare teachers to become multiculturally competent. This raises the need for multicultural instruments that measure preservice and in-service teachers' multicultural competency. Currently, there is only one instrument (i.e., MSES; Utley, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref31">27</reflink>]) that measures special education teachers' multicultural competency and one (i.e., MTCS; Spanierman et al., [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref32">24</reflink>]) that measures general teachers' multicultural knowledge and skills. While these measures serve a critical purpose in evaluating pre- or in-service teachers multicultural competency and may help guide instruction in multicultural training programs or professional development, there is still a need for future instruments that measure all three dimensions of multicultural competency for this specific population.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-31">Efficacy</hd> <p>In the current literature review, only one instrument (i.e., MES; Guyton & Wesche, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref33">11</reflink>]) was developed to measure multicultural efficacy. The target population for this measure is preservice teachers. This instrument measures the self-efficacy of preservice teachers. This population is an important segment in society that interacts with diverse students on a daily basis, however, it is important to measure the self-efficacy beliefs of various professionals from different fields. Currently, there are no measures that address the self-efficacy beliefs' of undergraduate students, staff, and or professor, at the higher education levels. Future instruments should expand on this area to include various populations beside teachers.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-32">Attitude</hd> <p>A great number of instruments focused on measuring multicultural attitudes in different populations. In this review, some of the instruments looked into the pre-/in-service teacher population while others examined multicultural attitudes of undergraduate students. The plethora of attitudinal measures in the field of multicultural education raises the need for shifting our focus from measuring multicultural attitudes into looking at the underlying factors of multicultural attitudes and examining various factors that contribute to positive change in these attitudes.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-33">School Climate</hd> <p>This is a highly influential aspect of the educational experience of students. In many cases, a positive multicultural school climate contributes substantially to the success of diverse students. The instrument discussed in this paper (i.e., MSCI; Marx & Byrnes, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref34">16</reflink>]) highlights the importance of a multiculturally inclusive school climate for all students. Currently, there is no framework for multicultural school climate and there is a need to fill this gap in the literature.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-34">Personality</hd> <p>The instrument reviewed in this category (i.e., MPQ-SF; Van der Zee et al., [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref35">28</reflink>]) makes controversial claims as it links success in multicultural settings with specific personality traits that people may possess naturally without exerting effort to adopt or learn. However, some of the subscales of the instrument (i.e., cultural empathy and social initiative) are critical multicultural skills. So, while the instrument is measuring personality traits, it is also highlighting significant multicultural skills that individuals should exhibit to function effectively in a culturally diverse society.</p> <p>There is a push in teacher education programs to prepare teachers to become multiculturally competent. This raises the need for multicultural instruments that measure preservice and in-service teachers' multicultural competency.</p> <p>The reviewed instruments highlight progress in the multicultural education field. As compared to previous literature reviews, the majority of instruments reviewed reported sound psychometric techniques in support of reliability and validity of newly developed instruments. These instruments pave the way for future instruments in the field, which is very promising. This progress is an indicator that future instruments will only continue to utilize advanced psychometric procedures. It is important to note that this progress may be a direct result of recommendations made by researchers in the field to include reliability and validity information of newly developed instruments (e.g., Brown, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref36">4</reflink>]).</p> <p>With researchers' shifted focus on including advanced statistical analyses for reliability and validity statistics, this trend resulted in less emphasis on rudimentary aspects of instrument development (e.g., item generation, sentence structure). Currently, there is a need for developing instruments that combine advanced statistical analyses without neglecting fundamental aspects of instrument development.</p> <p>Also, the extent of manipulated variables within multicultural instruments reveals an awareness toward the effect of multicultural education on various aspects of educational constructs (e.g., teaching and efficacy). Many researchers within the education field are aware of the importance of multicultural competency for educators, staff, and students. In the future, we can expect proliferation of instruments that address various constructs within education.</p> <p>A great number of the instruments reviewed were based on emerging themes from the literature. This trend in instrument development may contribute to less accurate measures. Future measures should be based on theoretical frameworks to develop items that precisely measure desired constructs. Using themes based on literature reviews to develop new measures, in which the relationship between these themes was not previously established, makes it very difficult to understand multicultural competency and related constructs. On the other hand, creating instruments based on theoretical frameworks produce precise operational definitions to measure multicultural constructs accurately. In addition, within the few instruments developed based on theoretical framework from counseling or educational fields, none measured all three dimensions of multicultural competence (i.e., awareness, knowledge, and skills) for teachers or students. There is a need to expand examination of undergraduate students' multicultural competence to include all three dimensions of cultural competence.</p> <p>... within the few instruments developed based on theoretical framework from counseling or educational fields, none measured all three dimensions of multicultural competence (i.e., awareness, knowledge, and skills) for teachers or students.</p> <p>While this review notes a progression in use of psychometric techniques of instruments developed in the field of education, elements related to fundamental instrument development need to be addressed. According to Crocker and Algina ([<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref37">5</reflink>]), items should be concise and composed of simple sentences (e.g., culture impacts family values). Many of the reviewed instruments included wordy items that were leading in nature (e.g., I have had enough exposure to different cultural groups through information offered through campus programs and activities that prepared me for my position). In some instances this led to double-barreled items (e.g., I respect and support the indigenous learning styles of students from culturally diverse groups and believe in the importance of using culturally congruent teaching and learning strategies with students) which resulted in low item loadings for the exploratory and confirmatory analyses. In many of the reviewed instruments, the factor loadings as well as the model fit for the data were below the recommended range. Future instruments should include items that are straightforward and precisely present the construct its intended to measure.