Relationship between prejudice and some personal variables among secondary schools students in state of kuwait
Yüklə 0,78 Mb.
|
4.3.3 Emotional Intelligence Test The scale of emotionl intelligence developed by (Welson, 2001) which measure many a spects of emotional individual which are: self controling, self awareness, achievement drive, and social skills controling. 4.3.3.1 Description and Scoring of the Test This scale consist of 58 multiple – choice item, each item is followed by four choices from which the student must select the suitable choice which applies to him, the score for the four choices ranged from 1-4. The maximum score for this scale is 232, and the manimum score is 58, when the student get the high score that mean the student characterized with more controling and handling of his emotional and social skills and abilities, vice versa. The time allowed for the completion of the emotional intelligence test is 20 minutes. 4.3.3.2. The Psychometric Efficiency of the Test
The developer of this scale (Welson, 2001) used some techniques to establish the validity of this scale as concurrent validity method among sample (N = 350 boys, 350 girls) in secondary schools, he found that emotional intelligence correlated highly with other test which is E.I.W (r = .77, p<.01) and with E.I.S (r =.74, p<.01), also he used internal consistency validity, the correlation coefficients ranged from .71 - .77, which are suitable for the validity. David (2003) used concurrent validity method for emotional intelligence with emotional intelligence test by Henry, the correlation value was (r = .73, p<.01) which is satisfactory. In this present study, the researcher verified the validity of this scale using the validity by internal consistency, the correlations coefficients values ranged from (.72 - .76, p< .01). Also by using concurrent validity with other test of emotional intelligence which was Elman test of emotional intelligence(2000), the correlation values were (r =. 75, p < .01). These values are suiatable for the validity of the emotional intelligence test.
The developer of this test (Welson, 2001) used spilit half reliability method for emotional intelligence test, (N= 350 boys and 350 girls) the values were .81 for the boys sample, .78 for the girls sample, which are satisfactory. David (2003) used test–retest reliability method, the mean interval of time was 12 days. The Pearson correlation between scores at these two assessments was (r =.81) which is high and satisfactory. In this present study, the researcher used Alpha Cronbach coefficient was computed to establish the reliability of the scale. The scale yielded alpha coefficients of .88, which is satisfactory for the reliability of the present scale.
The researcher surveyed several scientific and psychological aspects and facets of linguistic intelligence. Evident enough is that the intelligence test assesses the individual’s general mental ability as an umbrella under which other minor mental abilities can be researched. 4.3.4.1 Description and Scoring of the Test This test was prepared by Morsi and Mansour (1988), it consists of 50 items, each is accompanied by four answers of which the respondent has to choose only one answer. Each item has only one correct answer, the correct answer equal 1, and the wrong answer equal 0. The maximum score for this test is 50 point, and the manimum is 0. The high score of this scale means high level of linguistic intelligence, vice versa. Test completion takes 20 minutes. Since the test has 50 items, a question should be answered in not more than half a minute. 4.3.4.2 The Psychometric Efficiency of the Test (a) Validity Al-Bahay (1979) established the empirical validity of the linguistic intelligence test in the Kuwait environment, by computing correspondence between the respondents’ raw scores and intelligence levels on one part and their scholastic achievement on the other taking into account that the test assesses the mental ability of scholastic achievement. This validity was established by comparison of extreme groups and correlation coefficient method . Abo-Alam (1983) verified the validity of the linguistic intelligence test in the kuwait invironment through the consecutive increase in the means of raw scores for the ages from 12 to 18. Differences in means in different ages, particularly when the difference was large, were statistically significant, thus proving the mental ability assessed by the test to grow consecutively from the age of 12 to the age of 18. This concurs with many researches that support the mental ability theories as Terman and Merrill (1976) and the results of research conducted in Kuwait by Abo-Alam (1983). Abo-Alam (1983) established the validity of the test by differences between means of the raw scores obtained by students in the secondary stage and the intermediate stage. The t-test proved those differences to be significant, particularly the differences between the means of remote study levels, which indicates that the mental ability measured increases with progression through the educational stages. This agrees with the results of several studies that documented the growth of the general mental ability with the progression through the educational stages as Morsi (1995) and sarah (2000). This same finding was supported in Sarah’s study (2000) where the researcher applied the present test to 300 girls secondary school students in Saudia Arabia (Ryad City) and compared between students with high levels of intelligence (the higher quartile) and those with low levels (the lower quartile). She found that students in the higher quartile outperformed those in the lower quartile in all subject matters significantly. Morsi (1995) established validity for the test of linguistic intelligence by computing the correlation between the intelligence test scores of 111 students from the intermediate school and the secondary and their scores on achievement tests in the Arabic language, mathematics and the English language. All the values of correlation were suitable and stisfactory . Al-Hambaly (1996) in his study took the sample from Kuwaiti students, he examined the linguistic intelligence test for concurrent validity. The external criterion administered with the linguistic intelligence test was the differential aptitudes test. The concurrent validity coefficient was .51, which is statistically significant. In this present study, the researcher verified the validity of this scale using the validity by internal consistency, the correlations coefficients values ranged from (r = .71 - .83, p < .01) . Also by using concurrent validity with other test which was (L.I.J) liguistic intelligence by Joseph (1995), the correlation values was (r = .77, p < .01). Thes values are suiatable for the validity of the liguistic