Asian American Educators and Microaggressions: More Than Just Work(ers) 3031234588, 9783031234583

Table of contents :
Preface
Acknowledgments
Contents
About the Author
List of Tables
Chapter 1: China Virus: Asian Americans in the Crosshairs
Research
Importance of Research
Theoretical and Construct Foundations
Model Minority Myth
Microaggressions
Method of Research
Key Terms
Summary
References
Chapter 2: Microaggressions: American Snakemen
References
Chapter 3: Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype: Third Class Americans
Chinese Exclusion Act
Yellow Peril
Japanese Internment
Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype
Treated as an Outsider
References
Chapter 4: Model Minority Myth: Voice of Asian American Academics
Model Minority Myth
Negative Effects of the Model Minority Myth
Effects of the Model Minority Myth in Business, Technology Industry, and Academics
Critique of Hidden in Plain Sight: Asian American Leaders in Silicon Valley
Effects of the Model Minority Myth in Academia
I Am Not the Model Minority
Racial Stereotypes
Not a Social Problem
Summary
References
Chapter 5: Motivation: More than Just Work(ers)
The Perceived Career Paths of AA Faculty Members
Perceived Potential for Individual and Community Growth/Change
Accomplished Goals About which AAs Can Be Satisfied
Token Minority
A Good Relationship with Management
Summary
References
Chapter 6: Conclusion: The Emergence of New Tokenism
Findings
How do microaggressions impact AA faculty careers?
Model Minority Tokenism
Recommendations
Future Research
Conclusion
References
Appendix
Index

Citation preview

Asian American Educators and Microaggressions More Than Just Work(ers) Andrew Wu

Asian American Educators and Microaggressions

Andrew Wu

Asian American Educators and Microaggressions More Than Just Work(ers)

Andrew Wu Irvine, CA, USA

ISBN 978-3-031-23458-3    ISBN 978-3-031-23459-0 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Cover illustration: © Alex Linch shutterstock.com This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG. The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

To My Family- RKW, AKW and BW whose support helped make this book possible

Preface

I recently had a conversation with a colleague who expressed surprise that Asian Americans (AA) faced discrimination. His experience with AAs while at a large state university was one that AAs were highly successful and did not face racism or unequal treatment. This perception of AAs as the model minority did not surprise me as long-standing stereotypes of AAs continue to be perpetuated in US society. Diversity and racial equity in corporations and institutions of higher education have grown in importance during recent years, especially as contemporary research has been conducted on the experiences of AA faculty members (Davis & Huang, 2013; Gee, Peck, & Wong, 2015). However, the higher education research has excluded AAs, with little complex analysis on AAs’ experiences as student or faculty (Museus, 2009). Most news regarding higher education and AAs usually is relegated to AAs as high achieving students and/or the debate on affirmative action in college admissions. The purpose of this book is to share an interview-based qualitative study that gives a voice to AA faculty members at Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs). I utilized a basic interpretive design to examine individual experiences that shaped the perceptions of AA faculty members at their respective institutions. Utilizing the theoretical frameworks of the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and the construct of microaggressions, nine AA faculty members participated in interviews in which they described their career experiences at PWIs. AA faculty members stated that they were able to individually transcend microaggressions by drawing from life experiences, taking strategic action, and vii

viii 

PREFACE

experiencing the gradual increase of AA faculty members and their academic program representation at PWIs. The basic interpretive design methodology that I utilized resulted in findings that connected and strengthened the theoretical frameworks of the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype as mentioned, with the affects of microaggressions on AA faculty members for this study. The data collected on AA faculty members’ experiences at their institutions reveal the affects of the Model Minority Myth, perpetuating the narrative of monolithic AA success in academia and careers, yet not in the mold of leadership qualities (Yamagata-Noji & Gee, 2012). Also the perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, as the xenophobic racism that minority groups in the United States are considered non or less American (Armenta et al., 2013). And finally, microaggressions are subtle discrimination against minorities (Sue, 2010) that affect AAs’ career experiences. Implications for future research will help higher education administrative leadership and stakeholders better support career experiences and opportunities for AA faculty members. AAs have recently come under attacks, both verbal and physical, stemming from anti-Asian racism and microaggressions from the COVID-19 pandemic. The tragic legacy of anti-Asian racist historical blemishes and injustice such as the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the internment of Americans of Japanese ancestry resurface in modern form, from the physical assaults of AAs in cities across the country to verbal assaults from the president of the United States. I hope that the testimonies, research, and analysis in this book can help shed light on the racial microaggression and discrimination faced by AA faculty and help institutional decision makers, administrators, and faculty better understand the subtle and overt marginalization faced by AAs. And with this better understanding, strategic planning and actions to mitigate and ultimately eliminate structural and institutional racism. This is the vision of this book and the hope for future AA generations.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank my faculty mentors, Dr. Susan Swayze, Dr. Rick Jakeman, and Dr. David Surratt, for their wisdom, guidance, and scholarship. To my professors throughout my undergraduate to graduate programs that introduced and instilled the salience of diversity, especially in higher education, I gratefully acknowledge. There are many scholars that have contributed vital and important work, authoring what is considered the gold standard of racial microaggressions. Without their scholarship this book could not have been possible. I can never recognize all by name, and thus humbly acknowledge collectively. A special gratitude and acknowledgement to Dr. Chester Pierce, the scholar who is the foundation of scholarship on racial microaggressions. I’d also like to recognize the AA individuals and organizations that have stood up and fought AA hate and discrimination, challenged media and society to recognize and bring equity to AA populations. I hope this book will offer insight to the general public, students, and administrators on how microaggressions have historically impacted AAs and the specifically impacted AA faculty in higher education institutions. Finally, I would like to thank the AA faculty who spoke up and participated in this study, it has been an honor to listen to their career stories and to experience their bravery in sharing their workplace discrimination and microaggressions. Without their testimony this book would not have been possible. Their contributions on facing racial injustices at the workplace

ix

x 

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

were not without personal and professional risk. Not only did they share with transparency on their own journeys, but also encourage me to continue to go strong in the field of AA rights as a doctoral student and as a graduate. I am eternally grateful and inspired for their support and encouragement, one of the driving reasons to do this work and continue to contribute to the field.

Contents

1 China Virus: Asian Americans in the Crosshairs  1 2 Microaggressions: American Snakemen 27 3 Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype: Third Class Americans 41 4 Model Minority Myth: Voice of Asian American Academics 61 5 Motivation: More than Just Work(ers) 89 6 Conclusion: The Emergence of New Tokenism111 Appendix135 Index137

xi

About the Author

Andrew  Wu received his BA and MA degrees from California State University at Long Beach’s Department of Asian and Asian American Studies, Doctorate in Higher Education Administration from the George Washington University’s Graduate School of Education and Human Development. He has served leadership and faculty roles at a wide range of higher education institutions in the last two decades.

xiii

List of Tables

Table 1.1 Participant Profile Table 2.1 Themes Developed as a Result of Microaggression Research

4 34

xv

CHAPTER 1

China Virus: Asian Americans in the Crosshairs

“Wuhan. Wuhan was catching on, coronavirus, kung flu, I could give you many, many names. Some people call it the Chinese flu, the China flu, they call it the China.” —Donald Trump, June 2020.

I recall having feelings of concern and dread upon hearing news reports about the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19), towards the end of 2019 and the beginning of 2020. At that time there appeared to be little effect on life in the United States (U.S.) and with my experience of living in Asia during the Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) in the early 2000s, the feeling of concern was health based. The feeling of dread was evoked based on the long-standing historical racism and discrimination faced by Asians and Asian Americans (AA) in the U.S. Far too often AAs are racially stereotyped and considered as foreign, non-American. The experience of living in the environment of SARs in Asia, would be quite different than the effects of a virus that appears to emerge from China and its potential crash course with the current American governmental rhetoric of racism, xenophobia, and climate of dog whistle politics from the President of the U.S. Looking back to early 2020, I was prepared for some level of anti-Asian sentiment but did not anticipate the extreme level such bigotry reached at the end of 2020.

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0_1

1

2 

A. WU

In fact, Asian Americans have reported increased racial tension and racist microaggressions that result in verbal attacks being targets of racially motivated hate crimes that include physical violence and harassment— despite the disease impacting people of all races/ethnicities (Gover, Harper, & Langton, 2020). In March 2020, racist language was captured by a photographer on President Donald Trump’s notes for a speech at the White House. Trump had crossed out the words “Corona Virus” and replaced it with “China Virus”, a racialized phrase commonly used by Trump, along with “kung flu” (Moynihan & Porumbescu, 2020). In addition, on the same day Senator John Cornyn, R-Texas., told reporters that “China is to blame” because the Chinese culture is “where people eat bats and snakes and dog and things like that” (Smith, 2020). Blaming ethnic groups can have dangerous impacts, especially since hate incidents towards Asians Americans have increased in the past several months. New York State Assembly member Yuh-Line Niou, a witness the virus’ toll, stated that Trump is “fueling the flames of racism with all of his comments” and to continue calling COVID-19 the ‘Chinese virus,’ is to basically be racist. It’s fueling the xenophobia we’re seeing all over our districts” (Yam, 2020). President and executive director of Asian Americans Advancing Justice, John C.  Yang, commented to NBC, that Trump’s choice of words is not innocuous and is dangerous, “I absolutely think that words used by him matter,“ he said. “Certainly use of this term by him and others even in the last couple of weeks have led to a noticeable incline in hate incidents that we are seeing. I do think that there is a correlation” (Yam, 2020). As of June 2020, hate incidents experienced by Asian Americans on public transit, in the supermarket, walking on the sidewalk, at one’s workplace and business, are examples of more than 1800 reports of pandemic-fueled harassment or violence in 45 states received by Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council (Kambhampaty, 2020). Asian American educators have called from support for Asian American communities due to the increasing concerns from the COVID pandemic (CFA, 2020). and a better understanding of the long history of anti-Asian violence. The California Faculty Association (CFA) asked their colleagues at the California State University system to take note of: • People of all geographical areas and cultural backgrounds can be vulnerable to COVID-19. Avoid terms like “Wuhan virus” or “Chinese virus” that perpetuate racist rhetoric and inaccurate information.

