Deconstructing the Model Minority Myth

Report
Deconstructing
the Model Minority Myth
Diversifying the Asian American and Pacific Islander Experience
Maile Kaneko and Jennifer Truong
WSCA Conference 2014

Agenda









Objectives
Discuss Model Minority Myth
Who are API Students?
API Students in WA State Public Schools
Analysis of Data
Attitudes Towards Counseling
Subgroups - background and implications
Interventions and Strategies
Voices from the Community (Panel)
Objectives
•
•
•
•
Identify historical and social contexts and experiences of a
diverse set of Asian Pacific American subgroups
Evaluate educational and socioeconomic data for
disaggregated Asian American and Pacific Islander subgroups
Learn historical, cultural, political, and social contexts impact
on the educational experiences of various students
Collaborate, share, and discuss strategies for supporting
Asian American and Pacific Islander students
Model Minority Myth
“Proponent of the model minority thesis attributed the
supposed success of Asian Americans to their adherence
to traditional Asian cultural values and family structures.
They argued that Asian Americans were more obedient
to authority, respectful to teachers, smart, good at math
and science, hardworking, cooperative, well behaved,
and quiet. The model minority thesis also suggests that
Asian Americans are more successful educationally and
economically than other ‘minority’ groups in the United
states such as blacks, Latinos, and Native Americans.
Thus their pathway to success is viewed as a ‘model’ for
other ‘minority’ groups to follow”
(Kwon and Au, 2010)
Harms of the Model Minority Myth
1. Denies existence of present discrimination against
APA’s as well as effects of past discrimination
2. Masks unique barriers for varied experiences of
subgroups (in particular SouthEast Asians and
Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders)
3. Legitimizes attributes that generalize ability to
overcome discrimination to juxtapose other racial
groups
(CAPAA, 2010)
Who are API Students?
Asian Indian
Bangladeshi
Bhutanese
Burmese
Cambodian
Cham
Chamorro
Chinese
Chuukese
Filipino
Gillis
Islanders
Hmong
Indonesian
Iwo Jiman
Japanese
Korean
Kosraean
Laotian
Lau Islander
Malaysian
Maldivian
Maori
Marshallese
Mongolian
Native Fijian
Native
Hawaiian
Nauruan
Nepalese
New Caledonian
Niuean
Okinawan
Pakistani
Palauan
Papua New
Guinean
Rapa Nui (Easter
Island)
Raro Tongan
Rotuman
Samoan
Singaporean
Solomon
Islanders
Sri Lankan
Tahitian
Taiwanese
Thai
Tokelauan
Tongan
Uvea & Futuna
Vietnamese
Yapese
… and more.
Who are API Students?
 47+ ethnicities that speak more than 300 languages
and dialects
 Asians make up 7.2% of WA State Population; NHPI
make up .58%
 65.5% of Asians and 19.8% of NHPI are Foreign born
(CAPAA, 2010; 2006-2010 American Community Survey [ACS]; 2008-2012 ACS)
Photo by: Zamanalnsamt
Median
Family
Income
% Children
under 18 below
Poverty Level
Language
other than
English
Asian
67.2%
$54,611
14.1%
74.8%
Cambodian
65.8%
$34,801
31.8%
91.7%
Filipino
65.4%
$56,781
6.3%
67.1%
Hmong
61.2%
$27,955
56.4%
95.2%
Laotian
67.4%
$44,536
21.1%
91.4%
78%
$42,846
24%
92.4%
NHPI
17.2%
$45,596
18.9%
48.6%
Polynesian
16.0%
$43,556
17.8%
49.3%
Native Hawaiian
2.3%
$46,875
6.3
14.5%
Samoan
20.2%
$39,135
24.4%
69%
Tongan
54.5%
$65,733
4.1%
80.8%
Micronesian
12.1%
$48,810
22.9%
48.2%
Chamorro
3.4%
$51,071
21.1%
42.8%
Vietnamese
Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics: 2000 Census 2000 Summary File 4 (SF 4) - Sample Data;
Profile of Selected Social Characteristics: 2000 Census 2000 Summary File 4 (SF 4) - Sample Data
Washington State Demographics
Profile – 2000 Census Data
% Foreign
Born
East Asia & Oceania
East Asia
Oceania
WA State Public Schools
•
•
•
•
API’s make up 8.1% of school population
More than 30% of Asian Americans receive Free/Reduced
Price Lunch
14% are enrolled in Transitional Bilingual Instruction
Program (TBIP)
In 2007, there were 16 school districts that had Asian
Americans representing over 10% of their student body
(Hune and Takeuchi, 2010)
WA State Public Schools, Cont.
District
2007
2012
Seattle
22%
18%
Bellevue
26%
Tukwila
2007
2012
Issaquah
20%
23%
31%
Edmonds
14%
14%
21%
32%
North Shore
11%
14%
Kent
18%
19%
Everett
12%
13%
Highline
21%
19%
Mukilteo
15%
16%
Tacoma
12%
13%
N. Thurston
13%
10%
Lake WA
15%
19%
Shoreline
18%
15%
Federal Way
15%
17%
Auburn
11%
10%
Renton
25%
26%
(Hune and Takeuchi, 2010; OSPI, 2014)
Education Data