intelligence test for the present study. (b) Reliability Morsi (1995) investigated the reliability of the linguistic intelligence test by the test-retest method. The test was administered twice with a time interval of 30 days on 111 students from the intermediate school in Riyad city. The reliability coefficient .76 which was satisfacroty. Al-Hambaly (1996) administered the test among 400 boys and girls students and computed internal consistency through Kuder-Richardson formulae. The coefficients ranged from .90 to .95 and its suitable coefficients for the reliability of the intelligence test. Sarah (2000) computed a Kuder-Richardson reliability coefficient of .73, in addition, she performed the test-retest method with a time interval of 35 days and again high reliability of the test .72 which was supported. In this present study, the reseacher used Alpha Cronbach coefficient was computed to establish the reliability of the scale. The scale yielded alpha coefficients of .75 . This value is satisfactory for the reliability of the present scale. Statistical Analysis and Results 5. Statistical Analysis and Results In the previous section, the researcher presented the methodology of present study, which included the sample, the tools used, the procedure, and the related studies. This new section will presents descriptive statistics, t-test, correlation, and stepwise regression. In this section, the researcher deals with the most significant descriptive statistical devices used in this study. These included the mean, standard deviation for the boy, and the girls in the variables of the present study, as it's presented in the tables 6. Table 6, presents the descriptive statistic of the boy's and girl's samples in relation to the variables of presents studies. Table 6. Descriptive Statistic of Boy's and Girl's Samples of the Study's Variables
Note: N = 150 Table 6, presents descriptive statistic of boy's and Girl's samples of the study's variables. The mean scores of prejudice, emotional intelligence, and linguistic intelligence in boy's sample are higher than girl's sample. Whereas the mean scores are 64.3, 175.3, 29.9 respectively, but the mean score in creative activities in girl's sample is 122.1 which is higher than boy's sample 124. The value of SD for the boy's sample are higher than the girl's sample in the variables of prejudice 20.6 and creative activities 28.1, but in the girl's sample SD value are higher than boy's sample in the variable of emotional intelligence 29.8 and linguistic intelligence 9.8. In the next graph 3, it presents descriptive statistic of boy's and girl's samples of the variables of present study as the following. 
In graph 3, it obvious that the highest mean score between the genders was in boy's sample in the variable of emotional intelligence 175.4, and the lowest was in girl sample in the variable of linguistic intelligence 24.1. The highest SD score was in boy's sample in the variable of emotional intelligence 29.8, and the lowest was also in boy's sample in the variable of linguistic intelligence 8.9. In this section it presents the results of comparison by t-test between the genders in the variables of the study, t-test was used in order to detect the difference between boys and girls in the variables of the study. Table 7, presents mean difference across the variables the following. Table 7. Mean Differences between Genders of the Variables
Table 7, presents t-values for the differences between boys and girls among the variables of the study, in prejudice it was found that (t =.5), creative activities (t = -.7), and emotional intelligence (t = 1.5), all these values are not statistically significant at the level of .0001, that mean boys and girls scores in the previous variables are equal ,but in linguistic intelligence it was found that (t = 5.3) which is statistically significant at the level of .0001, which is mean that boys scores level is higher than girls score regarding to their means. In the next graph 4, it presents mean differences between the genders of variables in the present study as the following. 
Graph 4, shown that the highest t value for the differences between the gender among the study's variables was in linguistic intelligence (t = 5.3). In order to observe the inter correlation among all the variable taken in the study 4x4, correlation matrix was computed for the boy's sample (N=150), to find out the relationship between prejudice and other variables. The correlation coefficients were sorted separately and presented in the following table 8. Table 8. Person's Coefficient of Correlation Between Prejudice and Other Variables of the Boy's Sample.
Note: * P  .05, N=150
Table 8, presents the correlations between prejudice and other variables of the study for the boy's sample. Prejudice was found to be significantly correlated with emotional intelligence (r = -.183, P <.05), linguistic intelligence (r=-.196, P< .05), but was not found to be related to creative activities (r = -.101), creative activities was not found to be related to emotional intelligence (r = -.035), and linguistic intelligence (r =.108). Emotional intelligence was found to be significantly correlated with linguistic intelligence (r = .191, P<.05). Graph 5, presents person's coefficient of correlation between prejudice and other variables of the boy's sample as the following. 
Graph 5, presents person's coefficient of correlation between prejudice and other variables of the boy's sample, it obvious that the highest correlation value was between prejudice and linguistic intelligence (r = .196), and the lowest was between creative activities and emotional intelligence (r = .035). In order to observe the inter correlation among all the variable taken in the study 4x4, correlation matrix was computed for the girl's sample (N=150), to find out the relationship between prejudice and other variables. The correlation coefficients were sorted separately and presented in the following table 9. Table 9. Person's Coefficient of Correlation Between Prejudice and Other Variables of the Girl's Sample
Note: * P. 05, **P. .01, N = 150
Table 9, presents the correlation's between prejudice and other variable of the study for the girl's sample. Prejudice was found to be significantly correlated with emotional intelligence (r =- .157, P<.05), linguistic intelligence (r =-.266, P<.01), but was not found to be related for creative activities (r = -.054). Creative activities was not found to be related to emotional intelligence (r = .87), and linguistic intelligence (r = .063). Emotional intelligence found to be significantly correlated with linguistic intelligence (r = .278, P<.01). In the next graph 6, it presents person's coefficient of correlation between prejudice and other variables of the girl's sample as the following.
