Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue (IGD) Proposal

Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue (IGD) Proposal

Program Description

Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue to Be Offered by [IN] at [IUPUI]
Date Submitted:    TBA

1. Characteristics of the Program
a.   Campus Offering Program: Indiana University–Purdue University Indianapolis

b.   Scope of Delivery (Specific Sites or Statewide): Indianapolis

c.   Mode of Delivery (Classroom, Blended, or Online): Classroom and Blended
d.   Other Delivery Aspects (Co-ops, Internships, Clinicals, Practica, etc.): Practica/Internships e.      Academic Unit(s) Offering Program: (IUPUI School and Department(s)):
Indiana University School of Liberal Arts
Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs
Indiana University School of Social Work
Purdue School of Engineering & Technology, IUPUI

f.    Anticipated Starting Semester: Fall 2017 (first cohort) (Launch spring 2017)

2. Rationale for the Program
a.   Institutional Rationale (Alignment with Institutional Mission and Strengths)

Description of Program

The Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue (IGD) is a 12 credit hour certificate for students enrolled in a degree-seeking program.  It is housed in the Indiana University schools of Liberal Arts, Public and Environmental Affairs, Social Work, and the Purdue School of Engineering and Technology at IUPUI. The curriculum consists of one general education course, one course focused on leadership development and communication skills, one course to demonstrate proficiency in a specialized topic, and a capstone. The courses will be offered every semester to support students matriculating through the certificate.

Rationale for Proposing the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue

In 2009, IUPUI embarked on a campus-wide initiative to engage the campus community in meaningful, yet difficult, conversations pertaining to race, gender, sexual orientation, religion, and other social identities. This initiative used the four-stage intergroup dialogue model IUPUI adapted from the University of Michigan Program on Intergroup Relations.  Intergroup Dialogue (IGD) has gained popularity among college campuses as a tool to help students and leaders grasp
how to communicate and lead when called upon to discuss sensitive topics of diversity and social, economic, and environmental justice. The initiative is now purposely positioned to transition into the academic curriculum. The offering of a Certificate on the IUPUI campus expands the work of this initiative to help all members of campus increase levels of competence in regards to culture and inclusiveness. Following enrollment students will earn academic credit and expertise and skills in civil discourse, intercultural communication, conflict resolution and leadershipin
the real world.

Recent national events demonstrate the need for leaders to thoughtfully and effectively work in multicultural environments and who can help others navigate the inherent conflicts and tensions that emerge.  For instance, advocacy for same-sex marriage, the right to use public bathrooms based on gender identity rather than birth gender, and other LGBT rights are perceived by some religious groups to infringe on their religious freedoms.  “Black Lives Matter” highlights the long-standing frustration within the African-American community towards law enforcement, the justice system, and corrections over issues like police stops, police-action shootings, sentencing guidelines, and mass incarceration. Fears of international terrorism and debates about immigration adversely impact the rights and freedoms of many U.S. citizens, lawful aliens and others seeking lawful entry and protection within U.S. borders who have no association with terrorist activities.

These and many seemingly less dramatic issues and events based on differences in cultural values and social identities negatively impact the ability of individuals and groups to communicate and work and live together in many settings, including the workplace, community, neighborhoods, schools, churches, and public spaces.  While the certificate will benefit any undergraduate or graduate student who completes course requirements, it will particularly benefit students entering fields represented by the four partner schools for which culturally competent leaders and communicators are essential. These fields include communications, clergy, criminal justice and law enforcement, education, engineering and technology, human resource development, public administration, and social work.

Benefits to Students upon Completion of the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue

Courses forming the Certificate use the four-stage intergroup dialogue model. The intergroup dialogue teaching model contrasts markedly from traditional diversity educational approaches. Research demonstrates that learner comprehension of, engagement with, and willingness to converse on such topics are significantly enhanced through this model. The traditional diversity educational approaches introduce controversial topics absent from structured, thoughtful efforts to establish group norms and foster cohesiveness, and form trusting relationships beforehand.

The IGD Model forming the certificate framework will include …
o  One general education courses that is dialogue intensive and incorporates the four-stage intergroup dialogue teaching model
o  One course focused on leadership development and communication skills and designed to train students to facilitate dialogues for other students,
o  One course to further ground students in skills and/or professional practices relevant to their chosen fields,
o  One capstone course to guide students as trained facilitators to facilitate dialogues in subsequent general education “dialogue intensive” courses for their peers

General Expectations for students are for them to gain transferrable multicultural setting skills for work, personal, and professional life in:
o  Intercultural communication,
o  Conflict resolution,
o  Civil discourse, and
o  Leadership

Overview of IGD model four-stages and expected skills set for each stage.

The first two stagesare designed to engage students in practices, skills, and learning focused on:
•     Listening,
•     Resolving conflicts, and
•     Increasing understanding of cultural differences

These experiences are essential to prepare students to engage in the third stagewhich challenges them to:
•     Discuss issues and topics around race or other social identities

The fourth stageencourages students to:
•     Explore learning from previous stages
•     Identify ways to commit to issues of social justice, equity, inclusion, and
•     Foster multicultural communication and understanding in their future endeavors, as students and professionals in their chosen fields

IGD Competencies
Upon completion students will be able to quickly demonstrate leadership capabilities to support others through intergroup conflicts and to help them better function as teams, corporate
citizens, and community members. Specifically the students will be able to implement five core
steps of IGD in personal, professional, or social settings. These steps include:

1)   To create a space for dialogue [a negotiated space and time to truthfully share]
2)   To create rules and structure for the dialogue
3)   To set boundaries for one group to talk and the other to listen and reverse this process before drawing conclusions as a group
4)   To prepare to build community through shared space and engagement
5)   To draft plan of action for change with their voice and within their comfort zone

Alignment of Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue with IUPUI and School Missions

IUPUI’s mission statement refers to advancing the intellectual growth of Indiana’s citizens through research, creative activity, teaching and learning, and civic engagement.  It also refers to promoting the educational, cultural and economic development of Indiana through a commitment to diversity (among other means). The Office of Student Affairs has also recommended that some of this activity take place in co-curricular learning and not always in spaces devoid of interaction and academics. The IGD certificate emphasizes intensive dialogue processes offering unique and creative learning environments focused on enriching students’ engagement with topics related to diversity and cultural competence. These experiences expand learning beyond traditional lecture formats and encourage students to consider how their learning can be applied to future work, neighborhood, school and community settings.

The certificate’s focus on increasing intercultural competence through dialogue processes is also consistent with the various missions of the partner schools to “promote understanding of the human condition” (Liberal Arts), provide students “a global perspective” (SPEA), “promote health, well-being, and social and economic justice in a diverse world” (Social Work), and advance “a multi-faceted culture of diversity that seeks, values, and embraces diversity in all of its forms.” (Engineering and Technology).

Alignment of Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue with IUPUI Strategic and Academic Plans

The certificate’s focus on learning about intergroup dynamics, social identities, and the interpersonal experiences with and institutional implications of power, privilege and oppression in the context of intergroup relations aligns with IUPUI’s strategic initiative to “support efforts
that promote research, practice, and teaching focused on cultural diversity and social justice." The interactive nature of sustained in-class dialogues and the development of dialogue facilitation
skills provide students "high impact curricular and co-curricular experiences" that "enhance cross-cultural knowledge, understanding, attitudes, and skills as well as awareness of social
justice issues and civic responsibility." (IUPUI Strategic Plan, “Promote an Inclusive Campus
Culture;” web link: http://strategicplan.iupui.edu/Indiana-and-Beyond).