Graduation Rates (4-Year Cohort)
2012-2013
Aggregated API
Disaggregated API
100%
100%
90%
90%
82.5%
80.4%
80%
56.8%
80.4%
80%
67.1% 66.7%
70%
60%
78.1%
84.4%
82.5%
66.2%
53.9%
70%
60%
50%
50%
40%
40%
30%
30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%
64.5%
56.8%
78.1%
67.1% 66.7%
66.2%
53.9%
(OSPI 2013)
Drop-Out Rate (Adj. 4-Year Cohort)
2012-2013
Aggregated API
Aggregated API
30%
30%
26.8%
26.8%
25.8%
25%
25%
11.8%
12.9%
20.0%
19.4% 19.8%
20%
15%
9.5%
20.7%
20.0%
19.4% 19.8%
20%
10%
25.8%
15%
11.8%
10%
5%
5%
0%
0%
9.5%
12.9%
8.3%
(OSPI 2013)
3rd Grade MSP Math
2012-2013
Disaggregated API
Aggregated API
100%
100%
90%
90%
80%
67.3%
70%
67.3%
60%
60%
40%
72.0%
72.0%
70%
50%
80.2%
76.8%
80%
76.8%
42.5%
52.0%
46.7% 48.4%
50.4%
50%
36.1%
40%
30%
30%
20%
20%
10%
10%
0%
0%
52.0%
46.7% 48.4%
42.5%
36.1%
(OSPI 2013)
Push-Pull Hypothesis
Push-Pull Hypothesis: Migration is due to socioeconomic imbalances between regions, certain
factors "pushing" persons away from the area of origin, and others "pulling" them to the
area of destination
Immigration Waves
● First Wave of Asian Immigrants: 1840s–1930s.
○ One million Asians, most of them young men, was significant in the economic
development of the western states and Hawai’i.
○ Chinese, Japanese, Filipino, Korean, Asian Indian
● Second Wave of Asian Immigrants: Post-1965.
○ 1965 Immigration Act
○ Annual quotas for Asian states, priority for family reunification, & preferences for
economic visas
● Third Wave: Southeast Asian Refugees, 1975 and After.
○ U.S. military involvement in Southeast Asia
○ Refugees : persons who do not willingly choose to leave their homelands.
○ One million Vietnamese, Cambodian, Hmong, Mien, and other Laotians arrived
between 1975 and 1990 alone
(Hune and Takeuchi, 2010; So, 2008)
Attitudes Towards Counseling
Asian Americans underutilize counseling and other mental health facilities
Stigma, Shame, and Saving Face