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

3

• While the model minority myth has perpetuated notions that Asians and Asian Americans are “honorary whites” or “white adjacent,” proliferation of recent xenophobia again demonstrates how racial wedges serve to silence the embedded nature of orientalism and racism. • Understand the very real impacts of “Yellow Peril” rhetoric on Asian American communities. Here are just a few examples: bullying, harassment, loss of patronage and income to Chinatown and Asian-­ owned establishments (many of which employ some of the most vulnerable communities). (CFA, 2020) Asian American have been subjected to the violence, harassment, and discrimination created by COVID pandemic. Long standing historical anti-Asian racism and microaggressions has been given a new lease on life, impacting not just the daily lives of Asian Americans families, professionals, but also educators. Despite the paucity of research and scholarship on anti-Asian racist microaggressions, there has been a rising movement of Asian American organizations, such as the CFA and the Asian Americans Advancing Justice taking a stand and creating a public platform to address these current and historical injustices. This book explores the effects of microaggressions stemming from the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype on the career experiences of Asian American (AA) faculty members who are currently working at predominantly White institutions (PWIs) of higher education. Diversity and racial equity in academic environments have grown in importance over the recent years (Loes et  al., 2012; Park & Denson, 2013) because contemporary research has been conducted regarding the experiences of AA students and faculty members (Teranishi et al., 2009; CARE, 2011). However, the limited higher education research has focused primarily on AA students (CARE, 2008; Museus, 2009), with minimal scholarship on the career experiences of AA faculty members (Teranishi, 2010). Moreover, a specific study of microaggressions experienced by AA faculty members and their effects on career experiences in higher education institutions has not been conducted prior to this one. My research provided analysis of the perceptions and day-to-day experiences of a group of AA faculty members at higher education institutions. In addition, this study utilized the theoretical frameworks of the Model Minority Myth and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, as well as the construct of microaggressions, to determine how, in combination, they effect

4 

A. WU

the career experiences of AA faculty members. Current literature on the construct of microaggressions points to the intersectionality of racial, social, and economic constructs that have created a cultural dynamic of inequity and discrimination (Solorzano et  al., 2000; Sue, 2010; Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007a; Sue, Capodilupo, et al., 2007b). Such frameworks serve as interpretive lenses for the career experiences of AA faculty members at higher education institutions. The participant group consisted of nine AA faculty members with experience at PWIs who volunteered to participate in this study (see Table 1.1). All participants met the selection criteria of identifying as AAs and having current or prior experience working as faculty members at PWIs. Participants were all located in the West Coast of the U.S.  Their racial backgrounds can be described as follows: eight identified as “Asian-­ American” and one self-described as “Mixed Identity AA.” Demographic information summarizing the participants’ academic experience working in higher education and ethnicity: To better understand the effects on microaggressions on AA faculty members, I examined the historical context of racial discrimination faced by AAs, comparable experiences of AAs in the technology industry, the growth of the AA student and faculty member population, and AA faculty members’ career experiences that have affected their daily work and advancement opportunities. Microaggressions continue to have a substantial impact on AA experiences (Sue, Capodilupo, et  al., 2007b). Microaggressions are defined as “subtle insults directed toward people of color, often automatically or unconsciously” (Solorzano et  al., 2000, p. 60). Microaggressions, stemming from the racial discrimination of the Table 1.1  Participant Profile Participant Chris Nick Ian Sean Nicole Ben Sam Jim Denise

Years of Experience as Faculty 10 12 21 22 7 25 50 36 16

AA Ethnicity/Gender East Asian/male Southeast Asian/male East Asian/male Multi-ethnic/female Southeast Asian/female East Asian/male East Asian/male East Asian/male East Asian/female

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

5

Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, have had damaging effects on the careers of AAs in both the technology industry and academic institutions. Common microaggressions faced by AAs include comments such as: • You speak good English. • Can you help with this math/science problem? • Why are you so quiet? We want to know what you think. • Be more verbal. • Speak up more (Sue, 2010). Microaggressions, which are based on racism, are particularly pervasive in the media and educational process (Sue, 2010). Sue (2010) defined racism “as any attitude, action, institutional structure, or social policy that subordinates persons or groups because of their color” (p. 7). Overt racism is usually not socially condoned, nor is it common in public discourse; rather, microaggressions of a racial nature reflect a more innocuous form of racism (Solorzano et al., 2000) that AA populations experience. Chester Pierce’s (1974) commentary on mass media and microaggression was particularly applicable to modern day media. On October 2016, Fox News aired “Watters’ World,” a recurring segment on “The O’Reilly Factor,” which consisted of Jesse Watters, correspondent, conducting a series of mocking interviews of AA residents of New York City’s Chinatown that was criticized for its stereotypical portrayal of AAs and displays of overt racism (Stack, 2016). This contemporary media example of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and overt racism was demonstrated during a 5-minute video edited with clips referring to Asian cultural stereotypes such as martial arts and scenes of the correspondent getting a foot massage and playing with nunchucks. In addition, the host deliberately asked questions to local residents who appeared not to have a strong English language proficiency, ridiculing them when they did not understand or could not provide answers (Watters’ World, 2016). The video included edited clips from well-known movies including The Karate Kid and Chinatown as a reinforcement of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype theme. Among the segment’s critics were New York Mayor Bill de Blasio, who stated, “The vile, racist behavior of Fox’s Jesse Watters in Chinatown has no place in our city” (de Blasio, 2016, para. 1). Other critics included New York Councilman Peter Koo, stating that passing off this blatantly racist television segment as gentle fun not only validates racist stereotypes,

6 

A. WU

it encourages them. The entire segment smacks of willful ignorance by buying into Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype (Stack, 2016). This portrayal of microaggressions and racism mirrors Pierce’s (1974) statement that mass media portrayed minorities in ways that continue to teach White supremacy. The New York Times, U.S. News and World Report, and Los Angeles Times have all portrayed AAs in alignment with the success myth (Chun, 1980), in particular in regard to educational attainment, and at the same time by White superiority as the privileged foreigner whose status is dependent on his ability to be accepted by White natives (Chin & Chan, 1972). Institutional and historical conditions directly apply to the structural issues faced by AA faculty members and extend into the core foundation of the AA social framework in the U.S. Asian Americans have been racially triangulated vis-à-vis Whites and Blacks through two interrelated processes of relative valorization (Whites valorizing Asian Americans relative to Blacks) and the process of civic ostracism (Whites constructing Asian Americans as foreign and Other; Ng, Lee, & Pak, 2010). AAs have been placed in a separate third class of racial group, apart from the White majority and Black minority, a third outlying foreign group. In part this triangulation represented the foundation of the denial of racial reality and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, because AAs are considered neither the majority or severely oppressed, and anecdotal evidence of AA professional or academic success is unfairly cast on all AA groups. The denial of racial reality was exacerbated by AAs being labeled with the Model Minority Stereotype, perceived as singularly focused on hard work and lacking motivation to higher education leadership roles. Some researchers, such as Ng et al. (2007), argue that AA groups are not in the top achieving echelon, despite the model minority stereotype. The Model Minority Myth portrays AAs as lacking the right leadership style due to being quiet or passive, perpetrating an image of foreignness, continuously marginalized, and not being embraced by the majority at the highest levels of higher education. In the technology field, Gee et al.’s (2015) article continued the Model Minority Myth discussion by identifying three major Asian leadership gaps in awareness and expectations, role models, and behavior. Their research found that technology organizations showed disparity in placement of AA in leadership roles, “Asians were found to be 27.2% of the professional workforce, but only 13.9% of executives in the professional workforce at Google, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, LinkedIn, and Yahoo” (Gee et al., 2015,

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

7

p. 3). Gee et al. suggested issues of cultural deference to authority. This deference often implies weakness, ineffective communication and influencing skills, political naiveté/dexterity (i.e., a lack of understanding how organizational business decisions are made), and aversion to risk-taking in business and career, all of which ultimately hinder AAs’ access to executive roles. These themes were examined in further detail in this study. Stemming from the Model Minority Stereotype, a key barrier to AAs obtaining executive level positions is the inaccurate perception that Asian Americans lack the right leadership style because AAs are considered to be reticent or deferent to authority, thus lacking leadership potential. These challenges are evident in industries where AAs play substantial role. For example, self-reporting by social media companies shows that Asian employees are almost on par with White employees in professional non-­ executive areas at Facebook (Williams, 2014). Gee et al. (2015) provide quantitative metrics and attempt to elucidate the factors that have led to the underrepresentation of Asian American leadership diversity in Silicon Valley. Higher education institutions in the U.S. have experienced substantial increases in AA college enrollment; between 1979 to 2009, there was a fivefold increase from 235,000 to 1.3 million of AA students (CARE, 2011). Asian Americans are currently the fastest growing college-going population across a wide range of institutions in the U.S. (Chang et al., 2007). Between 1990 and 2000, “AA enrollment rates increased by 73.3 percent in public two-year colleges, 42.2 percent in public four year colleges, and 53.4 percent in private four year colleges” (CARE, 2008, p. 13). The changes in population growth of AA students enrolled at institutions of higher education demonstrate the importance of increased equity required in relation to AA faculty member representation. AA college students also face similar racial inequities related to the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype (Lee & Kumashiro, 2005), such as being told “go back to where [they] came from” and being looked at strangely when they receive grades. Existing stereotypes include, “the smart and hard-working Asian, the lazy and incapable Pacific Islander, the illiterate refugee draining the community’s resources, the gangster, the quiet and mysterious Other, and so forth” (Lee & Kumashiro, 2005, p. 19). In addition, with the recent increase of Chinese students (Allen-­ Ebrahimian, 2015) and the increased financial impact of such enrollments (Bothwell, 2018), the potential for Asian and AA discrimination or racism may persist. AAs are often assigned to a monolith group, which includes

8 

A. WU

Asians in general; the stereotypes and discrimination transcend both groups, ultimately effecting AAs. As a result, references to Asia or Asians in this study directly apply to AA groups as an underserved, marginalized population of Americans with Asian heritage. On the surface it would appear that AA faculty members have good representation in comparison with other faculty of color at college and universities. Indeed, “as of 2005 there were 42,858 AA faculty, representing 7.2% total” (Teranishi, 2010, p.  136). However, large disparities in promotion and tenure have been discovered in recent studies including: White faculty being twice as likely to be promoted as Asian faculty to the rank of associate or full professor. Similar to other faculty of color, AAs had a lower proportion of faculty with tenure (36.3%) compared to Whites (45.9%). However, there was a larger portion of AA faculty on the tenure track, but not tenured (25.4%) compared to other racial groups. (Teranishi, 2010, p. 137). The dearth in AA higher education leadership roles reveals an even lower representation at college and universities. In 2005, “only 2.8% of AAs were professional executive, administrative, and managerial staff “(Teranishi, 2010, p. 141). Positions of leadership held by AAs at colleges and universities was even lower, consisting of “only 1% of college presidents” (Teranishi, 2010, p. 141). Without executive level AA administrators and experienced tenured AA faculty giving voice and authority to address systemic institutional issues, overt and subtle forms of racism continue to target AA faculty members and students. Although there has been little scholarship on the effects of microaggressions on AA faculty members, “AAs are simply left out of the reporting of data” (Teranishi et  al., 2009, p.  64), a comparison of higher education and technology industries has illuminated the disparities and inequalities of leadership roles. This lack of leadership roles, in turn, has demonstrated that AAs face threats related to common stereotypes, such as the Model Minority Myth, the stereotype that virtually all AAs are well-­ educated, affluent, and self-sufficient (Lu & Coloretti, 2015), but at the same time reinforces the stereotype that AA lack leadership qualities (Sue, 2010). The U.S. Department of Labor (2015) recently reported that, in reality, the AA community is not a monolithic group and each subgroup faces specific challenges. In addition, the U.S.  Census Bureau reported that AA racial categories consist of 48 different ethnic groups spanning a full range of socioeconomic positions, from poor and underprivileged to affluent and highly skilled (CARE, 2011). Contrary to the Model Minority

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

9

Myth, one out of three AAs does not speak English fluently and certain subgroups, such as the Hmong and Pacific Islanders, have low levels of educational attainment and high levels of unemployment (Lu & Coloretti, 2015). A recent study reported that 80% of East and South Asians enrolled in college earned a bachelor’s degree, whereas other AA subgroups, such as Southeast Asians, reported 30–40% having attended college but not earned a degree (CARE, 2011). Although the U.S. Department of Labor report (2015) represented an important step in bringing forward AAs’ socioeconomic issues, it did not provide representation of microaggression events that effect AAs in higher socioeconomic groups such as higher education faculty members. In part, the stereotype that AAs are well-educated, affluent and self-sufficient is reinforced, thus requiring a closer examination of the connection between the lack of AAs in leadership roles in the technology field and the low percentages of AA faculty members in leadership roles in academia. Recent studies in both the technology and higher education fields have established that there is a disproportionate percentage of AA representation in leadership positions. This research has drawn a connection between the apparent underrepresentation of AAs in leadership roles in academic and business organizations. For example, a study presented in 2014 by the social media giant Facebook, demonstrated the clear separation of AAs in senior management versus AAs in staff roles. At Facebook, in the technology category, Asian non-senior tech employees are represented at 41% in comparison with White non-senior tech employees at 53%. However, at the senior level, Asian employees are represented at 19% whereas White employees are represented at 71% (Williams, 2014). This deficit of AA leadership was mirrored in higher education, as demonstrated by a 2013 report sponsored by The American Council on Education. This report found that 1.5% of college and university presidents were AAs and AAs led all other racial minority groups in the percentage of full-time tenured faculty members at 7%, but held only 2% of chief academic officer positions and 3% of deanships (Davis & Huang, 2013). These metrics presented a salient issue with AA equity in senior positions as a reflection on the existing framework of higher education administrative research. Further research is needed to examine solutions that could correct conditions in the traditional higher education power structure to allow for increased participation of AAs in leadership roles. The lack of AAs in leadership roles has been exacerbated by the current political climate in the U.S.  The resignation of 10 members of the