In addition, with four schools partnering to develop the certificate, staff and faculty within the IUPUI Division of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion providing administrative support, and staff and faculty throughout campus serving as intergroup dialogue facilitators, this certificate is a positive example of the IUPUI Strategic Plan objective to “promote undergraduate student learning and success” through “enhancing collaboration among schools, academic, and non-academic units to align student success efforts; improving curricular and co-curricular coordination; [and]
supporting the engagement of all students in demonstrated high-impact teaching and learning practices.” (IUPUI Strategic Plan, “Promote Undergraduate Student Learning and Success:
website: http://strategicplan.iupui.edu/StudentSuccess).

Intergroup Dialogue can also be integrated into the Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PUL). The PUL most emphasized in an IGD course is Understanding Society and Culture (#5) with a moderate emphasis on Values and Ethics (PUL #6) and an additional emphasis on Core Communication (PUL #1). An IGD course also fits well into the IUPUI undergraduate experience as articulated in the RISE to the Challenge, with special focus on Experiential Learning. Lastly, IGD principles and practices can also serve as tools to put into better and broader practice specific goals related to diversity. Specifically, the certificate supports the campus diversity objective related to curricular and co-curricular transformation to “[p]rovide curricular, co-curricular and interdisciplinary activities that increase the ability of students to recognize their own cultural traditions and to understand and appreciate the diversity of the human experience, both within the United States and internationally. (IUPUI Campus Diversity Goals, Curricular and Co-Curricular Transformation; Objective G: website: http://diversity.iupui.edu/diversity/mission-vision-goals/

The Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue Builds upon IUPUI’s Strengths

This certificate is the product of a seven-year campus-wide Intergroup Dialogue Initiative. The initiative was aimed at supporting staff and faculty efforts to develop curriculum and infuse intergroup dialogue principles and practices into existing courses. In addition, opportunities for staff and faculty development and participation in sustained intergroup dialogues and support co- curricular learning for student leaders to facilitate IGD-related conversations on important topics involving social identity and social justice. This initiative received the support of campus administrators and numerous other partner offices. Among these offices are the Center for Teaching and Learning which facilitates the Curriculum Enhancement Grant process through which four IGD-track CEG grants were awarded to each of the four schools represented in this certificate proposal. These offices also included the former Office for Intergroup Dialogue and Civil Community, currently incorporated within the Office of Intercultural Literacy, Capacity and Engagement in the IUPUI Division of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, which facilitated the Intergroup Dialogue Initiative, supported efforts to develop faculty to serve as IGD facilitators

and instructors, and facilitated numerous intergroup dialogues to provide faculty and others dialogue experiences and better equip them to teach IGD courses.

This broad-based initiative has exploited IUPUI’s great strength in fostering cross-disciplinary
and cross-department collaboration to address a defined need, in this case the need to increase and improve cultural competence and intercultural communication among and between all campus members, including students, staff and faculty, and social identity groups. This initiative and the resultant certificate will also afford additional opportunities for faculty to collaborate across disciplines and schools. For example, as a means of developing IGD curriculum and supporting participating faculty research, teaching and service agendas, faculty represented through this certificate are forming a community of practice. This community of practice will allow participating faculty to collaborate on research, publication and teaching opportunities that will strengthen the IGD certificate program over time while supporting faculty members’ individual and collective interests to advance their academic careers.

Student Population to be Served by the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue

The certificate targets undergraduates, including first year freshmen accepted to and returning to IUPUI. We will cater to pre-major and major specific students. The certificate will particularly benefit students pursuing degrees and careers within the four partner schools, including positions in communications, clergy, criminal justice and law enforcement, education, engineering and technology, human resource development, public administration, and social work.

See Appendix 1: Institutional Rationale for additional detail. b.   State Rationale
The Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue Addresses State Priorities Reflected in Reaching Higher,Achieving More?

The Certificate requires completion of core education courses which supports the goal of Reaching Higher, Achieving More to limit total credit hours to 120 credit hours for a bachelor’s degree. The Certificate also fulfills the Reaching Higher, Achieving More goal to “produce quality certificates that are valued by students and employers.” The Certificate helps students pursuing degrees in social work, criminal justice, human resources and the other fields listed earlier to gain advanced skills in civil discourse, intercultural communication, conflict resolution and leadership (among others). Research of similar intergroup dialogue programs at other institutions provides evidence that the core components of the Intergroup Dialogue Certificate will facilitate deeper experiences and exposure to issues of social justice and diversity through experiential, dialogue-intensive learning than is afforded students participating in similar courses that do not incorporate the IGD learning model. These experiences deepen students’ skills in intensive listening, respectful discourse and collaboration with others which are further strengthened through the Certificate’s dialogue training and capstone courses that enable students to develop advanced leadership skills as they co-facilitate challenging dialogues with peers. Employers in every field seek individuals who not only understand and are comfortable with the
complex differences, natural tensions and positive conflicts that occur within diverse work groups and with customers and clients, but who are capable of managing and leading employees, teams
and departments in ways that foster collaboration, intergroup cohesion, and increased
understanding and sensitivity to cultural differences. The earning of an Intergroup Dialogue
Certificate to complement a Bachelor’s Degree will inform perspective employers that the student

possesses both deep knowledge of issues related to diversity and social justice and the skill to work and lead in complex, dynamic and diverse environments.

c.   Evidence of Labor Market Need

i.   National, State, or Regional Needs

Employers who interview students possessing this certificate will find that they bring advanced skills and competencies in communicating across differences, managing team dynamics, and leading and supporting others in responding to complex workplace interactions.
After the review of the Bureau of Labor Statistics Employment projections for 2014 – 2024, it was overtly evident that the categories targeted by this certificate will help to respond to the
projected growth in employment needs nationally. As outlined in the table below, Employment by detailed occupation, 2014 and projected 2024 (Table 1 below) there will be an expected
growth in the following fields requiring nearly 48,000,000 personnel:

1.   General and operations managers,
2.   Administrative services
managers,
3.   Human resources managers,
4.   Education administrators,
5.   Medical and health services managers,
6.   Social and community
service managers,

7.   Human resources specialists,
8.   Training and
development specialists,
9.   Engineers,
10. Life, physical, and social science occupations,
11. Community and social
service occupations,
12. Education, training, and library occupations,

13. Media and communication workers
14. Protective service
occupations
15. Office and administrative support occupations

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 1.2 Employment by detailed occupation, 2014 and
projected 2024 (Numbers in thousands)  http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_102.htm

ii.   Preparation for Graduate Programs or Other Benefits

We respond to this item in two parts.  Part 1: We do not prepare students for graduate programs outright.

Part 2: However, recognizing the leadership skill set and marketability which comes from an undergraduate completing the certificate it is expected that they would be able to stand out as attractive applicants to any graduate school. In that graduate programs seek students who demonstrate both academic achievement and the promise of fulfilling leadership roles upon completion of the degree, the Certificate’s focus on developing advanced leadership skills will make the student applying for a graduate degree more competitive.