Feelings of guilt vs. Feelings of shame
Shame and “Saving face” - one person reflects on the entire group or family system
Frustration, anger, depression, anxiety - “Don’t think about it”
Self-reliance

Based on legacy of mistrust of outside institutions that have led to victimization of
APIs
Acculturation and help-seeking behaviors
Abe-Kim et al. (2007), Sue & Sue (2013), Yamashiro & Matsuoka (1997)
Attitudes Towards Counseling
As a child, I was taught not to call attention to
myself, because an upright nail gets pounded down.
I was taught to be helpful and to accommodate the
needs of others. I believed that the mature person
was loving, kind, and kept their opinions private.
- Yabusaki, 2010
(Sue & Sue 2013)
East Asian & South Asian Students
Self-control vs. Self-expression
East Asian
Chinese

South Asian

Japanese
Korean
Indian
Sri Lankan
Bangladeshi
Bhutanese
Maldivian
Nepalese
Self-control and restraint – one should exercise
restraint when experiencing strong emotions. The
ability to control emotions is a sign of strength.
Ability to resolve psychological problems – One should
overcome distress by oneself. Asking others for
psychological help is a sign of weakness. One should
use one’s inner resources and willpower to resolve
psychological problems.
Filial Piety – Obligation to family and ancestors

Authority figure vs. stranger
Model Minority as stressor – Academics & Career
(Kim & Park, 2008)
Implications & Strategies for School Counselors
 Consider students’ levels of acculturation
 Integration, assimilation, separation, and marginalization
 Family’s generational status
 Style of Counseling
 Logical, rational, directive vs. reflective, affective, non-directive
 Explore perceived expectations and pressures (especially in
academics and career choices) from family/community
 Failure to meet expectations feelings of inadequacy 
pressure/psychological stress
(Kim & Park, 2008; Sandhu & Madathil, 2008)
Southeast Asian Students
Southeast Asia:





Cambodia (Cham, Khmer)
Laos (Hmong, Iu Mien, Khmu, Lao)
Vietnam (Khmer, Montagnards,
Vietnamese)
Burma (Karen, Chin)
Thailand (Thai)
Social/Historical/Economic Context:
•
Language
•
“Involuntary Immigrants”
•
Socioeconomic status
•
Gang activity
Familial expectations & cultural norms
Educational Attainment - Bachelor’s Degree
or Higher in WA State, 2006-2010 ACS)
Cambodian/Khmer
16.1%
Filipino
39.6%
Hmong
14.5%
Laotian
10%
Thai
44.5%
Vietnamese
24.4%
Asian
45.6%
Asian Indian
58.4%
Chinese
57.3%
Taiwanese
75%
Japanese
52%
Korean
43.2%
(Hune and Takeuchi, 2010; Southeast Asia Resource Action Center; American Community Survey 2006-2012)
Implications & Strategies for School Counselors
 Interdependency & Collectivism
 Students’ Role as Cultural moderators/mediators
Explore perceived expectations (especially in
academics and career choice) from
family/community

Explore gender roles and expectations within
family/culture
 Emphasize strength of Bicultural identity navigating two (or more) worlds
 Trauma and secondary trauma

(Hune and Takeuchi, 2010)
Pacific Islander Students
Pacific Islanders:

Polynesian (Native Hawaiian, Samoan,
Tongan, Maori, and more)
Melanesian (Fijian, Papua New Guinean,
Solomon Islander, and more)
Micronesian (Chamorro, Marshallese,
Palauan, Kosraen, Chuukese, Yapese, and
more)