10 

A. WU

President’s Advisory Commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in objection to the president’s “portrayal of immigrants, refugees, people of color and people of various faiths as untrustworthy, threatening, and a drain on our nation” (Lee, 2017, para. 2) is a salient example. Not only is there a lack of representation of AAs in business and academic leadership, but also AA government administrators have faced racism and microaggressions in the new presidential administration, creating a significant loss in representation. Despite the reputation of AAs’ professional and academic success, this is considered one of the many challenges that emerge when examining the lack of advancement opportunities for AA higher education faculty members. Current data demonstrates both the lack of AAs in executive roles in both academic and business organizations and provides insight into the overall issues related to AA leadership opportunities. In U.S. society, two of the main environments that have high levels of AA involvement, as demonstrated by the Facebook (Williams, 2014) and the Ascend Foundation (Gee et  al., 2015) reports, would be the technology arena, which has a direct connection to the higher education arena. In fact, the high involvement in higher education enabled AAs to establish careers in high technology fields, even to flourish with numbers comparable to the White majority. Yet, the question remains as to why there has been a substantial percentage of AA employment in education and technology, but a clear lack of AAs in leadership positions in these two industries. Two key conditions contribute to microaggression experiences: the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and the Model Minority Myth. Along with institutional/historical racism and discrimination as referenced framework, these factors contributed to the lack of access and equity for AA faculty members in higher education career opportunities and trajectories. Therefore, my research sought to illuminate the applicability of the described theories and constructs in terms of how well they combine to serve as interpretive lenses for the experiences of AA faculty members. More specifically, I investigated the question, how do AA faculty members at higher education institutions describe their professional experiences and perceive career paths in relation with diversity issues? These were the problems and issues that I sought to address in the follow chapters. Microaggressions, Model Minority Myth, Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. The effects of microaggressions, the Model Minority Myth, and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype are all critical issues faced by AA faculty

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

11

members in higher education leadership advancement (Davis & Huang, 2013). The continuing discrimination and prejudice resulting from real life experiences, both professional and personal of the two theories and one construct served as forces that continue the marginalization of AA faculty members. Many AA faculty members face longstanding historical racial obstacles and limitations that have relegated the diverse AA group to third class status. Davis and Huang (2013) stated that “individuals, even those most familiar with higher education in general, fail to recognize that Asian Pacific Islander Americans are underrepresented in senior leadership” (p. 4). This suggests that issues in the career pipelines that AA faculty members face require a heightened awareness by leadership and policymakers at institutions of higher learning (Teranishi, 2010). At the time of writing this book, there was limited research on the individual AA faculty members’ career advancement experiences and the challenges they faced. Microaggressions and discrimination toward not just AA faculty members, but AAs as a whole, are present and continuing issues in the U.S. (Stack, 2016). The current overt presence of microaggressions and discrimination toward AAs as demonstrated in the media is alarming due to historical overt discrimination against this population such as the Chinese Exclusion Act and Japanese Internment during WWII, especially given that these instances are seen as obstacles that the U.S. has overcome. Microaggressions were present even at the highest level of government from then-candidate and current President of the U.S. questioning the origin of an American of Korean descent reinforcing the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype (Guillermo, 2015). Overt acts of discrimination only fostered and supported the use of subvert microaggressions toward AAs. AA faculty members are affected by the consequences of microaggressions in their day-to-day experiences at institutions of higher education. As racial minorities, AA faculty are not treated equally, especially where there is an ideal and practice of education as a meritocracy (S. Lee, 2002). Additional research is required to address these critically important issues. Even when AA faculty have limited success in the realm of higher education, the rules change, perpetuating Euro-American methods of dominance, such as racial exclusion and assimilation. Those in positions of power make the claim that AA faculty members lack qualities such as perfect English or assertiveness (Chan, 1989). This is particularly salient due to the presence of an estimated 1 million AA students and 45,000 AA faculty members in the U.S. as of 2006 (Teranishi, 2010). These

12 

A. WU

substantial totals impact the perceptions of AA faculty and how higher education policy and practice effect their daily experiences.

Research The purpose of the book’s research was to provide insight into the perceptions and day-to-day experiences of AA faculty members, as well as to strengthen the connection among microaggressions, the Model Minority Myth, and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype as obstacles for AA faculty members. I sought to identify factors that created a negative career impact for AA faculty members with respect to leadership roles. Through this study, the applicability of the aforementioned theories and construct is captured, especially as to how well they uniquely and/or in combination represent the experiences of AA faculty members. The overall contribution of this study is to inform and assist leadership at institutions of higher education to improve the workplace experiences of AAs. Consequently, as a result of increased awareness of AA faculty members’ experiences, diversity mission statements at colleges and universities will better support underrepresented faculty and staff. Specifically, the questions established for this book were as follows: 1. How do Asian Americans (AA) faculty members perceive their career experiences in higher education? 2. How does the Model Minority Myth shape AA faculty members’ experiences at Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs)? 3. How does the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype shape AA faculty members’ experiences at PWIs? 4. How do microaggressions, stemming from the MMM and PFS, effect AA faculty members’ careers at PWIs?

Importance of Research The research in this book has provided a scholarly contribution in two areas: (a) research regarding the career experiences and opportunities of AA faculty members at higher education institutions; and (b) contributing to the existing body of literature by applying the construct of microaggressions to the theories of the Model Minority Myth and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. This research has contributed to the significance of

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

13

these elements by connecting the lived experiences of higher education faculty members who identify as AAs and their lived professional experiences in the context of career tenure and promotion. Microaggressions have not only created discriminatory experiences for AAs, but also created challenging obstacles faced by AAs, not just in higher education career leadership opportunities (Teranishi et al., 2009), but also in U.S. society as a whole. In addition, the exploration has provided a multi-perspective approach to the understanding of why there is lack of leadership roles held by AAs working in higher education institutions. Research for this book incorporated unique frameworks and provided new information to other researchers who are interested in ways in which the frameworks of microaggression, the Model Minority Myth, and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype were used to promote further scholarship in this neglected area. These theories were conceptualized into the negative psychological effects AAs suffer as a result of microaggressions in the workplace. The research focus on AA higher education faculty members has provided valuable data that will inform policymakers and leadership in higher education institutions about ways to transcend traditional discriminatory power constructs with respect to AA faculty members’ experiences in leadership roles and advancement opportunities. Although the investigation for this book was qualitative and focused on the individual experiences of each participant, the connection between these experiences and the themes that appeared with greater frequency could inform policymakers in higher education on how to support AAs and the mission of diversity at most colleges and universities. This investigation also sought to identify factors creating a negative career impact for AAs with respect to leadership roles. The potential findings aimed to assist policymakers and executive boards within higher education to help increase recruitment, retention, and leverage the collective experience and skills of highly qualified AA faculty members. Additionally, this research placed an emphasis on applying theories such as the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype to the construct of microaggressions experienced by AA faculty members in higher education. It was important to gain an understanding of racial issues stemming from social constructs and frameworks. Utilizing the aforementioned framework that encompassed three key areas, I gained a better understanding of the discriminatory experiences faced by AAs. The first key area was the racism toward AAs, beginning with the Yellow Peril

14 

A. WU

label, continuing to the Chinese Exclusion Act and the internment of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II; these events form the central foundation of subordination to which AAs have been subjected throughout modern U.S. history. Next, the necessity to challenge and dispel the discriminatory labels of the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype applied to AA groups. The contemporary experiences of AAs and their challenges facing their career path demonstrated the application of new experiential knowledge that has the potential to drive awareness and prompt new scholarship for positive change and increased diversity in AA senior leadership opportunities. Finally, the effects of microaggressions on individual academic and business points of view as described AA professionals and faculty members brought an awareness of this area of discrimination by elucidating their unique experiences. Without recognizing the historical and racial frameworks in relation to the daily perspectives of current AA faculty members, they will continue to face marginalization and discrimination, influencing equity in the current multicultural American experience.

Theoretical and Construct Foundations This book utilized a variety of different lenses through which to view the experiences and effects of microaggressions on the career experiences of AA higher education faculty members. Civil and ethnic rights studies have addressed issues of microaggressions, but placed them in a broader lens that includes economics, history, context, group- and self-interest, and even feelings and the unconscious (Delgado & Stefancic, 2012). There is the notion that virtually all AAs are self-sufficient, well-educated, and upwardly mobile (Ng et al., 2010), and the invisibility of racism and discrimination faced by AA groups (Chou & Feagin, 2015). The theoretical frameworks of the Model Minority Myth, Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, and the construct of microaggressions were used as interpretive lenses for this study due to their combined breadth and varying views on the topic. It is important to establish that, for this study, microaggressions were the main conceptual construct, with the Model Minority Myth and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype being used as theoretical frameworks that manifest in the form of microaggressions. The justification was that such theories are primarily based on the racial experiences of people of color and underrepresented minorities, and they are applicable to the study of

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

15

current AA professionals in the corporate world and among higher education faculty.

Model Minority Myth The theory of the Model Minority Myth—the stereotype that virtually all AAs are self-sufficient, well-educated, and upwardly mobile—was a label placed upon AAs, incorrectly defining a diverse group to be singularly focused on hard work with a tunnel vision approach to higher education achievement. Ng et al. (2007) argued that the Model Minority Myth stereotype presents AAs as not having the right leadership style because they are quiet or passive, evoking ideas of their foreignness. Although AAs have been considered the model minority and are hardworking, something else keeps them from being embraced fully by the majority at the highest levels of higher education; as a result, they continued to be marginalized. The Model Minority Myth stereotype casts AAs as monolithic group whose members achieve universal and unparalleled academic and occupational success (Museus & Vue, 2013). Additional research in these areas utilized a self-assessment model approach to address issues with AA leadership in the technology area of Silicon Valley. Gee et al. (2015) identified three major Asian leadership gaps: a gap in awareness and expectations, role models, and behavior. Then they proposed a self-driven solution to resolve issues of cultural deference to authority. In part that deference often implies weakness, ineffective communication and influencing skills, political naiveté/dexterity (i.e., understanding how organizational business decisions are made), and a reluctance to take risks for business and career. Gee et al.’s (2015) research findings imply that a good faith approach to self-ownership is presented at some level as career improvement for AAs, and that AA professionals should seek out their corporate training organizations. This training develops soft skills, providing the training and tools required to develop the skills and behaviors required for AA executive leadership. However, the question remains whether it either corrects or continues to reinforce the Model Minority Myth. This study sought to explore if the participants utilized a self-ownership approach in addressing the issue of existing microaggressions experienced by AA faculty members.