Independent variables entered into the regression equation to predict prejudice in the boy's sample, the result is presented in table 10, as the following. Table 10. Summary of Stepwise Regression for the Boy's Sample Dependent Variable: Prejudice
Note: N = 150 Table 10, reveals that when the independent variables entered in the regression model with prejudice as a criterion for the boy's sample, the most important independent variable was a effected of prejudice was linguistic intelligence which was alone contributed %26 of the variance. The remaining variables were not considered to be important predictor that is why they are not shown in table 10. Graph 7, presents summary of stepwise regression for the boy's sample as the following. 
Graph 7, displays summary of stepwise regression for the boy's sample, and we can notice clearly the values of stepwise regression analysis. Independent variable entered into the regression equation to predict prejudice in the girl's sample, the result is presented in table 9, as the following. Table 9. Summary Stepwise Regression for the Girl's Sample Dependent Variable: Prejudice
Note: N = 150 Table 9, reveals that when independent variables entered in the regression model with prejudice as a criterion for the girl's sample. The most important independent variable was affected of prejudice was linguistic intelligence also, which was alone contributed 28% of the variance. The remaining variable was not considered important predictors. That is why they are not shown in table 8. Graph 8, presents summary of stepwise regression for the girl's sample as the following. 
Graph 8, displays summary of stepwise regression for the girl's sample, and we can notice clearly the values of stepwise regression analysis. 5.1 Discussion In the previous section, the results of present study were presented and discussed. In this section, an attempt has been made to interpret and discuss of results. The primary purpose of this research was to study the relationship between prejudice and some personal variables among secondary schools students in State of Kuwait, these personal variables are: creative activates, emotional intelligence, and linguistic intelligence. Before entering into discussion part, I would like to present a synopsis of the results obtained as the following: - By applying t-test technique, it's indicated that no differences between boy's and girl's scores in the variables of prejudice, creative activities, and emotional intelligence, but in the variable of linguistic intelligence, the result mentioned that boy's scores are higher than girl's scores regarding to the value of t-test and boy's mean. - By applying Person's Coefficient of Correlation Technique for determining the directions of relationships between the variables. The findings showed that there are a statistically significant negative correlation between prejudice and emotional intelligence, between prejudice and linguistic intelligence among a sample of males and females. Also the results indicated that there is positive statistically significant correlation relationship between emotional intelligence and linguistic intelligence for both the males and females samples. - By applying Stepwise Regression technique, the findings pointed out that linguistic intelligence is the only variable which contributes to predicting prejudice with both the male and female samples. So if we are to develop a society that can live in harmony and peace, then we must begin to address divisive issues in our classrooms. Very young children work and play together without bias. Unless the adults working with children help them learn how to continue to work and play together peaceably as they grow, however, biases picked up outside the school will begin to dominate and disrupt the harmony characteristic of the earlier years. Diversity exists throughout the world, and so teaching to overcome prejudice and bias is needed in all countries. We are now witnessing war in several countries. Children hear their elders and news commentators make unfavorable comments about other countries and groups of people. This can be confusing on children. They need opportunities to hear rational discussion and thoughts about these war situations. The classroom is a place where they can begin to sort out ideas about war and peace for themselves (Nancy, 2002). Prejudice is defined as positive or negative attitudes toward an identified social group. Attitudes toward social groups are based on three sources: cognitive, affective, and behavioral information. Prejudice represents the affective or emotional reaction to social groups. Cognitive information and behavioral tendencies are manifested through stereotypes and discrimination, respectively (Collie, 2006). Several statistical techniques were used in the present study which were included descriptive statistics, t-test, correlation, and stepwise regression. The study was conducted on 300 subjects with the ages of 16.4 years, and SD 1.96, students from secondary schools in the State of Kuwait were taken by the method of stratified random sampling. Subjects had comparable socio-economic. Background considered in the discussion of the results was how far the results as a whole shed light on the variables under investigation. An attempt was made to present a speculative view that will give direction for further research and project. In order to study the effect of gender among the variable of the present study. t-test was conduct to compare the scores of the boys and girls subjects. According to the results and values of t-test, it's indicated that boy scores level are higher than girl's scores level in the variable of linguistic intelligence, and there are no differences between genders in other variables. To analyze and discuss this result, i realize that these results are natural and reflect the reality of the environmental, education and social circumstances and influencing factors surrounding this study sample, represented in family and prevailing culture. Such influencing factors impose on the study sample a specific nature and type of fanaticism