The Certificate also provides students an additional practicum experience that they might not have experienced without pursuing the Certificate. The nature of this Certificate lends itself well to practicum experiences that provide direct exposure to the field in which the student will ultimately be employed.  For example, the Certificate can provide a social work student the opportunity to facilitate dialogue processes at a community center or a human resource development student to facilitate a dialogue process as part of a team development activity at a worksite. The Certificate can also provide students earning degrees in public affairs and
law enforcement opportunities to participate in public dialogue processes and similar forums that bring government officials, non-profits and other community representatives, and citizens together in deliberative processes to address social, cultural and political issues of mutual concern to their city, town, or community. Research shows that students who receive direct service learning experiences within their chosen field and profession while they
pursue their degree are more motivated and likely to complete their degree than students who do not have such experiences.

iii.   Summary of Indiana Department of Workforce Development and/or U.S. Department of
Labor Data

A summary of U.S. Department of Labor Data is provided on pages 6-7 of this proposal
(above) in response to Item 2.c.1.

iv.   National, State, or Regional Studies.

The University of Michigan was the first institution in the nation to develop an intergroup dialogue program.  Many institutions, including IUPUI, have since developed intergroup dialogue programs utilizing the four-stage intergroup dialogue framework developed at Michigan. The validity of this model was evaluated through a multiversity study involving nine institutions in which researchers evaluated the effects of intergroup dialogue on three major categories of learning outcomes – intergroup understanding, intergroup relationships, and intergroup collaboration and engagement – and compared them to learning experiences that were predominantly content- focused. They compared these effects between traditional content courses on race and gender and similar courses
that included an intergroup dialogue component. With respect to intergroup understanding, students in dialogue courses showed “greater increases in awareness and understanding of
both racial and gender inequalities and their structural causes” than their counterparts in traditional content courses. Regarding intergroup relations, these students demonstrated
“greater motivation to bridge differences and greater increases in empathy.”  And with respect to intergroup collaboration and engagement, they felt “greater responsibility for
‘challenging others on derogatory comments made about groups’ and for participating in
coalitions to address discrimination and social issues.” They also “expressed increased motivation to be actively engaged in their post-college communities by ‘influencing social policy,’ ‘influencing the political structure through voting and educational campaigns,’
and ‘working to correct social and economic inequalities.” (Gurin, Nagda & Zúñiga,
2013; Nagda, Gurin, Sorensen, & Zúñiga, 2009).

Studies demonstrate that intergroup practices are broadly applicable to many fields, including social work, psychology, education, public administration, human resources, and international relations.  A study of empirical literature on intergroup dialogue outcomes found that participants across academic, community, secondary education, and interethnic settings generally report positive experiences with respect to improving intercultural communication and understanding and intergroup collaboration. (Dessel and Rogge,

2008). In academic and secondary education settings, for example, studies report positive outcomes for both teachers and students participating in race, Arab/Jewish, and LGBT dialogues. (Dessel, 2010a; Dessel, 2010b; Gurin, Dey, Hurtado, and Gurin, 2002; Gurin, Nagda, and Lopez, 2004; Gurin, Peng, Lopez, and Nagda, 1999; Halabi, 2000; Hurtado,
2005; Nagda, McCoy, and Barrett, 2006; Nagda and others, 1999; Nagda, Kim, and
Truelove, 2004; Nagda and Zúñiga, 2003; Spencer, Brown, Griffin & Abdullah, 2008).

Studies of intergroup dialogue processes within community settings reveal the potential for conflict resolution and social change as the result of participants gaining “improved communication and cross-racial interaction skills,” developing friendships, and “uncovering common ground and initiating joint action on shared issues of concern.” (Dessel and Rogge, 2008, p. 226; DeTurk, 2006; LeBaron and Carstarphen, 1997; McCoy and McCormick, 2001; Rodenborg and Huynh, 2006). Social workers are especially suited for facilitating intergroup dialogues in such settings as a result of their professional knowledge, skills, and experience with relationship building, oppression, empowerment and systemic approaches. They naturally extend their skills and expertise to serve as mediators, community organizers, activists, educators and group facilitators, roles that can also support and be supported by work as trained intergroup dialogue facilitators. (Dessel, Rogge and Garlington, 2006). Practice areas where social workers can apply intergroup dialogue facilitation skills include clinical practice (schools, mental health centers, child welfare, etc.), community organizing (community-based organizations, social justice advocacy, etc.), social policy and evaluation (government and legislative bodies, advocacy organizations, etc.), and management of human resources (non-profit and for-profit organizations, human resources, etc.)(Spencer, Martineau, and warren, 2011).

Intergroup dialogue process are also prevalent in government, civic, social and political settings.  One study identified more than 400 cities in 46 states and the District of Columbia that over a 15-year period have implemented intergroup dialogue programs to improve race relations. (Walsh, 2006). Such dialogues often involve elected representatives, fire and safety officials, and others public officials meeting alongside city and town residents and nongovernment organization representatives.  (Walsh, 2006). Human resources and institutional equity professionals and other workplace advocates can readily apply dialogue facilitation skills to address multiple workplace treatment, equity and cultural diversity concerns, including efforts to prepare corporate workers for overseas assignments, address the impacts of discrimination and harassment claims and lawsuits, respond to consumer complaints of ill treatment based on social identity, and manage management/labor tensions. (Groth, 2001; Hardiman and Jackson, 2001; Ramos and Mitchell, 2001; Shoem, 2003).

References
DeTurk, S. (2006). The power of dialogue: Consequences of intergroup dialogue and their
implications for agency and alliance building. Communication Quarterly, 54(1), 33–51.

Dessel, A. (2010a). Effects of intergroup dialogue: Public school teachers and sexual orientation prejudice. Small Group Research, 41(5), 556-592.

Dessel, A. (2010b). Prejudice in schools: Promotion of an inclusive culture and climate.
Education and Urban Society, 42 (4), 407- 429.

Dessel, A. (2011). Dialogue and social change: An interdisciplinary and transformative history.  Smith College Studies in Social Work, 81 (2-3), 167-183.

Dessel, A., & Ali, N. (2012). The minds of peace and intergroup dialogue: Two complementary approaches to peace. Israel Affairs, 18(1), 123-139. doi:10.1080/13537121.2012.634276

Dessel A. & Rogge, M. (2008). Evaluation of Intergroup Dialogue: A Review of the
Empirical Literature. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 26 (2), 199-238.

Dessel, A., Rogge, M., & Garlington, S. (2006). Using intergroup dialogue to promote social justice and change. Social Work, 51 (4), 303-315.

Groth, C. (2001).  Dialogues in corporations.  In Schoem, D., & Hurtado, S. (Eds.). Intergroup dialogue: Deliberative democracy in school, college, community, and workplace (pp. 194-209).  Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Gurin, P., Dey, E., Hurtado, S., and Gurin, G. (2002). Diversity and higher education: Theory and impact on educational outcomes. Harvard Educational Review, 72(3), 330–
366.