16 

A. WU

In addition, examination of further bias and stereotyping of AA as merely good workers as detailed by contemporary researchers as they state that many managers expect Asians to be good workers but do not expect them to be potential leaders was conducted. The self-ownership approach has the potential to support the negative stereotype of AA employees lacking management soft skills, thus confining the value of the employee to one that is a good worker and technically proficient, but unsuitable for leadership. The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, which theorizes that some ethnic minorities do not fit the definition of what it means to be American, may manifest itself in subtle, covert marginalizing incidents, such as questioning an individual’s hometown, complimenting his/her command of the English language, or mistaking him/her for a foreigner (Liang, Li, & Kim, 2004). Recent research found an overwhelming propensity to more readily ascribe the American identity to European Americans rather than to ethnic minorities. In the minds of both European Americans and ethnic minorities (Asian Americans and Latino/as), being American is equated with being White (Armenta et al., 2013). As the researchers note, AAs and other minorities such as Latino/ Hispanic Americans consider such subtle experiences of racism offensive and invalidating of their participation in their own country, perpetuating a structural worldview that they are foreigners in their own land. This foreignness is reinforced by the stereotypes of Asian Americans as not having the right leadership style because they are quiet or passive (Hyun, 2005). In addition, as part of this enduring foreignness stereotype, AAs have been labeled as proficient workers, but are perceived as lacking leadership traits due to cultural and ethnic generalizations (Mundy, 2014). The literature suggested that this was a primary example of microaggressions faced by AAs during their career paths.

Microaggressions The construct of microaggression was originally developed by Harvard University professor Chester M. Pierce (1974). More often than not, the dominant race’s issuing of microaggression commentary has little or no effect on the perpetrator. Microaggressions are “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral and environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory or negative racial

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

17

slights and insults that potentially have harmful or unpleasant psychological impact on the target person or group” (Sue et al., 2007, p. 273). The psychological effects of such subtle racism further reinforce institutional issues of dominant racist ideology and create negative stress and psychological trauma on AA individuals. As Sue, Bucceri, et al. noted, AAs and other minorities such as Latino/Hispanic Americans consider such subtle experiences of racism to insult and invalidate their participation in their own country, due to a structural worldview that they are foreigners in their own land. As mentioned in the above research, labeling AAs as proficient workers, but lacking in leadership traits such to cultural and ethnic generalizations, is a primary example of a microaggressions faced by AA professionals during their career paths. The article then pointed out that overt examples of racism in contemporary U.S. culture are rare due to increasing social awareness and the nature of racism has become more insidious, covert, and private. Thus the manifestation of microaggressions is a common form of racism and discrimination by the White institutional power over people of color. Current contributions to the literature on microaggressions have been made by scholarship such as Derald Wing Sue (2010) and Daniel Solorzano et al.’s (2000) research demonstrating the substantial impact of microaggressions on minorities such as AAs. In addition, these authors provide support regarding the foundation of microaggressions by defining racism as a system of ignorance, exploitation, and power used to oppress African Americans, Latinos, Asians, Pacific Americans, American Indians and other people on the basis of ethnicity, culture, mannerism, and color (Solorzano et  al., 2000). The use of microaggression commentary and actions by the dominant systems may elicit little or no effect on the perpetrator. This established the manifestation of microaggressions as a common form of racism and discrimination by the institutional power constructs over people of color. The intersection of the construct and two theoretical frameworks revealed the common aspects of microaggressions, Model Minority Myth, and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. Others’ stereotypical racial perceptions of AA faculty members have affected their career environments. In this study, the data collected from interviews helped draw the connection between the daily experiences of AA faculty members and the respective construct and theories. Evidence of microaggressions faced by AA faculty members manifested in two primary areas: negative stereotypes of AAs as foreigners and positive stereotypes of AAs as a successful minority group (Sue, 2010). As mentioned in interviews, specific examples of being

18 

A. WU

treated as foreign and being labeled as successful in academically and professionally provided a detailed understanding of the effects of microaggressions on AA faculty members.

Method of Research According to Creswell (2013), qualitative research is appropriate when investigating a problem or issue that needs exploration. Therefore, I utilized an interview-based qualitative basic interpretive design was deemed appropriate as the primary source for data collection when researching AA faculty members’ experiences in higher education institutions. The interviews elicited candid, direct responses from AA faculty members in relation to their professional experiences. The individual representations of experiences gained from the interviews was the direct opposite of predetermined data from literature or prior studies, such as those used in quantitative research. According Maxwell (2012), the value in conducting interviewing lies in their ability to give access to others’ observations. Through interviewing, researchers can learn about places they have not been and about settings in which they have not lived. For this book, I implemented a semi-­ structured interview protocol with 13 initial exploratory interview questions to gain an understanding of the AAs’ faculty members job experiences with respect to diversity issues. An additional 11 exploratory questions were presented to establish respondent validation during a second interview. The initial analysis of the interview data consisted of reading the interview transcripts (Maxwell, 2012), which involved listening to the electronic recordings prior to transcription. The researcher took notes and memos based on the recordings, leading to development of tentative themes concerning categories and relationships. Coding was the primary form of categorical analysis used in this study. This process allowed the data collected from the interviews to be organized into broad themes and gradually broken down into more precise and specific themes and issues. Specifically, open coding (also known as initial coding) allowed for the separation the collected interview data into distinct parts, examination,

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

19

and comparison. I utilized the construction of vignettes, stories, and narratives to describe the participants and develop themes to answer the research questions. Afterwards, the collected vignettes were coded into separate data categories (Saldana, 2016), yielding eight themes: perceptions, status, stereotyping, societal labels, student success, career recognition, roles, and management importance. The experiences of diversity issues faced by AA faculty members are of significant research value. Therefore, a basic interpretive method approach was able to clearly identify and reveal their experiences as a part of building new scholarship in this area. Relevant examples included the lived experiences of issues faced by AAs such as career path limitations and the Model Minority Myth. I assumed that there would be high level of participation and competence in terms of the ability to understand, process, and communicate the questions presented in the course of interviews due to the study participants being experienced middle-level faculty members working within higher education institutions. Participating higher education faculty members were assumed to have completed at a minimum a bachelor’s degree and possibly a graduate degree in their respective fields of study. Rapport and connection with the participants were based on their combined education, management, and work experience in developing an interpersonal relationship that would be effective in the process of the interviews. The participants that I interviewed were similar to me in terms of sharing similar career experiences as AAs. In addition, I assumed that the interview questions would be answered with reflection and directness. I also assumed that the condition of anonymity and understanding that the purpose of this study was to generate awareness and equity for the AA community would promote genuine responses emphasizing integrity, ethical reflections, and perspectives. Due to the need to build scholarship and research in this area, I assumed that the participants would willingly share information and experiences that were critical to this study. The population of this study was limited to AA faculty members’ experiences at higher education institutions. Although the study looked at a specific racial group, it did not include any comparisons to any other specific minority or underrepresented groups. In this focused, descriptive study, I only considered data collection about the experiences of those who identify as AA faculty members in PWIs. The research presented in this study had certain limitations that should be brought to light. Naturally, the data collected from the participant

20 

A. WU

interviews came from their own personal professional/life experiences and perspectives. The interviews conducted in this study should not be considered a collective representation of all the roles of all AAs in higher education faculty and cannot be seen as a mirror image of other AA experiences. However, internal generalizability was a potential exception because it related to common findings within the study itself. Issues of external generalizability refer to the findings’ “generalizability beyond that case, setting, or group, to other persons, times, and settings” (Maxwell, 2012, p. 137). As a result, reviewers of this research are advised not to take a generalizable approach to findings to all external AA diversity issues.

Key Terms The following definitions were used in this book: Higher education administrator—“Postsecondary (higher) education administrators oversee student services, academic affairs, and faculty members’ research at colleges and universities. Their job duties vary depending on the area of the college they manage, such as admissions, student life, or the office of the registrar. Postsecondary education administrators work in colleges, universities, community colleges, and technical and trade schools” (U.S.  Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.). “Most work full time. Although a bachelor’s degree may be acceptable for some entry-level positions, a master’s degree or terminal degree is often required. Employers typically prefer to hire candidates who have experience working in the field, especially for occupations such as registrars and academic deans” (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, n.d.). Higher education faculty members—Faculty members or professors, also known as postsecondary teachers, are experts in different subjects and fields. Faculty members’ responsibilities can vary with their positions in higher education institutions such as universities or colleges. In large colleges or universities, faculty members can divide their duties in activities such as teaching, conducting research or experiments, applying for grants for research, or supervising graduate teaching assistants who are teaching classes. Postsecondary teachers who work for 4-year colleges and universities typically need a doctoral degree in their field. Some schools may hire those with a master’s degree or degree candidates for some specialties, such as fine arts, or for some part-time positions (U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2015).

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

21

Microaggression—Microaggressions are “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral and environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory or negative racial slights and insults that potentially have harmful or unpleasant psychological impact on the target person or group” (Sue et  al., 2007, p.  273). “Simply stated, microaggressions are brief, everyday exchanges that send denigrating messages to people of color because they belong to a racial minority group. These exchanges are so pervasive and automatic in daily interactions that they are often dismissed and glossed over as being innocuous” (Sue et al., 2007, p. 273). Model Minority Myth—“The stereotype of Asian Americans as model minorities, especially in education. The image of supposed academic achievement of Asian Americans used as a beacon to highlight the prototypical American success story, a group to be admired and emulated by others” (Ng et al., 2007, p. 95). “At the same time, however, it is used to produce a heightened sense of fear, particularly in schools, that the Asian horde will take over the classrooms to raise test scores, resulting in a new form of White flight” (Ng et al., 2007, p. 95). “These concerns are present all levels of education, from the PK–12 level to higher education. In either case, one thing remains clear; Asian Americans are excluded from the framework of normalcy” (Ng et al., 2007, p. 95). Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype—This stereotype presents the argument that some ethnic minority groups, AAs for example, are considered as other in the majority White society in the U.S. Ethnic minorities, such as AAs, have experienced “discrimination, awareness of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, conflict between ethnic and national identities, sense of belonging to American culture, and demographics” (Huynh et al., 2011, p. 133). In addition, with respect to AAs, “above and beyond perceived discrimination, awareness of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype significantly predicted lower hope and life satisfaction for Asian Americans, and [it is] a marginal predictor of greater depression for Latinos/nas” (Huynh et al., 2011, p. 133). Predominantly White Institution (PWI)—“The term used to describe higher education institutions such as college and universities in which students of White racial background account for 50% or greater of total enrollment. However, the majority of these institutions may also be understood as historically White institutions in recognition of the binarism and exclusion supported by the U.S. prior to 1964” (Brown & Dancy, 2009, p.  2). “It is in a historical context of segregated education that

22 

A. WU

predominantly White colleges and universities are defined and contrasted from other colleges and universities that serve students with different racial, ethnic, and/or cultural backgrounds” (Brown & Dancy, 2009, p. 2).

Summary Ultimately the research conducted for this book demonstrated both the challenges and opportunities for building and continuing research on microaggressions and how it effects the career experience of AA higher education faculty members. I assumed that the complex and nuanced phenomenon of microaggressions would present a set of findings of complex and intersectional racial and social processes, and was confident that these lived experiences could be researched, interpreted, and analyzed. In addition, the research demonstrated that the qualitative research approach utilized in an organized and deliberate manner allowed for delineation of the multifaceted interdisciplinary aspects of the AA faculty members’ career experiences. Therefore, the findings yielded opportunities for further research to strengthen representation of the realities of AA faculty members in higher education. This basic interpretive study was able to gain a deeper understanding of the participants’ lived experiences as a foundation for ongoing scholarship.