</p> <hd id="AN0111115430-35">Recommendations</hd> <p>This literature review provides evidence of progress in the education field toward development and validation of multicultural instrumentation. While this progress marks the beginning of groundbreaking work, there is still a need for refined multicultural instruments. Future instruments in the field should continue to be based on established theoretical framework, develop precise items, employ advanced data collection strategies (e.g., Graham, Hofer, & Piccinin, 1994) and statistical analyses. To further benefit the field, future instruments should also incorporate a "back to the basics" approach for item development which, as determined by this review, has fallen behind the focus on psychometric properties of these instruments. Both the wording of items and the psychometric properties of these instruments need to be considered when developing future instruments.</p> <p>Currently, there are a great number of instruments that address multicultural teaching. However, there is only one instrument that examines undergraduate students' multicultural attitudes (i.e., MASQUE; Munroe & Pearson, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref38">18</reflink>]). There is a need to examine change in knowledge and skills domains beyond measuring changes in the awareness domain for undergraduate students. Future research should address the lack of valid and reliable instruments in this context. This creates the need for cross-discipline collaboration between researchers to benefit from the exchange of knowledge from one field to the other, especially for the development of instruments that measure students' multicultural competency across disciplines.</p> <ref id="AN0111115430-36"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref22" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Banks, J. (2008). An introduction to multicultural education (4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson, Allyn/Bacon.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Banks, J. A., & Banks, C. A. M. (1995). Handbook of research on multicultural education. New York, NY: Macmillan.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref1" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Bernstein, R. (2012). U.S. census bureau projects show a slower growing, older, more diverse nation a half century from now. United States Census Bureau. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb12-243.html">www.census.gov/newsroom/releases/archives/population/cb12-243.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref5" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Brown, K. M. (2004). Assessing preservice leaders' beliefs, attitudes, and values regarding issues of diversity, social justice, and equity: A review of existing measures. Equity & Excellence in Education, 37(4), 332–342.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref37" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Orlando, FL: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref8" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> D'Andrea, M., Daniels, J., & Heck, R. (1991). Evaluating the impact of multicultural counseling training. Journal of Counseling & Development, 70(1), 143–150.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref7" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Dunn, T. W., Smith, T. B., & Montoya, J. A. (2006). Multicultural competency instrumentation: A review and analysis of reliability generalization. Journal of Counseling & Development, 84(4), 471–482.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref28" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> Fuertes, J. N., Miville, M. L., Mohr, J. J., Sedlacek, W. E., & Gretchen, D. (2000). Factor structure and short form of the Miville–Guzman Universality-Diversity Scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 33, 157–169.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref16" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Gollnick, D. M., & Chinn, P. C. (2009). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society (8th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Pearson Publishers.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Graham, J. W., Hofer, S. M., & Piccinin, A. M. (1994). Analysis with missing data in drug prevention research. In L. M. Collins & L. Seitz (Eds.), National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph Series (pp. 13–62). Washington, DC: National Institute on Drug Abuse.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guyton, E. M., & Wesche, M. V. (2005). The Multicultural Efficacy Scale: Development, item selection, and reliability. Multicultural Perspectives, 7(4), 21–29.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Humphreys, D. (2000). National survey finds diversity requirements common around the country. Diversity Digest. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.diversityweb.org/Digest/F00/survey.html">http://www.diversityweb.org/Digest/F00/survey.html</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson, V. D., & Kang, Y. S. (2006). Assessing differences in resident assistant confidence in addressing issues of cultural diversity between in three predominantly white universities. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 34(1), 31–42.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Johnson, V. D., Kang, Y. S., & Thompson, G. F. (2011). Structural analysis of the Resident Assistant Cultural Diversity Questionnaire. Journal of College and University Student Housing, 37(2), 38–53.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Little, T. D. (2013). Longitudinal structural equation modeling. New York, NY: Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marx, S., & Byrnes, D. (2012). Multicultural School Climate Inventory. Current Issues in Education, 15(3), 1–15.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Miville, M. L., Gelso, C. J., Pannu, R., Liu, W., Touradji, P., Holloway, P., & Fuertes, J. N. (1999). Appreciating similarities and valuing differences: The Miville Guzman Universality Diversity Scale. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 46, 291–307.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Munroe, A., & Pearson, C. (2006). The Munroe multicultural attitude scale questionnaire: A new instrument for multicultural studies. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(5), 819–834.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2010). The condition of education 2010. NCES 2000-025. U.S. Department of Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). (2012). Digest of education statistics. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98">http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=98</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pohan, C. A., & Aguilar, T. E. (2001). Measuring educators' beliefs about diversity in personal and professional contexts. American Educational Research Journal, 38(1), 159–182.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ponterotto, J. G., & Potere, J. C. (2003). The multicultural counseling knowledge and awareness scale (MCKAS): Validity, reliability, and user guidelines. In D. B. Pope-Davis, H. L. Coleman, W. M. Liu, & R. L. Toporek (Eds.), Handbook of multicultural competencies in counseling and psychology (pp. 137–153). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Prieto, L. R. (2012). Initial factor analysis and cross-validation of the Multicultural Teaching Competencies Inventory. Journal of Diversity in Higher Education, 5(1), 50–62.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spanierman, L. B., Oh, E., Heppner, P. P., Neville, H. A., Mobley, M., Wright, C. V., Dillon, F. R., & Navarro, R. (2011). The Multicultural Teaching Competency Scale: Development and initial validation. Urban Education, 46(3), 440–464.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Sue, D. W., Bemier, J. E., Durran, A., Feinberg, L., Pedersen, P., Smith, E. J., & Vasquez-Nutall, E. (1982). Position paper: Cross-cultural counseling competencies. The Counseling Psychologist, 10, 45–52.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Thompson, F. (2009). The development and validation of the Multicultural Dispositions Index. Multicultural Perspectives, 11(2), 94–100.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Utley, C. (2011). A psychometric investigation of the Multicultural and Special Education Survey: An exploratory factor analysis. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 9(1), 47–70.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Van der Zee, K., van Oudenhoven, J., Ponterotto, J. G., & Fietzer, A. W. (2013). Multicultural personality questionnaire: Development of a short form. Journal of Personality Assessment, 95(1), 118–124.</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Huda Sarraj; Stacy Carter and Hansel Burley</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref3"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref12"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref13"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref15"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref17"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref21"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref25"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref26"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1082569
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Literature Review of Multicultural Instrumentation
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Sarraj%2C+Huda%22">Sarraj, Huda</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Carter%2C+Stacy%22">Carter, Stacy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Burley%2C+Hansel%22">Burley, Hansel</searchLink>
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Multicultural+Perspectives%22"><i>Multicultural Perspectives</i></searchLink>. 2015 17(4):225-233.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 9
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2015
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Information Analyses<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Secondary+Education%22">Elementary Secondary Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Higher+Education%22">Higher Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Literature+Reviews%22">Literature Reviews</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Multicultural+Education%22">Multicultural Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Demography%22">Demography</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Technology%22">Educational Technology</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Curriculum+Design%22">Curriculum Design</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Competency+Testing%22">Teacher Competency Testing</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teacher+Surveys%22">Teacher Surveys</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Special+Education%22">Special Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Concept+Measures%22">Self Concept Measures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Self+Efficacy%22">Self Efficacy</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Questionnaires%22">Questionnaires</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Attitude+Measures%22">Attitude Measures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Personality+Measures%22">Personality Measures</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Educational+Environment%22">Educational Environment</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Predictor+Variables%22">Predictor Variables</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/15210960.2015.1088307
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 1521-0960
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: Demographic changes at the national level emphasize a critical need for multicultural education to be included as part of undergraduate education. This critical review of the literature examines 10 multicultural instruments that are suitable for use in K-12 or higher education institutions. This is a novel literature review in that it is the first such review to investigate the contribution of each instrument to five multicultural components in educational settings (e.g., teaching, efficacy, attitudes, school climate, and personality). The results reveal the need for a "back to the basics" approach in instrument development as more emphasis has recently been placed on advanced analyses and less emphasis on item generation and selection. This trend in instrument development has produced some advantages, but also several limitations to existing instruments used in educational settings. Directions for future research and recommendations are discussed.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: Ref
  Label: Number of References
  Group: RefInfo
  Data: 25
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2015
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1082569
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1082569
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/15210960.2015.1088307
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 9
        StartPage: 225
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Literature Reviews
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Multicultural Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Demography
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Technology
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Curriculum Design
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Competency Testing
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Teacher Surveys
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Special Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Concept Measures
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Self Efficacy
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Questionnaires
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Attitude Measures
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Personality Measures
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Educational Environment
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Predictor Variables
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Literature Review of Multicultural Instrumentation
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Sarraj, Huda
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Carter, Stacy
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Burley, Hansel
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2015
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 1521-0960
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 17
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Multicultural Perspectives
              Type: main
ResultId 1