Gurin, P., Nagda, R., Lopez, G. (2004). The benefits of diversity in education for democratic citizenship. Journal of Social Issues, 60(1), 17-34.

Gurin, P., Nagda, B.A., & Sorensen, N. (2011). Intergroup dialogue: Education for a broad conception of civic engagement. Liberal Education 97 (2) 46-51.

Gurin, P., Nagda, B., & Zúñiga, X. (2013). Dialogue across difference: Practice, theory, and research on intergroup dialogue. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Gurin, P., Nagda, B., Zúñiga X. (2013).  Intergroup dialogue: Its role in contemporary society. In Dialogue across difference: Practice, theory, and research on intergroup dialogue (pp. 11-31). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Gurin, P., Nagda, B., Zúñiga, X. (2013). Intergroup dialogue: A response to the challenges of demography, democracy, and dispersion. In Dialogue across difference: Practice, theory, and research on intergroup dialogue (pp. 328-354). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Gurin, P., Nagda, B., Zúñiga, X. (2013). Epilogue: Intergroup dialogue in a changing world. In Dialogue across difference: Practice, theory, and research on intergroup dialogue (pp. 355-376). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Gurin, P., Peng, T., Lopez, G., and Nagda, B. (1999). Context, Identity and Intergroup Relations. In D. Prentice and D. Miller (eds.), Cultural divides: Understanding and overcoming group conflict. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

Halabi, R. (ed.). (2000). Israeli and Palestinian identities in dialogue: The school for peace approach. Princeton, N.J.: Rutgers University Press.

Hardiman, R., & Jackson, B. (2001). Cultural study groups: Creating dialogue in a corporate setting. In Schoem, D., & Hurtado, S. (eds.). In Intergroup dialogue: Deliberative democracy in school, college, community, and workplace (pp. 181-93).  Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Hurtado, S. (2005). The next generation of diversity and intergroup relations. Journal of
Social Issues, 61(3), 593-610.

LeBaron, M., & Carstarphen, N. (1997). Negotiating intractable conflict: The common ground dialogue process and abortion. Negotiation Journal, 13(4), 341–361.

McCoy, M., & McCormick, M. (2001). Engaging the whole community in dialogue and action: Study circles resource center. In D. Schoem and S. Hurtado (eds.), Intergroup Dialogue: Deliberative Democracy in School, College, Community and Workplace (pp.
137-150). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Nagda, B. (2006). Breaking barriers, crossing borders, building bridges: Communication processes in intergroup dialogue.  Journal of Social Issues, 62, 553-576.

Nagda, B. Gurin, P. Sorensen, N., & Zúñiga, X. (2009). Evaluating intergroup dialogue: Engaging diversity for personal and social responsibility. Diversity & Democracy, 12, 4-6.

Nagda, B., Kim, C.-W., & Truelove, Y. (2004). Learning about difference, learning with others, learning to transgress. Journal of Social Issues, 60(1), 195–214.

Nagda, B., McCoy, M., & Barrett, M. (2006). Mix it up: Crossing social boundaries as a pathway to youth civic engagement. National Civic Review, 95(1), 47–56.

Nagda, B., Spearmon, M., Holley, L. C., Harding, S., Balassone, M. L., Moise-Swanson, D., and De Mello, S. (1999). Intergroup dialogues: An innovative approach to teaching about diversity and justice in social work programs. Journal of Social Work Education,
35(3), 433–449.

Nagda, B., & Zúñiga, X. (2003).  Fostering meaningful racial engagement through intergroup dialogues. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6(1), 111–128.

Ramos, M., & Cassandra, M. (2001). Dialogue throughout an organization. In Intergroup dialogue: Deliberative democracy in school, college, community, and workplace (pp. 210-
221).  Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Rodenborg, N., & Huynh, N. (2006). On overcoming segregation: Social work and intergroup dialogue. Social Work with Groups, 29(1), 27–44.

Schoem, D. (2001). Intergroup relations, conflict and community. In In Intergroup dialogue: Deliberative democracy in school, college, community, and workplace (pp. 137-
158).  Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.

Schoem, D., & Hurtado, S. (Eds.) (2001). Intergroup dialogue: Deliberative democracy in school, college, community, and workplace. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

Spencer, M., Brown, M., Griffiin, S, & Abdullah, S. (2008). Outcome evaluation of the intergroup dialogue project. Small Group Research, 39, 82-103.

Spencer, M., Martineau, D., & warren, n. (2011). Extending intergroup dialogue facilitation to multicultural social work practice.  In K. Maxwell, B. Nagda, B., & M. Thompson (Eds.). Facilitating intergroup dialogues: Building bridges, catalyzing change (pp. 147-159).  Sterling, VA: Stylus

Walsh, K. (2006). Communities, race, and talk: An analysis of the occurrence of civic intergroup dialogue programs. The Journal of Politics, 68 (1), 22-33.

Walsh, K. (2007). The community choice to pursue interracial dialogue. In K. Walsh, Talking about race: Community dialogues and the politics of difference (pp. 49-72). Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

See Appendix 3: National, State, or Regional Studies for additional detail. v.   Surveys of Employers or Students and Analyses of Job Postings
Analysis of Job Postings

An analysis was conducted of 34 positions relevant to the fields of study within the four schools for the proposal. Text analysis of these positions revealed that many of the skills and competencies that the certificate is intended to develop are essential for success in fulfilling these roles. These include an emphasis on working with “diverse” groups, using “interpersonal” and related communication skills, understanding the “social,” racial, psychological, and emotional characteristics and identities on those with whom job incumbents must work, and working with people with “disabilities” and other disadvantaged groups.

See Appendix 4: Surveys of Employers or Students and Analyses of Job Postings for additional details of this analysis.

Feedback from Past Participants in Intergroup Dialogues

Since August, 2011, IUPUI has engaged in a broad-based initiative to use Intergroup Dialogue as a means for meaningful conversations on matters involving diversity, intercultural communication and social justice education. These efforts have been implemented to support the University’s strategic initiative to promote an inclusive campus culture and to develop faculty and staff, among other goals. During this time, approximately 18 sustained dialogues have been facilitated for faculty and staff. Of these, ten dialogues focused on race as the principal social identity for exploration, two focused on gender, two on sexual orientation, and two on class and rank (a specific social identity for two dialogues was not specified). Post-dialogue participant survey evaluation generally confirm positive experiences. When asked what the participants found valuable from the experience, some representative comments included:

• “Having the opportunity to listen to others, and truly be heard” (Class/Rank Dialogue, Aug. 2015)
• “Candid conversations which led to personal and professional growth” (Race Dialogue, fall 2014)
• “Intimate dialogue [that] brought about a level of understanding between both groups [LGBT/straight] that none of us had prior to the dialogue” (Sexual Orientation Dialogue, May, 2014)
• “Getting to explore my own sense of gender awareness and identity” (Gender Dialogue, fall 2013)
• “Being able to hear honest and informative viewpoints from those of other races -- things I would probably never ask (or even know to ask) in normal work settings, all while knowing I was in a safe and secure environment.  (Race Dialogue, summer 2013)

Ron Sandwina, Ph.D., Sr. Lecturer, IU School of Liberal Arts, who has used Intergroup Dialogue to teach a course on Communication and Conflict reports that “[i]introducing students to the centrality of social identity has greatly enriched their understanding of course concepts. Moreover, the experiential pedagogy, the "hands-on" nature of getting students to understand, results in a richer, deeper learning experience. There is a reflexive process between learning and doing.”