References Allen-Ebrahimian, B. (2015). Chinese students in America: 300,000 and counting. Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/16/china-­us-­colleges­education-­chinese-­students-­university Armenta, B. E., Lee, R. M., Pituc, S. T., Jung, K., Park, I. K., Soto, J. A., et al. (2013). Where are you from? A validation of the foreigner objectification scale and the psychological correlates of foreigner objectification among Asian Americans and Latinos. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19, 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031547 Brown, M., & Dancy, T. (2009). Predominantly white institution. In K. Lomotey (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of African American education (pp.  1–5). SAGE Publications. California Faculty Association (CFA). (2020). CFA Calls for Support for Asian and Pacific Islander Communities as COVID-19 Spreads. CFA. Retrieved from https://www.calfac.org/post/cfa-­calls-­support-­asian-­and-­pacific-­islander-­ communities-­covid-­19-­spreads.

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

23

CARE. (2008). Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Facts, not fiction: Setting the record straight. The College Board. New York, NY: Author. CARE. (2011). The Relevance of Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders in the College Completion Agenda. Washington, DC: Author. Chan, S. (1989). Beyond affirmative action: Empowering Asian American faculty. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 21(6), 48–52. Chang, M., Park, J.  J., Lin, M.  H., Poon, O.  A., & Nakanishi, D.  T. (2007). Beyond myths: The growth and diversity of Asian American college freshmen, 1971–2005. Higher Education Research Institute, UCLA. Chin, F., & Chan, J. P. (1972). Racist love. In R. Kostelanetz (Ed.), Seeing through Schuck (pp. 65–79). Ballantine. Chou, R.  S., & Feagin, J.  R. (2015). The myth of the model minority: Asian Americans facing racism. Paradigm Publishers. Chun, K. (1980). The myth of Asian American success and its educational ramifications. IRCD Bulletin, 15, 2–13. Creswell, J. W. (2013). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. SAGE Publications. Davis, G., & Huang, B. (2013). Raising voices, lifting leaders: Empowering Asian Pacific islander American leadership in higher education. American Council on Education. de Blasio, B. [NYCMayor]. (2016, October 5). # NYCMayor. The vile, racist behavior of Fox’s Jesse Watters in Chinatown has no place in our city. @ FoxNews—keep this guy off TV. [Tweet]. Retrieved from https://twitter. com/NYCMayor/status/783830241672331264 Delgado, R., & Stefancic, J. (2012). Critical race theory: An introduction (2nd ed.). NYU Press. Gee, B., Peck, D., & Wong, J. (2015). Hidden in plain sight: Asian American leaders in Silicon Valley. Retrieved from https://www.ascendleadership.org/ resource/resmgr/Research/HiddenInPlainSight_OnePager_.pdf Guillermo, E. (2015). ‘Are You from South Korea?’ Harvard student speaks out about Trump event. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/ news/asian-­a merica/are-­y ou-­s outh-­k orea-­h ar vard-­s tudent-­s peaks­out-­about-­trump-­n447496 Huynh, Q., Devos, T., & Smalarz, L. (2011). Perpetual foreigner in one’s own land: Potential implications for identity and psychological adjustment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30, 133–162. https://doi.org/10.1521/ jscp.2011.30.2.133 Hyun, J. (2005). Breaking the bamboo ceiling: Career strategies for Asians: The essential guide to getting in, moving up, and reaching the top (1st ed.). Collins. Kambhampaty, A. (2020). 'I Will Not Stand Silent.' 10 Asian Americans Reflect on Racism During the Pandemic and the Need for Equality. Time. Retrieved from https://time.com/5858649/racism-­coronavirus/

24 

A. WU

Lee, S. J., & Kumashiro, K. K. (2005). A report on the status of Asian Americans and Pacific islanders in education: Beyond the “model minority” stereotype. National Education Association. Lee, T. (2017). 10 resign from president’s advisory commission on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-­america/10-­resign-­president-­s-­advisory-­commission­asian-­americans-­pacific-­islanders-­n721386. Loes, C., Pascarella, R., & Umbach, P. (2012). Effects of diversity experiences on critical thinking skills: Who benefits? The Journal of Higher Education, 83, 1–25. https://doi.org/10.1353/jhe.2012.0001 Lu, C., & Coloretti, N. (2015). Beyond the model minority myth: Investing in the well-being of the AA community. Retrieved from https://obamawhitehouse. ar chives.gov/blog/2015/09/30/beyond-­m odel-­m inority-­m yth­investing-­well-­being-­AA-­community Maxwell, J. (2012). Qualitative research design: An interactive approach: 41 applied social research methods. SAGE Publications. Moynihan, D., & Porumbescu, G. (2020). Trump’s ‘Chinese virus’ slur makes some people blame Chinese Americans. But others blame Trump. The Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/09/16/tr umps-­c hinese-­v ir us-­s lur-­m akes-­s ome-­p eople-­ blame-­chinese-­americans-­others-­blame-­trump/ Mundy, L. (2014). Cracking the bamboo ceiling. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/11/cracking-­the­bamboo-­ceiling/380800/. Museus, S. (2009). A critical analysis of the exclusion of Asian American from higher education research and discourse. In L.  Zhan (Ed.), Asian American voices: Engaging, empowering, enabling (pp. 59–76). NLN Press. Museus, S. D., & Vue, R. (2013). Socioeconomic status and Asian American and Pacific islander students’ transition to college: A structural equation modeling analysis. The Review of Higher Education, 37(1), 45–76. https://doi. org/10.1353/rhe.2013.0069 Ng, J., Lee, S., & Pak, Y. (2007). Contesting the model minority and perpetual foreigner stereotypes: A critical review of literature on Asian Americans in education. Review of Research in Education, 31, 95–130. https://doi.org/10.310 2/0091732x07300046095 Pierce, C. (1974). Psychiatric problems of the black minority. In S. Arieti (Ed.), American handbook of psychiatry (Vol. 2, pp. 512–523). Basic Books. Saldana, J. (2016). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. SAGE Publications. Smith, A. (2020). Photo of Trump remarks shows 'corona' crossed out and replaced with 'Chinese' virus. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbc-

1  CHINA VIRUS: ASIAN AMERICANS IN THE CROSSHAIRS 

25

news.com/politics/donald-­t rump/photo-­t rump-­r emarks-­s hows-­c orona­crossed-­out-­replaced-­chinese-­virus-­n1164111. Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. The Journal of Negro Education, 69, 60–73. Stack, L. (2016, October 7). Protest Against Fox Correspondent Accused of Racism for Chinatown Interviews. The New York Times. Retrieved from http:// www.nytimes.com/2016/10/07/business/media/fox-­reporter-­accused-­of-­ racism-­for-­chinatown-­interviews-­on-­trump-­clinton-­and-­china.html?_r=0 Sue, D. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. Wiley. Sue, D., Bucceri, J., Lin, A., Nadal, K., & Torino, G. (2007a). Racial microaggressions and the Asian American experience. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 1099-­9809.13.1.72 Sue, D., Capodilupo, C., Torino, G., Bucceri, J., Holder, A., Nadal, K., & Esquilin, M. (2007b). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62, 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003 -­066x.62.4.271 Teranishi, R. (2010). Asians in the ivory tower: Dilemmas of racial inequality in American higher education. Teachers College Press. Teranishi, R., Behringer, L., Grey, E., & Parker, T. (2009). Critical race theory and research on Asian Americans and Pacific islanders in higher education. New Directions for Institutional Research, 142, 57–68. https://doi. org/10.1002/ir.296 U.S.  Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). Occupational outlook handbook: Postsecondary teachers. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/ooh/education-­ training-­and-­library/postsecondary-­teachers.htm U.S.  Bureau of Labor Statistics. (n.d.). Postsecondary education administrators. Retrieved from https://www.bls.gov/ooh/management/postsecondary-­ education-­administrators.htm Watters’ World. (2016). Watters’ World: Chinatown edition [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJmnLzw8NA4. Williams, M. (2014, June). Building a more diverse Facebook. Retrieved from http://newsroom.fb.com/news/2014/06/building-­a -­m ore-­d iverse­facebook/. Yam, K. (2020). Trump doubles down that he's not fueling racism, but experts say he is. NBC News. Retrieved from https://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-­ a m e r i c a / t r u m p -­d o u b l e s -­d o w n -­h e -­s -­n o t -­f u e l i n g -­r a c i s m -­e x p e r t s ­say-­n1163341.

CHAPTER 2

Microaggressions: American Snakemen

“China is to blame because the culture where people eat bats & snakes & dogs & things like that, these viruses are transmitted from the animal to the people and that's why China has been the source of a lot of these viruses like SARS, like MERS, the Swine Flu.” —John Cornyn, March 2020

Shortly after the coronavirus was declared a national emergency in March 2020, Senator John Cornyn, R-Texas, made a statement that was racist, incorrect and xenophobic. In one broad stroke, the senator, in defense of Donald Trump use of the phase “the Chinese virus”, perpetrated Asian racist stereotypes and incorrectly blamed the sources of prior epidemics. The MERS outbreak was first identified in Saudi Arabia in 2012 and the swine flu pandemic started out in 2009  in Mexico and the U.S. (Shepard, 2020). In response, Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., the chair of the Congressional Asian Pacific American Caucus, called Cornyn’s comments disgusting, an attempt to shift attention away from President Trump's truncated response to the coronavirus pandemic (Wu, 2020). Chu also commented: Disparaging an entire ethnic group and culture like this is bigotry, plain and simple. Over the past few days, Trump has repeatedly labeled this pandemic as the ‘Chinese virus,’ and his loyal Republican followers have come to his © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0_2

27

28 

A. WU

defense in increasingly hateful terms. Their words are inciting racism and violence against Asian Americans in the U.S. (Shepard, 2020)

In addition, Cornyn’s comment dog-whistles American taboos against eating certain animals, but without evidence that eating Chinese cuisine leads directly to the spreading of pandemics. Cornyn failed to mention that in his home state of Texas, snake meat snacks were presented in annual state festivals (Wu, 2020). In addition, the senator published a column on his senate website in 2019 titled, “The Texas Snake Man: Jackie Bibby and His Rattlesnake Roundups” (Wu, 2020). The casual and subtle combination of several false accusations of Chinese culture and incorrect attribution of disease origin was racist discrimination of Asians as a group. The COVID-19 pandemic stimulated the rise of anti-Asian racism and micro-aggressions within American society (Solórzano & Huber, 2020). As mentioned in the earlier in this book President Donald Trump called COVID-19 “the Chinese virus” and the “Kung Flu virus” and many Asian Americans across the U.S. have been victims of racial hostility and attacks. The anti-Asian events and expressions evoked, for many Asian Americans, painful and repressed memories of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 and the internment of Japanese Americans during the 1940s (Solórzano & Huber, 2020). Microaggressions are often indicative of environments that place minorities such as AAs at risk of experiencing discrimination. The construct of microaggressions was originally developed by Harvard University professor Chester M.  Pierce. Pierce’s (1974) definition of microaggressions, framed by mass communications, was that virtually all Black-White racial interactions were described as White put-downs that were perpetrated in an automatic, preconscious, or unconscious fashion. Pierce concluded that the accumulation of these disastrous mini interactions had a “pervasive effect on the stability and peace of this world” (Pierce, 1974, p. 13) . Described as a contemporary form of discrimination, the perpetrators of microaggressions potentially do not recognize their role or are unaware of the consequences of their actions. Racist jokes, asking a to speak or represent their race, or expecting a person’s race to result in reduced quality of work performed are subtle but create great psychological distress (Burrow & Hill, 2012). Being denied a job promotion or housing due to race suggest that even with the less overt nature of racial microaggressions, such experiences have negative impacts on the well-­ being and health of the target person or group.