Language
Socioeconomic status
Multigenerational homes
US Territories & Formal Association
Values:
Collectivistic
Respect for Elders: Familial
expectations & cultural norms
•
•
Educational Attainment - Bachelor’s Degree
or Higher in WA State, 2006-2010 ACS)
NHPI
11.3%
Native Hawaiian
16.2%
Samoan
8.0%
Tongan
15.4%
Micronesian
8.3%
Chamorro
8.0%
Melanesian
18.1%
Fijian
18.1%
Marshallese
1.4%
Asian
45.6%
Implications & Strategies for School Counselors
 Explore and recognize importance of family &




collectivist decision making
Acknowledge role of religion
Connect students to community organizations &
community work
Explore gender roles and expectations within
family/culture
Advocacy for socioeconomic, immigration, and
language systems of support
2013 Legislative Recommendation
The Educational Opportunity Gap Oversight and Accountability
Committee (EOGOAC)’s Recommendation #5:
 Provide tools for deeper data analysis and disaggregation of
student demographic data to inform instructional strategies to
close the opportunity gap.
 The EOGOAC recommends that the race category Asian be
disaggregated into the following categories: Cambodian, Chinese,
Filipino, Hmong, Indian, Indonesian, Japanese, Korean, Laotian,
Malaysian, Pakistani, Singaporean, Taiwanese, Thai, Vietnamese,
and Other Asian.
(CAPAA, 2013)
Interventions & Strategies
Student
Empowerment:
Acting With
Advocacy:
Acting On
Behalf
Student
Empowerment
Student Advocacy
Microlevel
Family/
Community
Family
Partnership/
Community
Collaboration
School/
Department
Empowerment:
Acting With
Family Advocacy Systems Advocacy
Macrolevel
(Modified from Lewis, Arnold, House & Toporek, 2003)
References
2006-2010 American Community Survey. Dp02: selected social characteristics in the United States.
2006-2010 American Community Survey. Dp02: selected economic characteristics in the United States.
Abe-Kim, J., Takeuchi, D.T., Hong, S., Zane, N., Sue, S., Spencer, M., Appel, H., Nicdao, E., & Alegria, M. (2007). Use of mental healthrelated services among immigrant and US-born Asian Americans: Results from the National Latino and Asian American Study.
American Journal of Public Health, 97 (1), 91-98.
Commission on Asian Pacific American Affairs [CAPAA]. 2010. The state of Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in Washington.
Olympia, WA: CAPAA.
Educational Opportunity Gap Oversight and Accountability Committee [EOGOAC]. 2014. Recommendations from the 2014 annual
report.
Hune, S. and D. Takeuchi. (2008). Asian Americans in Washington State: Closing their hidden achievement gaps. A report submitted to
The Washington State Commission on Asian Pacific American Affairs. Seattle, WA: University of Washington.
Kim, B. & Park, Y. (2008). East and Southeast Asian Americans. In Garrett McAuliffe & Associates (Ed.), Culturally alert counseling:A
comprehensive introduction (pp. 188-219). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Kwon, H. & Au, W. (2010). Model minority myth. In E.W. Chen & G.J. Yoo (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Asian American issues today: Volume 1
(pp. 221-230). Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, LLC.
Lewis, Arnold, House & Toporek. 2003. Advocacy competencies. Accessed at
http://www.counseling.org/resources/competencies/advocacy_competencies.pd
Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). (2013). Graduation and dropout statistics annual report 2011-2012 (Data file).
Retrieved from http://www.k12.wa.us/DataAdmin/pubdocs/GradDropout/11-12/GradandDropOutStats2011-12.pdf.
Sandhu, D.S. & Madathil, J. (2008). South Asian Americans. In Garrett McAuliffe & Associates (Ed.), Culturally alert counseling:A
comprehensive introduction (pp. 353-388). Los Angeles: Sage Publications.
Sue, D. W., & Sue, D. (2013). Counseling the culturally diverse: Theory and practice (6th ed.). New York: John Wiley and Sons.
U.S. Census Bureau (2014). American Community Survey 2008-2012: Race. Retrieved February 8, 2014, from
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_12_5YR_B02001&prodType=table.
Yamashiro, G., & Matsuoka, J. K. (1997). Help-Seeking among Asian and Pacific Americans: A multiperspective analysis. Social Work,
42(2), 176-186.
Panel


similar documents