Khadija Khaja, M.S.W., Ph.D., Associate Professor, IU School of Social Work, says “IGD principles will particularly benefit disciplines where there may be little or no training on how to facilitate classrooms when discussions are around more sensitive topics such as race, gender, religion, politics, affirmative action, immigration, health care reform, affirmative action, etc. [S]tudents need to be leading IGD on campus to serve as role models, so training students on this is key as they will use these same skills when they are out in the workforce.”

vi.   Letters of Support

See Appendix 5: Letters of Support.

Letters of Support are provided in Appendix 5 and are submitted by academic leaders from the four schools represented in this proposal, including:

Michael A. Patchner, Ph.D. University Dean and Professor
Indiana University School of Social Work

Lilliard Richardson, Ph.D. Executive Associate Dean
Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

David J. Russomanno, Ph.D. Dean
School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI

Kristina Horn Sheeler, Ph.D.
Associate Dean for Academic Programs
Indiana University School of Liberal Arts

3. Cost of and Support for the Program

a.   Costs
i.   Faculty and Staff

Faculty from the four schools represented in this proposal have engaged in the development of curriculum that incorporates Intergroup Dialogue into the core courses identified in this proposal. Many of these faculty are doing so as part of grants received through the Center for Teaching and Learning and its Curriculum Enhancement Grant process. Specific grant awards, schools, faculty, and courses being developed are as follows:

*Note: Amounts do not include 100% department fund match as required for the Center for Teaching and
Learning Curriculum Enhancement Grant Process. **Note: Julia Carboni accepted a position at another institution is no longer employed at SPEA.

Additional faculty continue to be identified from these four schools who are also incorporating Intergroup Dialogue into courses identified in this proposal.  In addition, two staff members from the Office of Intercultural Literacy, Capacity and Engagement, within the IUPUI Division of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, are available to assist in classroom activities involving intergroup dialogue facilitation and/or may also serve as adjunct faculty.  A few other faculty and staff within the university who have received training to serve as IGD facilitators may also be available to assist in this capacity.  The four representative schools also have individuals who serve in administrative support roles to assist faculty with course preparation and administration.

See Appendix 6: Faculty and Staff for additional detail. ii.   Facilities
The program has sufficient resources to facilitate the Intergroup Dialogue Certificate.  No renovations, capital projects, new leases are required or anticipated.

See Appendix 7: Facilities for additional detail. iii.   Other Capital Costs (e.g., equipment)
No impacts on other capital are anticipated.
See Appendix 8: Other Capital Costs for additional detail. b.   Support
i.   Nature of Support (New, Existing, or Reallocated)

No reallocation of resources has occurred nor is anticipated.  Further, no programs have or will be eliminated or downsized in order to provide resources for the Certificate.

ii.   Special Fees above Baseline Tuition

No special fees are needed.

4. Similar and Related Programs
a.   List of Programs and Degrees Conferred
i.   Similar Programs at Other Institutions

Campuses Offering (On-Campus or Distance Education) Similar Programs:

The Intergroup Dialogue Certificate is the first of its kind among Indiana institutions of higher education. To the knowledge of the Certificate proposers, no similar program has been developed nor is being contemplated in Indiana. Faculty represented in this proposal have been involved in enhancing existing courses to incorporate the Intergroup Dialogue model and related pedagogy and practices. These efforts have been supported through Curriculum Enhancement Grants awarded by the IUPUI Center for Teaching and Learning.

ii.   Related Programs at the Proposing Institution

There are no related programs at Indiana University. b.   List of Similar Programs Outside of Indiana
The University of Michigan offers a Minor in Intergroup Relations Education. https://igr.umich.edu/article/announcing-minor-intergroup-relations-education

Skidmore College in Saratoga Spring, NY also offers a Minor in Intergroup Relations:
http://www.skidmore.edu/igr/minors/index.php

c.   Articulation of Associate/Baccalaureate Programs

All students transferring into any of the majors offered through the four schools will be eligible to pursue the Certificate.

See Appendix 9: Articulation of Associate/Baccalaureate Programs for additional detail. d.   Collaboration with Similar or Related Programs on Other Campuses
There is no collaboration with similar or related programs on other campuses. Though not a program as contemplated by this question, faculty from the campus of Indiana University – Purdue University Columbus (IUPUC) participate in the Intergroup Dialogue Initiative at IUPUI and are considering developing curriculum on their campus that incorporates Intergroup Dialogue pedagogy and practices.

5. Quality and Other Aspects of the Program
a.   Credit Hours Required/Time to Completion

The Certificate requires completion of 12 credit hours which can be completed in four years.  In their first two years, students would select one course from a list of 100-200 level courses that are within General Education Core. Within their second, third and fourth years, they would
participate in a 300-level facilitator training course and in the 400-500 level capstone course. Within the course of their four-year program, they would also participate in one course from a list
of 200-400 level courses that provide additional grounding in cultural competence or skills
development relevant to their degree.

See Appendix 10: Credit Hours Required/Time to Completion for additional detail. b.   Exceeding the Standard Expectation of Credit Hours
The program will not exceed 120 semester credit hours.

See Appendix 11: Details Related to Exceeding the Standard Expectation of Credit
Hours for additional detail.

c.   Curriculum, Program Competencies, or Learning Outcomes

General Curriculum

The Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue is a 12 credit hour undergraduate certificate. Students can complete course requirements within two to four semesters.  Curriculum for the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue will include the following requirements and initial course offerings:

A.  One 3-credit hour general education course that is dialogue intensive and incorporates the four-stage intergroup dialogue teaching model. The following courses will satisfy this requirement:

•    ANTH 104  Culture and Society
•    Comm. C  282 Intergroup Dialogue
•    Comm. C  180 Interpersonal Communication
•    OLS 252  Human Behavior in Organizations
•    SPEA J 101  America Criminal Justice System
•     SPEA J 260 Topics in Criminal Justice
•     SPEA J 275  Diversity Issues in the Criminal Justice System
•     SPEA J 443  Managing Workforce Diversity
•     SWK S 102  Understanding Diversity in a Pluralistic Society
•     SWK S 141  Introduction to Social Work
•     SWK S 221  Human Growth and Development in the Social Environment
•     TCM 18000  Intercultural Technical Communication

B.  One 3-credit hour course focused on leadership development and communication skills and designed to train students to facilitate dialogues for other students. The following courses will be will satisfy this requirement:

•     Comm. C 382  Intergroup Dialogue Facilitation Training
•     TCM 38500  Co-Facilitating Intergroup Dialogue with Peers in Technical
Communication Settings

C.  One 3-credit hour course to further ground students in skills and/or professional practices relevant to their chosen fields. The following courses, and other courses as
approved by the certificate director, will satisfy this requirement:

•    AMST A 101  Intro to American Studies
•     ANTH E402 Gender in Cross-Cultural Perspective
•     ANTH E403  Women of Color in the US
•     ANTH L401  Language, Power, and Gender
•     COMM C395 Gender and Communication
•     COMM R350  American Feminist Rhetoric
•     HIST H306  Sex Roles and Society
•     LATS L228  An Interdisciplinary Look at US Latino/a Identities
•     LSTU-L 100  Survey of Unions & Collective Bargaining
•     LSTU-L 101  American Labor History
•     LSTU-L 110  Intro to Labor Studies: Labor & Society
•     LSTU-L 201  Labor Law
•     LSTU-L 203  Labor & the Political System
•     LSTU-L 205  Contemporary Labor Problems
•    LSTU-L 210  Workplace Discrimination/Fair Employment
•    LSTU-L 220  Grievance Representation
•    LSTU-L 231  Globalization & Labor
•    LSTU-L 260  Leadership & Representation
•    LSTU-L 290  Photographic Images of Labor & Class
•    LSTU-L 314  Ethical Dilemmas in the Workplace
•    LSTU-L 315  The Organization of Work
•    LSTU-L 331  Global Problems, Local Solutions
•    PHIL P 394  Feminist Philosophy
•    REL R383  Religion Ethics, and US Society
•    SOC R320  Sexuality and Society
•    SOC R325 Gender and Society
•    SOC R425 Gender and Work
•     SWK-S 251  History and Analysis of Social Welfare Policy
•     SWK-S 322  Small Group Theory and Practice
•     SWK-S 331  Generalist Social Work Practice I: Theory and Skills
•     SWK-S 332  Generalist Social Work Practice II: Theory and Skills
•     SWK-S 352  Social Welfare Policy and Practice
•     SWK-S 371  Social Work Research
•     SWK-S 423  Organizational Theory and Practice
•     SWK-S 433  Community Behavior and Practice with a Generalist Perspective
•     TCM 36000  Communication in Engineering Practice
•     TCM 37000  Oral Practicum for Technical Managers
•     TCM 46000  Engineering Communication in Academic Contexts
•     WOST W105  Intro to Women’s Studies

D.  One 3-credit 400-level capstone course to guide students as trained facilitators to
facilitate dialogues in subsequent general education “dialogue intensive” courses for their peers.

Note Regarding Consistency with Similar IUPUI Degree Programs

Though the IGD program is unique in many ways, i.e., peer dialogue facilitation, the intent is to create a certificate within standard IUPUI guidelines and frameworks. The Program would be offered as a model to consider and follow.

Incorporation of IUPUI General Education Core within IGD Certificate Curriculum

As noted in response to 5.a. and 5.b. (above), the certificate incorporates courses within the IUPUI General Education Core and will allow students to complete the certificate within four years without exceeding 120 credit hours.

Prerequisite Courses to Acquire Foundational Knowledge for Success in Later Courses

As also noted in response to 5.a. and 5.b. (above), students must first enroll in one 100-200 level General Education (“dialogue intensive”) course in which they acquire foundational knowledge which will enable them to succeed in a 300-level course where they develop dialogue facilitation and leadership skills and thereafter a 400-level capstone course in which they apply these skills through facilitating dialogue processes with peers.

Compliance with All Required Academic, Administrative, and Procedural Policies of the
University

The proposed Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue is compliant with these policies.

Competencies and Learning Outcomes Students Must Master to Complete the Certificate in
Intergroup Dialogue

IGD Competencies
Upon completion students will be able to quickly demonstrate leadership capabilities to support
others through intergroup conflicts and to help them better function as teams, corporate
citizens, and community members. Specifically the students will be able to implement five core steps of IGD in personal, professional, or social settings. These steps include:

1.   To create a space for dialogue [a negotiated space and time to truthfully share]
2.   To create rules and structure for the dialogue
3.   To set boundaries for one group to talk and the other to listen and reverse this process before drawing conclusions as a group
4.   To build community through shared space and engagement
5.   To draft plan of action for change with their voice and within their comfort zone

The IGD Certificate’s Incorporation of IUPUI’s  Principles of Undergraduate Learning and
Support for IUPUI’s  RISE program.

IGD processes are particularly accessible for use in the development of high-impact educational practices as advocated by the American Association of Colleges and Universities’ LEAP (Liberal Education and America’s Promise) Initiative (http://www.aacu.org/leap/index.cfm). These
include first-year seminars and experiences, learning communities, diversity and global learning opportunities, service-learning and community-based learning.

Intergroup Dialogue can also be integrated into the Principles of Undergraduate Learning (PUL). The PUL most emphasized in an IGD course is Understanding Society and Culture (#5) with a moderate emphasis on Values and Ethics (PUL #6) and an additional emphasis on Core Communication (PUL #1). An IGD course also fits well into the IUPUI undergraduate experience as articulated in the RISE to the Challenge, with special focus on Experiential Learning.

See Assessment section (below) for additional detail

d.   Assessment
The assessment of the program will follow the format of pre-and post-test instruments used in our
initial assessment. We will require that schools use the instruments to assess growth with
students. However we are cognizant that behavioral and or attitudinal changes occur over a longer period of time and takes time before they become part of everyday routine.

Assessments will take place in the courses at the start and end of each course. The culminating seminar will present demonstration of competencies gained. We anticipate that performance indicators will include students knowing, being able to do, and being able to apply. Please see below.

Annual success assessment of the IGD Certificate will use six benchmarks. These will include:
1.   #/% of course sections
2.   #/% of course Enrollments
3.   #/% of course completion rate
4.   #/% of persons advancing and becoming trainers/facilitators
5.   #/% of capstone experiences,
6.   #/% of co-facilitated sections with students
7.   #/% growth and attitudinal change after 1yr participation in certificate
8.   # of reports of positive experiences following engagement in certificate

To assess the development of skills resulting from participation in the IGD certificate students will complete a capstone course and participate in completing a post-test.

Overall assessment will be conducted by a multi-departmental advisory group convened by representatives within the Office of Intercultural Literacy, Capacity and Engagement within the IUPUI Division of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, who will provide ongoing support for faculty engaged in developing and teaching IGD courses.  Information gathered through the assessment process will be used to help determine the summative effectiveness of the program in meeting its intended learning outcomes and to inform any adjustments that are determined to be needed to help with continuous programmatic improvement.

e.   Licensure and Certification

The Certificate does not prepare graduates for a license or certification. The Certificate certifies completion of course content in Intergroup Dialogue.

The Certificate is particularly suited for graduates pursuing employment and career opportunities in the following occupations: communications, clergy, criminal justice and law enforcement, education, engineering and technology, human resource development, public administration, and social work. This list is not exhaustive and represents special reviews conducted within the schools represented in this proposal.

This certificate is not primarily a feeder for a graduate program.  Completion of the certificate could be attractive for consideration for certain graduate programs, as stated elsewhere herein.

See links to resources in Appendix 2.

f.      Accreditation
Not Applicable (N/A).

6. Projected Headcount, FTE Enrollments, and Degrees/Certificates Conferred

A projected headcount is provided in the following table. The program will be offered solely on the
IUPUI campus.