behaviors, different styles of thinking. Social upbringing in the environment surrounding the study sample differs between males and females. Consequently; the consequences and reflections of these influencing factors whether positively or negatively on the study sample, social roles of males are more flexible than those of the females. This is because males are more involved with institutions, societies and friends in society, they have memberships in several sports, religious, social and political centers and clubs. Therefore, this membership was reflected on the degree of their kinds of personality and cognitive abilities such their linguistic intelligence by virtue of their being involved with several problems, situations, discussions to their environment, both individual and group. Thus, we see them support and oppose the ideas and belongings of several political, religious creeds and trends as well as the influencing religious and political factors surrounding the State of Kuwait. These were reflected on the ideas and orientations of youth especially the males. Whereas for the females, there are some relative restrictions in membership of several sports, political and religious centers. Therefore, the ratio of linguistic intelligence for females was less than that of the males on the one hand. On the other hand, the nature of the male youth and their ability to interact and communicate with several institutions and non-governmental organizations with different religious and political attitudes have been reflected upon them not only at their level of linguistic intelligence but on other phases of their personality phases as well. Thus, linguistic intelligence for male youth is higher than that of the females by virtue of their flexibility in terms of movement and communication on the contrary of the females who are restricted by some inherited customs and traditions which negatively affected the development of their emotional and linguistic intelligence. This result reached by the researcher leads to refusing the first hypothesis of this study which stated that there will be differences between the gender effects (male, female) in the variables of the present study, actually it was differences only in one variable (which is linguistic intelligence) not in all the variables, this finding is inconsistent with the finding reached by William and Thomas (1984). To clarify and determine the nature of the relationship between the prejudice and the variables of this study, the researcher used Person's Coefficient of Correlation Techniques for determining the nature of these relationships. The findings showed that there is a statistically significant negative correlation between prejudice and emotional intelligence, between prejudice and linguistic intelligence, and there is no statistically significant correlation between prejudice and creative activities among a sample of males and females. This result reached by the researcher leads to refusing the second hypothesis which stated that there will be statistically significant correlation between prejudice and creative activities. While it leads to accepting the third hypothesis of this study which stated that there will be statistically significant correlation between prejudice and emotional intelligence, and also to accepting the fourth hypothesis which stated that there will be statistically significant correlation between prejudice and linguistic intelligence. No doubt this has a good and proper indicator and evidence that the creative activities posed in schools do not include any school curricula or activities with the relation to alleviating the severity and level of prejudice for students. Therefore, we did not find any significant relationship between prejudice and creative activities. This findings is consistent and concur with the finding reached by Teagle (1968),but contradict with the findings reached by Byrnes and kiger (1988), Klain (1992), Soderquist (2002), Bernier (2004), Mosten (2004), Clark (2005), Junn and Grier (2005), Dangelo and andea (2006). Moreover that the components of both emotional and linguistic intelligence and their elements, whenever available and formed in the character of the student, gives him a large and strong base and culture to control his fanatic features and behaviors. Therefore, and according to the present finding, the higher levels and degrees of emotional and linguistic intelligence with males and females, the more this is reflected on reducing and alleviating the level of their fanatic features due to their full comprehension and understanding of the negative consequences and reflections of prejudice features and manifestations. Consequently, we advise schools to intensify their schools activities which are related to emotional and linguistic intelligence for reducing and getting rid of prejudice due to the nature of reflective relationship between them. According to the values of Correlation Coefficient, it has become apparent to us that there is a direct statistically significant correlation relationship between emotional intelligence and linguistic intelligence for both the male and female samples, i.e. the higher the ratio of emotional intelligence of both males and females, the more this is reflected on the rise in the ratio of their linguistic intelligence. This is an indicator of strong correlation relationship between both intelligences, there are common and similar elements and components between both of them overlapping and interacting between both of them strongly and in a measured manner. These elements include ability to positively interact and extend the bridges of positive social relationships with others. Such characteristics do not take place without people using their linguistic intelligence in deepening their relationship and emotions. This finding reached by the researcher leads to accepting the fifth hypothesis which stated that there will be statistically significant correlation between emotional intelligence and linguistic intelligence. The findings of the Correlation Coefficient values pointed out that there is no statistically significant