2  MICROAGGRESSIONS: AMERICAN SNAKEMEN 

29

Pierce (1974) described mass media as portraying White superiority in relation to Blacks. Often Blacks as represented in film and television as in non-menial as well as menial roles in films and on television, despite the argument of how marvelous it is that Blacks are now seen regularly, regardless of the presentation of Blacks in media, overall has been key keeping Blacks in a reduced status. For example, Blacks are more often the server than the served, in a commercial the Black person pumps the gas while the White person is the driver of the car, or the Black woman is the cab driver while the White man’s uncivil remarks give her a headache. In addition, Pierce (1974) described mass media as depicting Blacks less often as thinking beings. This is evidenced by a Black person portraying a district attorney who solves a case with his fists in a television program. A White police lieutenant whose position is lower than the district attorney, instead uses his brains to solve the same problem. Another example of Black portrayal as a non-thinker is a public service advertisement concerning White and Black adults and youths’ testimonial of White children getting eyeglasses. This resulted in better school grades and increased ability to concentrate. Then one sees a Black child stating that getting one’s eyes tested is fun. As a result of these inferior representations in the mass media, the Black person is repeatedly seen in such guises as a server and a non-thinking physical creature. Even his or her own health is addressed only because it is shown as fun and immediately gratifying. Ultimately, mass media offers the clear message that Whites control, decide, and plan what is viewed by an audience of millions. The foundation of these offensive maneuvers by Whites stems from the mental attitude of presumed superiority. Thus, Whites feel they can initiate actions, direct unilateral operations, and control Blacks, whom they are told over and over are unthinking, physical creatures dependent and available for entertainment, gratification, and exploitation (Pierce, 1974). Microaggressions are also defined as commonly experienced indignities, either intentional or unintentional; verbal, behavioral, or environmental; that demonstrate forms of hostile, derogatory, negative, slights, and insults to targeted people of groups of various racial, gender, sexual orientation, and religious backgrounds (Sue, 2010). Sue (2010) described examples of the effects on microaggressions as an African American student changing majors, a female worker missing opportunities for promotion, and lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people being punished for coming out.

30 

A. WU

More specifically, racial microaggressions are a representation of the changing nature of the three types of racism: overt individual, institutional, and cultural (Sue, 2010). In addition to the representations of racism described by Pierce (1974), other overt forms of racism include serving Black patrons last, using racial slurs, preventing a White son or daughter from dating or marrying a person of color, or not showing clients of color houses in affluent White neighborhoods. Because there are few repercussions to the dominant race in individual, institutional, and cultural racism, when there are examples of issuing of microaggression action, the continuation microaggressions goes unchecked. The following adapted passage (as cited in Sue, 2010, p. 15), for example, indicates how microaggressions were perceived by Don Locke, an African American man: I am tired of— Watching mediocre White people continue to rise to positions of authority and responsibility. Wondering if the White woman who quickly exited the elevator when I got on was really at her destination. Being told I do not sound Black. Being told by White people that they “don’t see color” when they interact with me. The deadening silence that occurs when the conversation turns to race. Having to explain why I wish to be called “African American.” Wondering if things will get better. Wondering if the taxi driver really did not see me trying to hail a ride. Being told that I should not criticize racially segregated country clubs because I wouldn’t enjoy associating with people who belong to them anyway. Being followed in department stores by the security force and pestered by sales clerks who refuse to allow me to browse because they suspect I am a shoplifter. Never being able to let my racial guard down. Listening to reports about people of color who failed as justification for the absence of other people of color in positions of authority. Being told that “we are just not ready for a Black person in that position.” Having to explain that my sexual fantasies do not center on White women. Feeling racially threatened when approached by a White law enforcement officer. Explaining that not all African Americans are employed to meet some quota.

2  MICROAGGRESSIONS: AMERICAN SNAKEMEN 

31

Being told that I need to openly distance myself from another African American whose words have offended someone. Having people tell me that I have it made and then telling me that I have “sold out” in order to have what I have. Explaining why I am tired. Being tired.

This testimony of multiple examples of microaggressions show the damaging effects of the constant marginalization of minority groups. The common and routine nature of these experiences has harmful effects that diminish the quality of life of those targeted, either intentional or unintentionally. Although Locke’s commentary was reflective of the African American experience, many of the comments are applicable and similar to the AA experience. Despite the increasing racial diversity of the U.S., White Americans continue to have a difficult time distinguishing between Asian American groups and often respond as if no difference exists (Sue, Capodilupo, et al., 2007b). As a result, there are common racial assumptions and beliefs in the White Western worldview regarding nearly all Asian Americans. Two are especially powerful beliefs in the manifestation of racial microaggressions toward Asian American are: (a) negative stereotypes of Asian Americans as foreigners, and (b) positive stereotypes of them as a successful minority group: When the general public thinks about Asian Americans, these are some of the images and stereotypes that come to mind: spies, sneaky, backstabbers, disloyal, slanted eyes, stingy, subhuman, model minority, bright, hardworking, obedient, studious, quiet, good in math and science, wealthy, passive, lack of leadership skills, poor interpersonally, unassertive, men are unmasculine/sexually unattractive, women are domestic, exotic, and sexually pleasing, and poor English skills. (Sue, 2010, p. 152)

For example, AA women, despite being Americans by birth or naturalization, experience common microaggressions; they are expected to be like foreigners, possessing vast knowledge of their ancestors’ cultures, histories, and languages, as well as to be able to cook Asian food, offer culinary or travel advice, and speak on the immigrant experience (Endo, 2015). According to Endo (2015), additional assumptions regarding foreignness of AA women included the expectation that they are cultural experts who could act as cross-cultural brokers or translators. If their

32 

A. WU

perspectives did not match with stereotypical perceptions of AAs as foreign and immigrants, AA women were discredited. All of these images are reflected in racial microaggressive themes directed against Asian Americans: aliens in their own land, ascription of intelligence, denial of racial reality, eroticization of Asian American women, invalidation of interethnic differences, pathologizing of cultural values/communication styles, second-class citizens, and invisibility. Research has hypothesized that AAs are more likely to face microaggression themes of perpetual foreigner, an alien in one’s own land, than other forms of microaggressions. This category of microaggression, microinvalidation, is considered to be the most insidious because it seeks to nullify the experiential reality of racial minorities. Themes of xenophobia or perpetual foreignness are some of the most commonly experienced microaggressions experienced by AAs. Being viewed as a perpetual foreigner was found to be associated with symptoms of depression (Ong et al., 2013). Examples of xenophobia revealed the practice of microaggressions toward AA students. Xenophobic comments such as Asian invasion, Asian flush, too many Asians, too many international students, and go back to Asia were encountered by AA students who were mistaken for international students (Yeo et  al., 2019). These statements revealed an unwelcoming climate for international students and exposed the hostility faced by both AAs and Asians on PWIs. Although Asian Americans may be well represented in the higher echelons of management, evidence suggests that they must possess higher levels of education and training to attain a comparable position to their White colleagues (Sue, 2010). In other words, the super minority syndrome must be achieved to obtain an equal occupational level as White employees. Sue, Bucceri, et  al. (2007a) provided another salient definition of microaggressions. The old-fashioned type of racist hatred that was overt, direct, and often intentional has increasingly morphed into a contemporary form that is subtle, indirect, and often disguised (Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007a, p. 88). Thus, the manifestation of microaggressions as a common form of racism and discrimination by the White institutional power over people of color (Sue, Bucceri, et  al., 2007a, p.  88). The psychological effects of such subtle racism further reinforce institutional issues of dominant racist ideology, creating stress and psychological trauma for the AA individual. As the authors note, AAs and other minorities such as Latino/ Hispanic Americans consider such subtle experiences of racism to insult

2  MICROAGGRESSIONS: AMERICAN SNAKEMEN 

33

and invalidate their participation in their own country due to a structural worldview that they are foreigners in their own land. As mentioned in prior research, labeling AAs as proficient workers but lacking in leadership traits such to cultural and ethnic generalizations is a primary example of a microaggressions faced by AA professions during their career paths. A contemporary definition of racial microaggressions is defined by Solórzano and Huber (2020) as one form of systemic, everyday racism used to keep those at the racial margins in their place. Racial microaggressions are: 1. verbal and nonverbal assaults directed toward People of Color, often carried out in subtle, automatic, or unconscious forms; 2. layered assaults, based on a Person of Color’s race, gender, class, sexuality, language, immigration status, phenotype, accent, or surname; and 3. cumulative assaults that take a psychological and physiological toll on People of Color (Solórzano & Huber, 2020) Solórzano (Solórzano & Huber, 2020) also defined racial microaggressions as “a form of systemic everyday verbal or non-verbal assaults directed toward People of Color. They are also layered assaults, based on a Person of Color’s marginalized identities…. [T]hey are [also] cumulative assaults that take a physiological, psychological, and academic toll on People of Color” (cited in Harmon, 2019). Beyond the macro view of the issues faced by AAs and their representation in senior leadership in higher education, the daily experiences of discrimination are equally important. On the micro level, microaggressions have substantial impact on AAs’ professional experiences. Defined as “subtle insults directed toward people of color, often automatically or unconsciously” as shown in Table 2.1 (Solorzano et al., 2000, p. 60), common microaggressions faced by AAs include “You speak good English,” “Help [me] with a Math or Science problem,” or “Why are you so quiet? We want to know what you think. Be more verbal. Speak up more” (Sue, 2010, p. 34). These microaggressions are further validated by the definition of racism, namely “the belief in the inherent superiority of one race over all others and thereby the right to dominance” (Solorzano et al., 2000, p. 61). In addition, the authors provide another relevant definition of racism, “a system of ignorance, exploitation, and power used to oppress African Americans, Latinos, Asians, Pacific Americans, American Indians and other people on the basis of ethnicity, culture, mannerism, and color” (p. 61).

34 

A. WU

Table 2.1  Themes Developed as a Result of Microaggression Research Article

Definition

Racial microaggressions and Brief and commonplace daily verbal, the Asian American experience behavioral and environmental (Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007a)* indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory or negative racial slights and insults that potentially have harmful or unpleasant psychological impact on the target person or group. Racial microaggressions in Racial microaggressions are brief and everyday life: Implications for commonplace daily verbal, behavioral, clinical practice (Sue, or environmental indignities, whether Capodilupo, et al., 2007b) intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory, or negative racial slights and insults toward people of color Critical race theory, racial Microaggressions are subtle insults microaggressions, and campus (verbal, nonverbal, and/or visual) racial climate: The experiences directed toward people of color, often of African American college automatically or unconsciously. students. (Solorzano et al., 2000) Psychiatric problems of the Almost all black-white racial black minority (Pierce, 1974) interactions are characterized by white put-downs, done in an automatic, preconscious, or unconscious fashion. These mini-disasters accumulate. Contesting the model Contemporary characterizations of minority and perpetual Asian Americans reveal the persistence foreigner stereotypes: A of the foreigner and model minority critical review of literature on stereotypes in mainstream culture and Asian Americans in education more educated, professional (Ng, Lee, & Pak 2010) communities. Where are you from? A Such threats appear to be commonly validation of the foreigner experienced by many ethnic minorities objectification scale and the in the U.S., who may view themselves psychological correlates of to be just as American as their foreigner objectification European American counterparts, but among Asian Americans and also may be aware that they are Latinos (Armenta et al., 2013) viewed as less American than are European Americans

Main Themes Alien in own land Ascription of intelligence Denial of racial reality

Alien in own land Ascription of intelligence Color blindness

Group superiority Racist power Minority marginalization Reduced status Controlled and directed

Non-Americans The model minority

Foreigner objectification Identity denial

(continued)