Appendices

Appendix 1: Institutional Rationale

Appendix 2: Summary of Indiana Department of Workforce Development and/or U.S. Department of Labor Data

Appendix 3: National, State, or Regional Studies

Appendix 4: Surveys of Employers or Students and Analyses of Job Postings

Appendix 5: Letters of Support Appendix 6: Faculty and Staff Appendix 7: Facilities
Appendix 8: Other Capital Costs

Appendix 9: Articulation of Associate/Baccalaureate Programs

Appendix 10: Credit Hours Required/Time to Completion

Appendix 11: Details Related to Exceeding the Standard Expectation of Credit Hours

Appendix 1: Institutional Rationale
Discussion of the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue and its alignment with IUPUI’s strategic and
academic plans, IUPUI mission, the missions of the four representative schools, and support for the IUPUI RISE initiative and incorporation of the Principles of Undergraduate Learning, is provided in pages 3-5 of this proposal in response to Item 2.a.  Specific links to these plans, missions and initiatives are provided there and also below, along with mission statements for the four represented schools:

IUPUI Core: Vision, Mission, Values, and Diversity
Principles of Undergraduate Learning
RISE to the IUPUI Challenge
Strategic Plan: IUPUI: Our Commitment to Indiana and Beyond
Diversity @ IUPUI

School Mission/Vision Statements

IU School of Liberal Arts
(http://liberalarts.iupui.edu/index.php/dean/deans_office_strategic_plan_2010_2015)

Mission: Creating and exchanging knowledge that promotes understanding of the human experience. Aspiration: To become a model 21st-century urban liberal arts school and a preferred location for learning and research in the humanities and social sciences.

IU School of Public and Environmental Affairs: (https://spea.iupui.edu/index.html)

Vision: Building on a generation of growth and scholarly achievement, SPEA aspires to be “the best of
its class,” with a faculty and student body who have a global perspective and who appreciate the value of unconventional careers that span the public, non-profit and for-profit sectors.

IU School of Social Work (http://socialwork.iu.edu/About/about_iussw_mission.php)

Mission Statement: The mission of the IUSSW is excellence in education, research and service to promote health, well-being, and social and economic justice in a diverse world.
Vision Statement: An exemplary university and community-based collaboration advancing social and economic justice, empowerment, and human well-being in a changing global landscape.

Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI
(http://engr.iupui.edu/main/about/_documents/IUPUI_StrategicPlan_sm_6-8-12_FINAL.pdf)

Vision: The Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI, will be regarded as one of America’s premier urban schools of engineering and technology, recognized regionally, nationally, and internationally for its excellence in teaching and learning, research and creative activities, and civic engagement.

Mission: The Purdue School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI, serves the greater Indianapolis metropolitan area, the State of Indiana, and the nation by providing a high-quality learning environment informed through the discovery and dissemination of knowledge via the scholarship of teaching and learning, research and creative activities, and civic engagement.

Appendix 2: Summary of  Indiana Department of Workforce Developmentand/or U.S. Department of Labor Data

A table from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics and entitled Employment by Detailed Occupation, 2014 and projected 2024, is provided in response to Item 2.c.1 of this proposal and appears as Table 1 on page
7. Fifteen specific fields were identified from this table which graduates from the four represented schools would likely pursue. This fields are listed on page 6 of this proposal.  After review of this data, it was
overtly evident that the categories targeted by this certificate will help to respond to the projected growth in employment needs nationally. As outlined in the table, there will be an expected growth in these fields
requiring nearly 48,000,000 personnel.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 1.2 Employment by detailed occupation, 2014 and projected 2024 (Numbers in thousands)  http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_102.htm.

Appendix 3: National, State, or Regional Studies

A review of literature supporting the labor market need for the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue is provided in response to item 2.c.iv of the proposal (Rationale for Program: Evidence of Labor Market Need: Regional and National Studies, pages 8-12).  Some of the principal references cited in this review are provided below, including citations and hyperlinks. These and other references regarding research on intergroup dialogue are provided by the University of Michigan Program on Intergroup Relations: https://igr.umich.edu/respub/publications

Dessel, A., & Rogge, M. (2008). Evaluation of intergroup dialogue: A review of the empirical Literature. Conflict Resolution Quarterly, 26 (2), 199-238. Link: https://igr.umich.edu/files/igr/Evaluation%20of%20Intergroup%20Dialogue.pdf

Dessel, A., Rogge, M., & Garlington, S. (2006). Using Intergroup Dialogue to Promote Social Justice and Change. Social Work, 51 (4), 303-315. Link: https://igr.umich.edu/files/igr/Using%20Intergroup%20Dialogue.pdf

Nagda, B.A., Gurin, P., Sorensen, N., & Zúñiga, X. (2009). Evaluating intergroup dialogue: Engaging diversity for personal and social responsibility. Diversity & Democracy, 12 (1), 4-6. Link: https://igr.umich.edu/files/igr/Evaluating%20Intergroup%20Dialogue.pdf (Note: This reference provides a brief synopsis of the findings from the Multi-university referenced in this proposal).

Sorensen, N., Nagda, B., Gurin, P., & Maxwell, K. (2009). Taking a "Hands On" approach to diversity in higher education: A critical-dialogic model for effective intergroup interaction. Analyses of Social Issues and Public Policy, 9 (1), 3-35. Link: https://igr.umich.edu/files/igr/Gurin-TakingaHandsOnApproa.pdf

Appendix 4: Surveys of Employers or Students and Analyses of Job Postings
Thirty four (34) job positions were selected for analysis from social work, engineering, public administration, human resources, and communications, among other fields. Job titles were selected based on similarity to the job classifications selected as relevant to the fields and disciplines identified for the certificate and as listed within the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Table 1.2 Employment by detailed occupation (2014 and projected 2024)  http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_102.htm (please refer to Table 1 and related discussion on pages 6-7 of this proposal). The positions reviewed are:

• Adminisulative Services Manager
• Behavioral Health Manager
• Clubhouse Assistant Director
• Communication Specialist
• Corporate Communications Specialist
• Employment Consultant
• Environmental, Health and Safety Manager
• General and Operations Manager
• Health Services Manager
• Human Resource Specialist (2 positions)
• Human Services Case Manager (Family Coach)
• Juvenile Justice Advocate
• Lead Adminisulator, Charter School
• Lead School Adminisulator
• Life Sciences Consultant/Project Manager
• Manager, Human Resources
• Media Director
• Operations Team Leader
• Program Director
• Principal, Elementary School
• Senior Communications Specialist
• Social Science Research Professional
• Social Services Coordinator
• Social Services Manager (2 positions)
• Social Worker Bachelors Level
• Special Project Coordinator- Indiana Partnerships for Success Initiative
• Therapist and Caseworkers
• Training and Development Senior Specialist
• Training and Development Specialist
• Health Systems Manager, Primary Care
• Training and Staff Development Specialist
• Senior Application Engineer

Text analysis was performed for these positions revealing the following commonalities of job responsibilities and skills that align with learning outcomes identified for the IGD certificate.   Specific word analyses include the following:

1.   “Social,” “psychological,” “emotional,” “cultural,” “spiritual,” “racial,” “ethnic,” etc. The word “social” was prevalent in many job descriptions, appearing in almost 30% of the generic descriptions and 20% of the listed skills and qualifications for the positions. Though this is to be expected since many of the positions involve “social” work, other references related more closely to the need for understanding “social” needs and were often linked with words like “cultural,” “psychological,” “emotional”, “racial” and “ethnic,” highlighting the need for understanding the multiple dimensions of individuals’ identity.  For example:
•     “Works in close collaboration with physicians and other health care personnel in patient evaluation and treatment to further their understanding of significant social and emotional factors underlying resident's health problem.” And, “Provides service planned to restore resident to optimum social and health adjustment within resident's capacity.” (Social Services Manager, first position)
•     “Assists the physician and other members of the hospice team in understanding significant social , spiritual, and emotional factors related to the patient's health problems to establish a plan of care that fosters the personal worth, spiritual well-being, and human dignity of each patient.”  And, “Assesses the social, spiritual, and emotional needs/factors in order to estimate the patient's and family's capacity and potential to cope with the problems of daily living and with the terminal illness.” (Social Worker Bachelors Level)
•     “Helps residents and their families (in their social, racial, ethnic, and cultural context) cope with the immediate effects of the decision to move to the facility.” (Social Services Manager, second position).
•     “The school aims to nurture the whole child through an integrated curriculum that cultivates each individual's innate creative, intellectual, emotional, physical, and social capacities.” (Lead Administrator, Charter School).
•     “DIVERSITY - Ability to understand and influence personal, political, social, economic, and legal relationships with the skill to work effectively with diverse populations.” (Principal, Elementary School).

2.   “Disabilities:” This term appeared in over 11% of the descriptions in the context of the need to work with people with disabilities and other disadvantaged groups.  For example:
•     “A Bachelor's degree in any field and one year of human services related experience (i.e., work providing assistance to individuals and groups with issues such as economically disadvantaged, employment, abuse and neglect, substance abuse, aging, disabilities , prevention, health, cultural competencies, inadequate housing.” (Human Services Case Manager – Family Coach)
•     “Experience directly supporting adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities is strongly preferred.”  And: “Understanding of special health care conditions of adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities , such as dementia or ability to be educated in this area.” (Human Services Manager).
•     “Three to five years of experience working with individuals with disabilities, preferably in employment services.”  (Employment Consultant)
•     Though working with people with “disabilities” is not mentioned in one position, it is implied: “Extensive knowledge in cultural, societal, and systemic issues impacting juvenile delinquency, such as substance abuse, domestic violence, and mental health issues.” (Juvenile Justice Advocate)

3.   “Interpersonal skills.” This term was used in over 8% of the descriptions.  However, at 38% of the descriptions (13 of 34) referenced the need for skills that imply the need for effective interpersonal skills, such as “communication,” “facilitation,” “listening,” “negotiation,” and “conflict management” skills.  Further, some descriptions emphasize the need to be able to respond to difficult communication and relationship challenges, even if specific terms like “communication,” “interpersonal” or “conflict” are not used.  For example:
•     “Excellent oral and written communication, presentation, and interpersonal skills.” Also: “Remains composed under stress, handles responses to criticism tactfully and delivers on organizational commitments.”   (Health Systems Manager, Primary Care)
•     “Strong interpersonal and communication skills (both written and verbal).” (Operations
Team Leader)
•     “Excellent verbal and written (technical) communication skills and strong interpersonal skills with demonstrated ability to lead, motivate, and foster a compliant / safety-first culture in the workplace.” (Environmental, Health, and Safety Manager)
•     “Critical thinking and listening skills.”  (Behavioral Health Manager)
•     “Ability to carefully listen , communicate professionally and effectively (both orally and in writing), and interact appropriately with a wide variety of people and to provide excellent customer service, and resolve complex issues while complying with regulations, procedures, and confidentially requirements. Ability to maintain composure and work cooperatively under pressure with coworkers, legislators, legislative staff, and the general public on a daily basis.” (Human Resources Specialist)
•     “Excellent communication skills: oral, written, and listening. Includes executive presentations, facilitation, and conflict resolution.” (Life Sciences Consultant/Project Manager)
•     “COMMUNICATION - Ability to model effective communication skills (oral, written, and listening) when communicating with a variety of audiences.”  (Principal, Elementary School)
•     “Demonstrate active listening skills, communicate effectively both orally and in writing, and speak effectively before large and small groups.” Also: “Conduct training and development sessions, perform the role of facilitator, and effectively utilize group dynamic skills and techniques.”  (Training and Staff Development Specialist)
•     “Supervisory experience to include conflict resolution and disciplinary processes.” (Administrative Services Manager)
•     “Conflict resolution skills. Strong verbal and written skills.” (Human Services Case
Manager – Family Coach)
•     “Conflict Resolution Skills.”  (Lead School Administrator)
•     “COMMUNICATING AND BUILDING COALITIONS – This core competency involves the ability to explain and advocate facts and ideas in a convincing manner while communicating and negotiating with individuals and groups.” (General and Operations Manager)
•     “Demonstrated ability to influence professionals and leaders by persuasion, negotiation and problem solving.”  (Training and Development Senior Specialist)

4.   Working with “diverse” groups and populations.  A number of position descriptions reference the need to work with “diverse” groups in some form.  For example:
•     “Ability to represent the Society effectively and professionally to primary care health systems, community leaders, including working with disparate populations and diverse constituents. Demonstrated success managing a team of diverse relationship/account managers with mission, fundraising, and health industry experience. Able to manage and motivate diverse groups and individuals, and work successfully as a leader in a team environment.” (Health Systems Manager, Primary Care)
•     “DIVERSITY - Ability to understand and influence personal, political, social, economic, and legal relationships with the skill to work effectively with diverse populations.” (Principal, Elementary School)
•     “Proven track record of student success in a Principal role serving a diverse student population.” Also: “Candidates with experience working with diverse populations will also be a priority.”  (Lead Administrator, Charter School)
•     “Must possess the ability to speak to large and diverse groups both in the profession and in the community.”  (Juvenile Justice Advocate)
•     “Demonstrated ability to design and deliver high quality, effective presentations and training programs to diverse audiences.”  (Manager, Human Resources)
•     “Ability to engage and teach a diverse group of stakeholders including judicial officers, law clerks, court staff, external partners and attorneys.” (Training and Development Specialist)

Letters of Support are provided from the following academic leaders representing the four schools in this proposal:

Michael A. Patchner, Ph.D. University Dean and Professor
Indiana University School of Social Work

Lilliard Richardson, Ph.D. Executive Associate Dean
Indiana University School of Public and Environmental Affairs

David J. Russomanno, Ph.D. Dean
School of Engineering and Technology, IUPUI

Kristina Horn Sheeler, Ph.D.
Associate Dean for Academic Programs
Indiana University School of Liberal Arts

A list of faculty who will teach for the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue is provided below.

Appendix 7: Facilities

There will be no major impacts on facilities caused by this certificate.

Appendix 8: Other Capital Costs

There are no other capital costs associated with this certificate.

Appendix 9: Articulation of Associate/Baccalaureate Programs

Not applicable.

Appendix 10

Degree maps for the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue from the four represented schools are provided. These contain semester-by-semester, course level detail of the Certificate in Intergroup Dialogue within the four schools. Assuming full-time study, the Certificate can be completed within four years.

The program will not exceed 120 semester credit hours.

IUPUI Division of Undergraduate Education
July 22, 2015