correlation relationship between creative activities and emotional intelligence on one hand, and between creative activities and linguistic intelligence on the other hand for both male and female samples in this study. These findings give us an indicator that the components of creative activities, i.e. fluency, flexibility and originality, do not overlap or interact with the components of both emotional and linguistic intelligence. This finding, reached by this study, leads to accepting the sixth hypotheses which stated that there will not be statistically significant correlation between creative activities and emotional intelligence, and also accepting the seventh hypothesis which stated that there will not be statistically significant correlation between creative activities and linguistic intelligence, and which are naturally logical and convincing. This is an indicator that creative activities which are practiced in the environment of the study sample focus on creative aspects only without paying due attention to other intellectual aspects and capabilities, such as emotional intelligence and linguistic intelligence. What is supposed is the other way around, i.e., there is variety in attitudes, elements and capabilities reflected by such schools activities in such a way that develops all the personal and cognitive aspects, not just focusing on creative aspects. Referring to the findings of Stepwise Regression, the findings pointed out that linguistic intelligence is the only variable which contributes to predicting prejudice with both the male and female samples. This, undoubtedly, is very clear in all the manifestations of fanaticism which, in the first place, focus on strictness in talking, bad-tempered discussions and fanaticism for opinion which is considered the first stage of fanaticism manifestations. While the fanatic behavior is the second stage and aggressive behavior comes in the third stage. This finding, reached by the study, leads to refuse the eighth hypothesis which stated that emotional intelligence then creative activities will be more important predictors for prejudice. If individual could develop their verbal intelligence capabilities and know their strategies, they can reduce and alleviate the their ratio of prejudice and have enough flexibility in discussions, interlocution, consultation and democracy in opinion, and consequently the ability to accept the ideas and opinions of others or convince them in different manners away from prejudice in opinion and sticking to hard-line ideas. This, undoubtedly, depends upon their capability to develop verbal intelligence in such a way that they are directed to the right direction, beneficial manner, and ability to control emotions in such a way that such emotions do not become severe or hard-line; they become flexible and socially acceptable. 5.2 Conclusion Prejudice is a cultural attitude that rests on negative stereotypes about individuals or groups because of their cultural, religious, racial, or ethnic background. Discrimination is the active denial of desired goals from a category of persons. A category can be based on sex, ethnicity, nationality, religion, language, or class. More recently, disadvantaged groups now also include those based on gender, age, and physical disabilities. Prejudice is deeply imbedded at both the individual and societal levels. Attempts to eradicate prejudice must thus deal with prevailing beliefs or ideologies, and social structure. Prejudice as far as historical records show, no society or nation has been immune to prejudice, either as victim or victimizer. Contemporary forms of prejudice date back to when European colonizers penetrated and transformed previously isolated societies and peoples. The more extreme forms of discriminatory practices include genocide, slavery, legislated discrimination, discriminatory immigration laws, and disenfranchisement. Less extreme forms of prejudice and discrimination, but nevertheless pervasive and oppressive, include social exclusion at the institutional level (such as in schools and hospitals), and the more subtle forms practiced by the media. As to the root cause of prejudice there appears to be no clear acceptance of any theory of causation. Scholars do agree, however, that prejudice is not universals as something humans are inherently born with. There is ample evidence that prejudice is social constructions. If indeed prejudice is inherent in the human condition, we would not be able to account for intermarriage and assimilation among highly differentiated human groups. There is, moreover, considerable evidence that prejudice is absent in young children. Although there is no wide agreement as to the "cause" of prejudice, there is a consensus that they constitute a learned behavior. Today in our schools we can use and apply many kinds of educational scholastic programs, activities, and game...etc, (as brain storm activities,..etc) to reduce prejudice in addition visiting many social and education organizations and institutes which their works focus among facing prejudice to take some information's about their works, designing some scholastic activities in-out of the schools to facing all phenomenon's of prejudice, and foster with support the students to achieve their educational objectives among reducing prejudice. The internalization of prejudice starts with parents and, later, teachers, the groups primary in the formation of attitudes within children. In the school the administration must bring kinds of creative scholastic activities which are consist of kinds of emotional and linguistical intelligence abilities and situations that cab students learn more and more for getting educational and sociological experiences against prejudice. The media and social institutions solidify prejudicial attitudes, giving them social legitimacy. At best, one can reduce prejudice. Society looks most often to education and legislation to alleviate prejudice for reasons still not clearly known, inter-group contact alone is not enough to reduce prejudice. On one hand, multicultural education, whether direct or indirect, constitute