2  MICROAGGRESSIONS: AMERICAN SNAKEMEN 

35

Table 2.1 (continued) Article

Definition

Main Themes

Perpetual foreigner in one’s own land: Potential implications for identity and psychological adjustment (Huynh, Devos, & Smalarz, 2011)

The assumption that ethnic minorities Identity conflict do not fit the definition of what it Sense of means to be American may manifest belonging itself in subtle, covert marginalizing incidents, such as questioning an individual’s hometown, complimenting his/her command of the English language, or mistaking him/her as a foreigner

In this book, I utilized the construct of microaggressions as part of the conceptual framework to examine the career experiences of AA faculty members at PWIs. The examination of microaggressions was designed to illuminate the experiences of AAs as recipients of racial microaggressions. The literature reveals that racial discrimination and microaggressions faced by AA faculty members is not explored in detail in relation to their conceptual theories. Therefore, it is important to apply the construct of microaggressions, in addition to the theoretical and conceptual frameworks of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and the Model Minority Myth, both of which have effects on the experiences of AA faculty members at PWIs. The research regarding the effects of microaggressions, Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, and the Model Minority Myth on AAs demonstrated a lack of scholarship on specific experiences of discrimination toward AA faculty members in higher education. It appears that the majority of the limited research relates to AAs’ experiences working in the technology sector and basic data on AA representation at higher education institutions, with a focus on percentages of AA faculty members, but lacking information regarding the low percentage of AAs serving as administrators or executive leaders such as deans or college presidents. S. Lee (2002) presented this research disparity, AAs were included in a federal study on job earnings and promotion rates, but held job positions as engineers. In addition, there were few studies on academic career experiences with respect to AAs. This limited scholarship does not provide a comprehensive understanding of experiences of AA faculty members at PWIs in the U.S. Teranishi (2010) addressed the paucity of attention given to AA educators in available research:

36 

A. WU

What we know about AA faculty is severely limited by the dearth of research, coupled with how researchers report on aggregated faculty data. Consider that when AAs are included in many reports, it is difficult to differentiate international scholars with Asian origins from AAs. (p. 139)

Academic research has generally excluded AAs from the broader discourse on equity and social justice, leading to marginalization in regard to federal, state and local level higher education policy considerations (CARE, 2011). This exclusion is due in part to the de-minoritized status of AAs, who are no longer conceptualized as minorities due to stereotypes of success and being routinely ignored in scholarship (Ng et al., 2016). A review of the five most widely read peer-reviewed higher education academic journals revealed that “less than 1% of articles include any explicit focus on AAs” (Museus & Vue, 2013, p. 46). Subsequently, the Model Minority Myth and misleading data analyses reinforcing the stereotype have perpetuated the exclusion of AAs in research (Museus & Vue, 2013). In addition, AA faculty that conducted research on Asian American studies or ethnic or gender-related fields faced marginalization due to the perception that their work was not objective or rigorous (Ng et al., 2016). Given this lack of research, it was necessary to examine and bring increased understanding to the connecting factors influencing AA faculty members’ career experiences from the perspective of societal and historical contexts in the U.S. and to closely examine the daily career experiences of AAs in PWI organizations and consequently draw the connection into themes of microaggressions through the theoretical and conceptual frameworks of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and Model Minority Myth. In addition, addressing the conceptual framework of microaggressions, Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, Model Minority Myth in connection with conditions in the workplace faced by AAs is the first step toward furthering critical scholarship and is essential to analyzing AA faculty members’ career experiences and will be applied to qualitative research methodology for this book. The combination of this construct and these theories will bring insight and build upon AA higher education diversity issues that have not been addressed adequately in the existing literature. Although the experience of AAs in leadership positions and career advancement in higher education is somewhat similar in comparison to AAs in the technology industry, higher education is unique as an environment of academia and should be examined with AA experiences in US society as a whole. As institutions that aspire to higher learning and

2  MICROAGGRESSIONS: AMERICAN SNAKEMEN 

37

education, colleges and universities may in fact have greater accountability in comparison to business institutions due to their organizational culture of equity and diversity as core values. As is evident from the exploration of AAs in organizations, this population is not a monolithic group (Museus & Vue, 2013). The historical discrimination faced by AAs provides a clear roadmap of the challenges and obstacles experienced by this unique and growing minority group of higher education faculty members. As stated in a report by the American Council on Education: Given the projected growth of the Asian Pacific Islander American population within the U.S. (Vincent & Velkoff, 2013), it is imperative that we cultivate the diverse talents and leadership of Asian Pacific Islander Americans to ensure that the American college presidency is reflective of all its constituents. (Davis & Huang, 2013, p. 11)

The purpose of this book was to reveal the connection between microaggressions and AA faculty members’ career progression, as well as to provide further opportunities to AAs by contributing to the limited scholarship on AAs’ higher education leadership experiences. With the rich and extensive history of AAs in the U.S., research on microaggressions provides a reflection of both past and current society. While examining AAs’ experiences, the building of the connections from historical blemishes toward AAs to contemporary issues of career progression, access and equity of opportunities can be achieved. From research foundation of Chester Pierce’s (1974) microaggressions in mass media to current mass media microaggressions against AAs, further examination will generate a better understanding of the effects of discrimination on AAs and the importance of diversity in higher education. The following two chapters, four separate themes emerged from the analysis of interview data as participants provided answers describing their experiences with microaggressions at PWIs: • Treated as an outsider (Perpetually Foreign Stereotype) • I am not the Model Minority (Model Minority) • Racial stereotypes (Model Minority) • Not a social problem (Model Minority)

38 

A. WU

The purpose of the interviews was to provide insight into the perceptions and day-to-day experiences of AA faculty at PWIs. This investigation sought to identify factors that effected the careers of AA faculty members. Consequently, through this book the applicability of the construct of microaggressions and theories such as the Model Minority Myth, Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype will reveal how well they uniquely represented the experiences of AA faculty members.

References Burrow, A. L., & Hill, P. L. (2012). Flying the unfriendly skies?: The role of forgiveness and race in the experience of rcial microaggressions. The Journal of Social Psychology, 152(5), 639–653. https://doi.org/10.1080/0022454 5.2012.686461 CARE. (2011). The Relevance of Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders in the College Completion Agenda. Washington, DC: Author. Davis, G., & Huang, B. (2013). Raising voices, lifting leaders: Empowering Asian Pacific Islander American leadership in higher education. American Council on Education. Endo, R. (2015). How Asian American female teachers experience racial microaggressions from pre-service preparation to their professional careers. The Urban Review, 47, 601–625. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11256-­015-­0326-­9 Museus, S., & Vue, R. (2013). Asian American and Pacific Islander students’ transition to college: A structural equation modeling analysis. The Review of Higher Education, 37, 45–76. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2013.0069 Ong, A. D., Burrow, A. L., Fuller-Rowell, T. E., Ja, N. M., & Sue, D. W. (2013). Racial microaggressions and daily well-being among Asian Americans. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 60(2), 188–199. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031736 Pierce, C. (1974). Psychiatric problems of the black minority. In S. Arieti (Ed.), American Handbook of Psychiatry (Vol. 2, pp. 512–523). Basic Books. Shepard, K. (2020). John Cornyn criticized Chinese for eating snakes. He forgot about the rattlesnake roundups back in Texas. Washington Post. Retrieved from https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/03/19/coronavirus-­ china-­cornyn-­blame/ Solórzano, D., & Huber, L. (2020). Racial Microaggressions: Using Critical Race Theory to Respond to Everyday Racism. Teachers College Press. Solorzano, D., Ceja, M., & Yosso, T. (2000). Critical race theory, racial microaggressions, and campus racial climate: The experiences of African American college students. The Journal of Negro Education, 69, 60–73. Sue, D. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. Wiley.

2  MICROAGGRESSIONS: AMERICAN SNAKEMEN 

39

Sue, D., Bucceri, J., Lin, A., Nadal, K., & Torino, G. (2007a). Racial microaggressions and the Asian American experience. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 1099-­9809.13.1.72 Sue, D., Capodilupo, C., Torino, G., Bucceri, J., Holder, A., Nadal, K., & Esquilin, M. (2007b). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62, 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-­ 066x.62.4.271 Teranishi, R. (2010). Asians in the ivory tower: Dilemmas of racial inequality in American higher education. Teachers College Press. Wu, N. (2020). GOP senator says China 'to blame' for coronavirus spread because of 'culture where people eat bats and snakes and dogs’. USA Today. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2020/03/18/coronavirus-­s en-­j ohn-­c ornyn-­s ays-­c hinese-­e ating­bats-­spread-­virus/2869342001/ Yeo, H. T., Mendenhall, R., Harwood, S. A., & Huntt, M. B. (2019). Asian international student and Asian American student: Mistaken identity and racial microaggressions. Journal of International Students, 9(1), 39–65. ­https://doi. org/10.32674/jis.v9i1.278.

CHAPTER 3

Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype: Third Class Americans

“You know what I want to think of myself? As a human being. Because, I mean I don’t want to be like ‘As Confucius say,’ but under the sky, under the heavens there is but one family. It just so happens man that people are different.” —Bruce Lee, December 1971

5 years after nearly a century of racist anti-Chinese legislation in the U.S. was repealed, Bruce Lee, Asian American martial artist and actor, was presented the question if he still thought of himself as Chinese or North American. Like many Asian Americans at that time, Lee experienced discrimination, navigating racist stereotypes of being perpetually foreign and the model minority. It was Lee’s answer, as part of the interview with journalist Pierre Burton, that resonated with me as an Asian American (Franklin & Rothery, 1971). His answer was crafted and strategic, a representation of his understanding the realities of barriers faced in the film industry and U.S. society. Lee wanted to be regarded as a human being, not the racist stereotype that Asians were sub-human, filthy yellow hoards placed by Europe and the North Americas at the end of the nineteenth century (Allred, 2007, p.  78). His answer was representative of the patience, wise articulation, and humor demonstrated throughout an interview that was riddled with unsophisticated, stereotype riddled questions. He was also cognizant to remind Burton that the universal family was not © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0_3

41

42 

A. WU

a Confucian stereotype. It was ironic that Lee, an American by birth, experienced this interview in Hong Kong, the place of his ancestral heritage. Similarly when I was living and working in Asia in the early 2000s, I struck up a conversation with 2 White missionaries at a traffic light. Their first question presented to me was “where did you learn such good English”, to which I responded, “I’m American”. A general history of AAs in the U.S. and higher education provides an overview of this population’s entry into higher education as students and subsequently as faculty members and leadership positions. When examining AAs in administrative roles in higher education, the building of the connections from historical discrimination toward AAs to contemporary issues of faculty members’ career progression access and equity of opportunities in higher education at traditional PWIs. With a focus on AA faculty members in higher education, I explored additional literature about the effects of discrimination issues in higher education and other industries such as the technology field. This literature serves as a salient research foundation that provides further understanding of the effects and importance of diversity on AAs as a whole in U.S. society. Further examination of management theory and factors effecting AA workplace experiences and organizational roles has increased current understanding of faculty members’ career trajectories. In researching this book, the construct of microaggressions (Pierce, 1974), combined with the theories of Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and Model Minority Myth, bridged conditions in the workplace faced by AAs. The Model Minority Myth began to emerge in the mid-1960s in response to African American and Latino protests again discrimination (Chou & Feagin, 2015). The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype refers to the belief that some ethnic minorities in the U.S. are foreigners (Tuan, 1998). This qualitative approach used a combination of these theories as interpretive lenses to view and build upon AA higher diversity theories did not adequately address the concepts in education that will be explored in this book. Throughout the history of the U.S., racism and discrimination toward AAs has been an ongoing social issue (Chou & Choi, 2013). Beginning over 200 years ago, AAs have been denied equal rights, had their rights revoked and were unjustly imprisoned, were treated with harassment and hostility, were physically attacked and murdered, and were relegated to a third class status as American citizens (Ng et al., 2007). Various historical events and conditions offer examples of such racism and discrimination, but three prominent examples of treatment and attitudes have especially shaped the experiences of AAs in the U.S.