the mainstay of educational efforts to eliminate prejudice. On the other hand, the emphasis on civil rights, enlightened immigration policies, and mandates for quota hiring are the cornerstone of legal approaches to alleviating the effects of prejudice. The most overlooked area in resolving the problems of prejudice lies in the web of close relationships where genuine feelings of love can be fostered and strengthened. Prejudice produce immense effects in the psychological, social, political, and economic domains. Whether intended or not, the effects are compounded by the loss of self-worth, a sense of alienation from the wider society, political disempowerment, and economic inequalities. Prejudice and ethnic hostilities constitute a major danger to peace both within a nation and among nations. As a consequence, the emergence of a new global moral order increasingly provides a leverage point to counter the effects of prejudice. While many agree that the various international instruments to protect people against prejudice is still not universally followed or even implemented, it is clear that a new international consciousness is indeed emerging and is, in fact, intensifying. The centuries of unequal relationships between dominant and minority groups have, of them, compound the difficulty of eradicating prejudice and discrimination. What can be said of the nature of such relationships among whites and blacks in the United States seems to also apply to other groups around the world. In the Baha'i view, as example the dominant groups are unable or unwilling to see discrimination "as a chronic social, psychological, and spiritual illness," while subjugated groups have a "deep-seated mistrust, suspicion, and bitterness. Without the recognition of the spiritual nature of the problem, long-term transformation will not occur and social progress of both dominant and subjected groups will be retarded. If you have ever observed two or three year-olds playing together you will see much interaction, some bossiness, a little possessiveness with toys, but absolutely no prejudice. Prejudice is a learned reaction that is passed down to children from their parents. In today’s classroom there still exist some prejudicial attitudes that usually rear their heads by the second grade. Children are great listeners and imitators of adults. What they hear and absorb in the first seven years of life has an enormous impact on how they see the world and the people who inhabit it. By the time they get to school they have learned their parents’ and relatives’ take on society and it becomes part of how they see the world. When i was teaching high school in my country (State of Kuwait) i saw many instances of prejudice among the diverse student population, though never in the classroom. My school held assemblies to help the student body learn how destructive prejudice could be. Above all, try to remember that children are like sponges. They absorb the good and the bad things they hear at home. Allowing racial, ethnic, or prejudicial slurs to be said in your home is wrong. The telling of a racial “joke” is not funny and it can have a lasting impression on your child if they think you accept it. Let your child know that prejudice is not correct and not allowed. Teach them that there is beauty in all cultures, races, and ethnicities. Tolerance and respect begins in your own home. References: 1-Abdel-Ghafar, A. (1976). The mental superiority and creativity. Cairo: The Arabian Press. 2- Abdel-Ghafar, A. (1979). The creativity. Journal of Qatar Unesco, 31, 25 - 30. 3- Abo – Alam, R. (1983).The project of study the talented in high school in Kuwait. Kuwait: Ministry of Education Press. 4- Abo-Alam, R. (1985).The psychology of education. Kuwait: The Pen Company for Publishing. 5- Abo-Hatab, F. (1996). The mental abilities. Cairo: The Anglo Press. 6- Adel, A. (2006). Social psychology. Cairo: Anglo Press. 7- Ahmad, F. (2005). The education system in State of Kuwait. Kuwait: The Science Press. 8- Al-Abdellah, E. (1991). The styles of creative thinking. The Annual Conference of Ministry of Education, Bahrain, (May, 14-18, 1991). 9- AL-Alosy, B. (1985). The scholastic education styles in development the creative thinking abilities. Journal of Arabian Gulf, 15, 71-89. 10-Al-Bahay, F. (1979). Statistical psychology and the measure of human brain. Cairo: The Arabian Cognitive Company for Publishing. 11- Al-Barak, A. (2001). The scholastic creative activities. Kuwait, Ministry of Education: Ministry Press. 12- Al-Deriny, H. (1975).The creativity, it concept and development. Journal of Art Faculty, 1, 161-171. 13- Al-Ghenem, A. (1998). A future strategy for improving education in the State of Kuwait up to 2025. Kuwait, Ministry of Education: Ahram Press. 14- AL - Hambaly, C. (1996). The intelligence. Kuwait: Psychology Press. 15- Al- Hamouly, T. (1996). The intelligence. Bahrain: Education Group Press. 16- Al-Hefni, A. (2002). Encyclopedia of psychology schools. Cairo: Atlas Press. 17-Alkafafi, A. D. (1983). The obstacles of critical thinking. Journal of Education Faculty, 2 (2), 219 – 236. 18- Al-Khalifey, E. (1989). The education of creativity and the general teaching. Journal of Education, 3, 1-19. 19 – Allport, G. W. (1954). The nature of prejudice. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley. 20- Allport, G. W. (1966). Religious context of prejudice. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 5,447-457. 21- Ayed, F. (1996). Psychology of statistic. Cairo: The Arabian Press. 22-Altemeyer, B. (1981). Right-wing authoritarianism. Winnipeg: Press of Manitoba University. 23- Anna, F. (1962). After education. New York: S. T. Press. 24- Ashmore, R. (1970). The problem of intergroup prejudice. In B. E. Collins (Ed.), Social psychology (pp. 245-296). Reading, Massachusetts: Addison- Wesley. 25- Ashmore, R., & DelBoca, F. (1981). Conceptual approaches to stereotypes and stereotyping. In D. Hamilton (Ed.), Cognitive processes in stereotyping and inter-group behavior (pp. 1-36). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum. 26- Atia, A. (2006). Factorial study of creativity ability for the elementary. Ph.D Dissertation, Cairo, Cairo University. 27- Babad, E. Y., Birnbaum M., & Benne K. D. (1983). The social self: Group influences on personal identity. Washington: Sage. 28- Bana, N., & Al -Shafi, A. (2001). Effective Intelligence. Cairo: Anglo. 29- Banks, J. A. (2007). Educating citizens in a multicultural society. New York: Teachers College Press. 30- Barach, J., & Eckhardt, D. (2007). Leadership and the job of the executive. Westpor, CT: Quorum Books. 31- Barkow, J. H., Cosmides L., & Tooby J. (1992). The adapted mind. New York: Oxford University Press. 32- Baron, J. (1982). Personality and intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.). Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 308 – 351). New York: Cambridge University Press. 33- Barrett, L. F., & Gross, J. J. (2001). Emotional intelligence: A process model of emotion representation and regulation. New York: IT Press. 34-Barron, F. (1961). Creative vision and expression in writing and painting. Washington: NC. 35- Bert, J. (2002). The new education. New York: J. K. Publishers. 36- Bernier, C. (2004). Multicultural education: Raising cultural awareness and reducing prejudice among a middle school population. Master Dissertation, Nova Southeastern Univ. 37 - Binet, A., & Simon, T. (1916). The development of intelligence in children. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins. 38- Botkin, J. W., Elmandjra M., & Malitza M. (1979). No limits to learning: Bridging the human gap (A report to the Club of Rome). New York: Pergamum. 39- Brody, N. (1992). Intelligence. Boston, MA: Academic Press. 40- Brody, N. (1997). Intelligence. San Diego: Academic Press. 41- Brody, N. (2000). History of theories and measurements of intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp .16–33). New York: Cambridge University Press. 42-Brookfield, S .D. (1986). Media power and development of media: An adult, educational interpretation. Harvard Educational Review, 56 (2), 151 – 170. 43-Brookfield, S. D. (1987). Developing critical thinking. California: Jossey – Bass Publishers, Inc. 44- Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1985). Dynamic assessment: One approach and some initial data. Cambridge: Bolt, Beranek & Newman. 45 - Buss, D. M. (1995). Evolutionary psychology: A new paradigm for psychological science. Journal of Psychological Inquiry, 6, 1-30. 46- Butterfield, E. C. (1986). Intelligent action, learning and cognitive development might all be explained in the same theory. In R. J. Sternberg & D. S. Detterman (Eds.), What is intelligence? Contemporary viewpoints and its nature and definition (pp. 45-49). Norwood, NJ: Ablex. 47- Byrnes, D., & Kiger, G. (1988). Ethical and pedagogical issues in the use of simulation activities in the classroom: Evaluation the "Blue Eyes –Brown Eyes" prejudice simulation. Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of The Northern Rocky Mountain Educational Research Association. Utah State Univ, Logan. Dept. of Sociology. 48- Campione, J. C. (1989). Assisted assessment: A taxonomy of approaches and an outline of strengths and weaknesses. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 22 (3), 55-65. 49- Camionz, S. (2001). Creativity Test. NJ: Crown Press. 50- Carroll, Z. N. (2005). The intelligence. New York: PH Publisher Group. 51-Cary, C. (2002). Emotional intelligence. American Journal of Community Psychology, 30 (1), 1-14. 52-Chen, J. E., & Siegler, M. N. (2000). Social intelligence. Washington:U.S Press. 53- Christina, L. (1999). Teacher's biases toward creative children. Journal of Education, 12 (4), 321- 382. 54- Ciarrochi, J., Chan, A. Y. C., & Caputi, P. (2000). A critical evaluation of the emotional intelligence construct. Journal of Psychology, 30, 539-561. 55- Clark, M. L. (2005). Applying ecological theory to advance the science and practice of school based prejudice intervention. Journal of Educational Psychology, 40(3), 177-189. 56- Collie, W. (2006). Predictors of racial prejudice in white American counseling students. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development, 34, (1), 15-22. 57- Condor, S., & Brown R. (1988).Psychological processes in inter-group conflict. In W. Stroebe, A. Kruglanski, D. Bar-Tal, & M. Hewstone (Eds.), The social psychology of inter-group conflict (pp.3-26). Berlin: Springer. 58- Dangelo, A. M. & Andea, B. P. (2006). Using multicultural resources for teacher to combat racial prejudice in the class room. Journal of Early Childhood, 29 (2), 183-187. 59- David, H .A. (2003). Psychology of emotional intelligence. Washington: Education Press. 60- David, W. C. (2003). Dimensions of emotional intelligence and their relationships with social coping among gifted adolescents in Hong Kong. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 32 (6), 409 – 416. 61- Deary, I. J. (2000). Simple information processing. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 267–284). New York: Cambridge University Press. 62 -De-Bono, E. (1995). Teach yourself to think. London: Mc. Quaig Group Inc. 63 - De-Bono, E. (1998). Thinking course. London: BBC book Press. 64- Deutsch, M., & Gerard, H. (1955). A study of normative and informational social influences on individual judgment. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 51, 629-636. 65- Dewey, J. (1933). How we think: A restatement of the relation of reflective thinking to the educative process. Boston: Heath. 66- Duckitt, J. (1992). Psychology and prejudice: A historical analysis and integrative framework. Journal of American Psychologist, 47, 1182-1193. 67- Duckitt, J. (1994).The social psychology of prejudice .Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. 68 - Ehrlich, H. J. (1973). The social psychology of prejudice. New York: Wiley. 69- Ellis, C., & Sonnenfield, J. A. (1994). Diverse approaches to managing diversity. Journal of Human Resource Management, 33, 79-109. 70- Elman, S. (2000). Cognitive Tests. NJ: Book Press. 71- Fairchild, H., & Gurin, P. (1978). Traditions in the social psychological analysis of race relations. American Behavioral Scientist, 21, 757-778. 72-Farouk, A. O. (1993). Critical thinking. Journal of Psychology, 7(27), 27– 48. 73-Farouk, A. O. (1994). Development critical thinking. Cairo: Alanglo Press. 74-Fearn, L. (1976). Identification development creativity. San Diego: E. K. Press. 75- Feuerstein, R. (1980). Instrumental enrichment: An intervention program for cognitive modifiability. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press. 76- Flax, T. (2005). The differences between the gender of the prejudice among secondary school students. Journal of Social Psychology, 33 (5), 22-32. 77- Freud, S. (1923).The Ego and the Id, In S, Fox (Ed). Freud and creative live, pp.13-49).New York: G.R Press. ) 78- Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind. New York: Basic Books. 79- Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: Theory into practice. New York: Basic Books. 80- Gardner, H. (1999a). Intelligence refrained. New York: Basic Books. 81- Gardner, H. (1999b). Are there additional intelligences? The case for naturalist, spiritual, and existential intelligences. In J. Kane (Ed.), Education, information, and transformation (pp. 111–131). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall. 82- Gardner, H. E. (2000). Intelligence reframed: Multiple Intelligences for the 21st Century. New York: Basic Books. 83- Getzels, J. W., & Jackson, P. W. (1962). Creativity and intelligence. New York: Wiley. 84- Goleman, D. (1990). Emotional intelligence. Why it can matter more than IQ, New York: Bantam Books. 85- Goleman, D. (1996). Working with emotional intelligence. New York: Bantam Books. 86- Goleman, D. (2003).Destructive emotions. How can overcome them?. New York: Bantam Books. 87- Goleman, D., Boyatzis, R. E., & McKee, A. (2002). Primal leadership: Realizing the power of emotional intelligence. Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. 88- Gorg, S. W. (2000). Enhancing emotional intelligence and social adeptness. Master’s Action Research Project, Saint Xavier University. 89- Greenfield, P. M. (1997). You can't take it with you: Why abilities assessments don't cross cultures. Journal of American Psychologist, 52 (10), 1115–1124. 90 -Guilford, J. P. (1956). Structure of intellect. Psychological Bulletin, 53, 267-293. 91- Guilford, J. P. (1957). A revised structure of intellect, study of high level personal. Report from Psych, Lab, Univ. of S. California, 19, 12-20. 92 - Guilford, J. P. (1959). Personality. New York: Mc Graw Hill. 93 -Guilford, J.P. (1967). The nature of human intelligence. New York: Raw-Hill. 94- Guilford, J. P. (1971). The analysis of intelligence. New York: Mc Graw Hill. 95- Gurin, P., Peng, T., Lopez, G., & Nagda, B. R. (1999). Context, identity, and inter-group relations. In D. A. Prentice & D. T. Miller (Eds.), Cultural divides: Understanding and overcoming group conflict. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 96- Gwyneth, L. M. (2007). Psychology of creative thinking. Ohio: L. M Press. 97- Habib, M. (1999). Creative activities inventory. Cairo: AL - Nahda Press. 98- Hamed, A. Z. (1984). The guidance and psychological counseling. Cairo: The World of the Book. 99- Hamilton, D. (1981). Cognitive processes in stereotyping and inter group behavior. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Erlbaum. 100- Hamilton, D. L., & Trolier, T. K. (1986). Stereotypes and stereotyping: An overview of the cognitive approach. In J. F. Dovidio & S. L. Gaertner (Eds.), Prejudice, discrimination, and racism (pp. 127-158). Orlando, FL: Academic Press. 101- Hassan, B. (2001). The creative system in education. Bahrain: Education Press. 102- Hassan, H. (2002). The prejudice. Cairo: Anglo Press. 103- Hebb, D. O. (1949). The organization of behavior. New York: Wiley. 104 - Herbert, N. (1993). Elemental mind. New York: Dutton. 105- Herrnstein, R. J., & Murray, C. (1994). The bell curve. New York: Free Press. 106- Horn, J. L. (1976). Human abilities: A review of research and theory in the early 1970's. Annual Review of Psychology, 27, 437-485. 107- Horn, M.P. (2006). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), The encyclopedia of human intelligence (V.1, pp. 443–451). New York: Macmillan. 108- Howard, A. T. (2007). Deep prejudice. Journal of Innovation, 12 (3), 22-30. 109- Hunt, E. B. (1980). Intelligence as an information-processing concept. Journal of British Psychology, 71, 449 – 474. 110- Ibrahim, A. (1987). The basic of psychology. Saudi Arabia: Al-Merik for Publishing. 111- Ibrahim, S. (2003). The relationship between personal characteristics and prejudice attitudes among university's students. 3rd Conference of Social Sciences (April, 4-7,2003), Kuwait University. 112- Ibrahim, W. M. (1966). Experimental study for the factors to improvement the critical thinking. Ph.D dissertation, Cairo, Tantan University. 113- Irosevski, R. (1980). Psychology of creativity. Journal of Psychology, 6, 33- 45. 114- Jack, A., & James, C. (2001).Understanding intelligence, giftedness and creativity using the PASS theory. Journal of Roeper Review, 23 (3), 151- 162. 115- Jerison, H. J. (1982). The evolution of biological intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of human intelligence (pp. 723-791). New York: Cambridge University Press. 116- Jerison, H. J. (2000). The evolution of intelligence. In R. J. Sternberg (Ed.), Handbook of intelligence (pp. 216–244). New York: Cambridge University Press. 117- John, A., & Lori, R. (2005). The analysis of the emotional intelligence skills and potential problem areas of elementary educators. Journal of Education, 125(4), 615 – 623. 118- Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. W., & Holubec E. J. (1994). Cooperative learning in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. 119- Joseph, D. G. (1995). Linguistic Intelligence Test. NJ: Students Press. 120- Junn, E. N., & Grier, L .K. (2005). Playing "Sherlock Holmes" enhancing students understanding of prejudice and stereotyping. Journal of Teaching Psychology , 4 (2) 121 – 130. 121- Kamel, A. (1994). Psychology of physiology. Cairo: Educational Press. Yüklə 0,78 Mb. Dostları ilə paylaş:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