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

43

The initial group of AAs that entered the U.S. was from 1840 to 1930 and then a second group entered post 1965 as a result of the 1965 Immigration Act that put a stop to national origin quota discrimination that impacted AA immigration. For the purpose of this book, the term AAs is used to describe Americans of Asian heritage. It should be known that AAs have been described variously as Asian Pacific American, Asian Pacific Islanders, Asian-Pacific Islander Americans, and Asian American Pacific Islanders (Huang, 2012).

Chinese Exclusion Act In 1882 the Congress passed the Chinese Exclusion Act (CEA) and President Chester A. Arthur signed it into law. With regard to race, nation, and law, the CEA was a prominent event because it denied Chinese immigration into the U.S. for over 80 years. This policy to exclude immigrants based on race and nationality was the first time in US American history. The Gold Rush of the 1840s brought Chinese workers, mainly men, to the West Coast of the U.S.  These temporary laborers worked for two-­ thirds less pay than White workers, so industries considered them indispensable and initially encouraged their immigration (Kil, 2012). However, as Chinese laborers continued to arrive, the anti-Chinese sentiment/ movement grew, especially on the West Coast. As birds of passage, “Chinese men were seen as working too hard for less pay than White labor and saving too much and spending too little for the benefit of China over the USA” (Kil, 2012, p. 664). Violence such as lynching and racist discrimination plagued the Chinese worker as the culmination of over 40 years of native resentment toward a growing Chinese immigrant group.

Yellow Peril Given their complex historical positions, attitudes regarding and perceptions of AAs by U.S. society have created negative racial stereotypes. To some extent, the dominant racial discourse gave rise to the ideological placement of Asian-Americans as confined to a liminal and in-between space where they are considered part of a visible Oriental problem and simultaneously model minorities who are rendered as belonging to an invisible race and caricatures of no identities by both classic Western literature and through the lens of dominant media narratives (Zhu, 2013). Descriptions of AAs include: “power-hungry despots”, “helpless

44 

A. WU

heathen”, “comical loyal servant”,… “pudgy de-sexed detective” and “sensuous dragon ladies” bearing an evil scheme. Ma proclaimed that the purpose of this type of representation is to project Asians or Asian-­ Americans either as sign of threat or piece of laughingstock in an attempt to establish and affirmed the “permanent and irreconcilable differences that define the Anglos as superior physically, spiritually, and morally.” (Zhu, 2013, p. 404)

Japanese Internment At the beginning of World War II, Japanese immigrants and Americans of Japanese descent were imprisoned for fear of disloyalty and espionage (Ng et al., 2007). This act has been acknowledged by the U.S. government as a “fundamental injustice” (Parks, 2004). On August 10, 1988, President Ronald Reagan signed Public Law 100- 383, the Civil Liberties Act of 1988 (National Archives Commemorates the 25th Anniversary of the Civil Liberties Act, 2013). The purposes of the act include most of the Congressional commission’s recommendations: acknowledging the fundamental injustice of the internment; apologizing on behalf of the people of the U.S.; providing for a public education fund about the internment; making restitution to individuals of Japanese ancestry; discouraging the occurrence of similar injustices and violations of civil liberties in the future; and suggesting congressional awareness of America’s increasingly complex role in global economics and politics, making more credible and sincere any declaration of concern by the U.S. over violations of human rights committed by other nations (U.S. Code: Title 50, n.d.). In addition, during fiscal years 1991–1993, Congress appropriated US$1.25 billion for reparations of $20,000 each to Japanese American who lost liberty or property because of discriminatory wartime actions by the government and to the Civil Liberties Public Education Fund (Unrau, 1996). A presidential letter accompanied each check and included the words of President Clinton, “Today, on behalf of your fellow Americans, I offer a sincere apology to you for the actions that unfairly denied Japanese Americans and their families fundamental liberties during World War II” (Parks, 2004, p. 588). Federal policies and laws such as the CEA and the Japanese internment, in addition to the social and institutional representation of Asians as the Yellow Peril, serve as the historical foundation of racial discrimination

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

45

faced by AAs. These historical injustices have had a contemporary impact on AAs’ societal experiences. Modern day literature exploring microaggressions, the Model Minority Myth, and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype demonstrate a connection between the historical and current workplace obstacles faced by AAs. Due to current civil rights legislation, such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (National Archives, n.d.), legal protections are provided to AAs in social and workplace environments. These legal protections form a front line against overt racial discrimination toward minority groups such as AAs. Even with the reduction in discrimination and racism, AAs continue to experience inequality in the media and workplace. The clear disparity of AAs in leadership roles is evident in industries such as technology, where AAs hold 18% of managerial positions and 13.9% of executive positions, whereas their White colleagues hold 72.7% of managerial positions and 80.3% of executive roles (Gee et al., 2015). In higher education, AAs hold 1–2% of roles as Dean, Chief Academic Officer, and President positions, whereas their White colleagues hold over 85% of all three positions (Davis & Huang, 2013). A question arises regarding to the factors that contribute to shaping parity issues in AAs’ leadership roles in higher education institutions. Historical injustices have created problems for AAs in the workplace, as have the career experiences of AAs in higher education. Race, class, and access are critical themes within the discussion of AAs’ experiences in academia.

Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype is one of the key concepts that contribute to AA experiences of microaggressions. Policymakers and leaders must recognize the historical roots of the Yellow Peril stereotype, acknowledging the foundation of racism and discrimination faced by early AA immigrants in the nineteenth century, the internment of Americans of Japanese descent at the start of World War II, the civil rights era, and contemporary times (Ng et al., 2007). Considered to be perpetual foreigners, AAs have been framed by this stereotype threat. The cultural stereotype that members of various ethnic minority groups are foreigners is a persistent issue that presents itself as a threat:

46 

A. WU

Such threats appear to be commonly experienced by many ethnic minorities in the U.S., who may view themselves to be just as American as their European American counterparts, but also may be aware that they are viewed as less American than are European Americans. (Armenta et  al., 2013, p. 131)

In recent U.S. history AAs have been subjected to exclusionary treatment. Examples include the CEA, and the internment of Americans of Japanese descent following Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor. The CEA resulted from a culmination of resentment against Chinese immigrants arriving during the 1850s (Tuan, 1998). The first Chinese immigrants: were sojourners to America. They arrived in a state of humiliation as indentured servants, coolie laborers to California to perform the labor of slaves, which were outlawed in this free state. They never intended to settle here. The Whites encouraged them with overt White racism and legislative racism to leave as soon as they could. (Chin & Chan, 1972, p. 70)

Chinese immigrants discovered that, due to racial discrimination, the work available to them was mainly in mining, manufacturing, and labor. They also faced legislation such as unfair taxation, licensing, duties, and fines that was aimed at discouraging permanent settlement. The work that the Asian men were involved in created a stereotype of an aggressive, hypersexual and especially toward white women. Then the stereotype changed to emasculated and celibate as Asian men immigration increased and other forms of domestic labor became job opportunities due to emerging laws that barred Asian men from labor intensive work. The stereotype of Asian women is unique and different as compared to Asian men. Asian women followed in later times, arriving in large numbers, they became exotified as either dangerous “dragon ladies” or delicate “China dolls” (Chou et al., 2016). Chou et al. (2016) also describe that: Although these images seem different, the creation of each emphasized the white man’s virility. These omnipresent controlling images in the media exacerbate the “oriental fetishism” Asian and Asian American women face”. Controlling images affecting both Asian American men and women exist “to define the white man’s virility and the white man’s superiority.”

These racist stereotypes of AA women as dragon ladies or China dolls continue to the present day, perpetuated in media, workplace, and society.

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

47

The placement of Japanese Americans into internment camps during the Second World War contributed to the concept of AAs as “perpetual foreigners” because they were seen as threats to the nation’s safety (Murjani, 2014, p. 83). The anti-Japanese actions took place after Japanese immigration began in the late nineteenth century, becoming prevalent around 1905, as a result of increased immigration and the Japanese victory over Russia during the Russo-Japanese War. The first defeat of a western country by an Asian country caused first-generation Japanese immigrants and the Japanese to be viewed as threats. The Asiatic Exclusion League (AEL), an anti-Japanese organization, was formed and attempted discriminatory actions such as school segregation (National Park Service [NPS], n.d.). A statement from an AEL proceeding demonstrated perpetual foreignness stereotyping: In its racial aspects Asiatic immigration differs radically from European immigration. In respect to the admissions of Caucasians it is a question of regulation. In respect to Orientals it must be one of exclusion. The blood of America and Europe can meet, harmonize and flow in the same veins, and produce an integrity of a high physical, mental and moral nature; but an eternal law of nature has decreed that the White cannot assimilate the blood of another color without corrupting the very springs of civilization. This means, then, that the Asiatic would be compelled to live with us, but not one of us. (The Pluralism Project, n.d.)

In addition, there were increasing examples of violent attacks on business and individuals. Anti-Japanese xenophobia arose from economic factors, in combination with envy due to the successes of Japanese immigrant farming. The fears of Asian conquest, the Yellow Peril, were exacerbated with the resulting Japanese victory in the Russo-Japanese War, reinforcing the perception of otherness and Asian inscrutability, consistent with American racial stereotyping of AAs than continued during and after World War II (NPS, n.d.). During World War II, Life magazine reinforced the perspective of foreignness of Chinese and Japanese peoples and drew the connection to Asians living in the U.S.: How To Tell Japs From The Chinese: Chinese public servant, Ong Wen-hao, is representative of Northern Chinese anthropological group with long, fine-boned face and scant beard. Epicanthic fold of skin above eyelid is found in 85% of Chinese. Southern

48 

A. WU

Chinese have round, broad faces, not as massively boned as the Japanese. Except that their skin is darker, this description fits Filipinos who are often mistaken for Japs. Chinese sometimes pass for Europeans; but Japs more often approach Western types. Japanese warrior, General Hideki Tojo, current Premier, is a Samurai, closer to type of humble Jap than highbred relatives of Imperial Household. Typical are his heavy beard, massive cheek and jaw bones. Peasant Jap is squat Mongoloid, with flat, blob nose. An often sounder clue is facial expression, shaped by cultural, not anthropological, factors. Chinese wear rational calm of tolerant realists. Japs, like General Tojo, show humorless intensity of ruthless mystics. (Miles, 2012, para. 8)

This example of racist representation of AAs is foundational in the institutional and social establishment of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, “Skin color and facial features are generalized for each race, feeding into the stereotypes that permeated American psyches” (Miles, 2012, para. 7). The blatantly biased and fundamentally racist depictions of Asians by a respected publication such as Life magazine not only documents the propaganda commonly accepted by U.S. society at that time, but also displays AAs extremely negatively, almost as a subhuman species. In the same article, Chinese American reporter Joe Chiang is pictured with the caption, “Chinese Journalist, Joe Chiang, found necessary to advertise his nationality to gain admittance to White House press conference.” He is shown in the photograph in a business suit and tie wearing a handwritten sign, “Chinese Reporter NOT Japanese Please” (Wong, 2005). This is an example of an AA, despite being an American citizen, still being identified as foreign and forced into the good Asian versus bad Asian dichotomy. Studies have shown that AAs that experience the perpetual foreignness stereotype report lower hope or life-satisfaction, even after controlling for perceived discrimination such as microaggressions (Huynh et al., 2011), providing further support for the incremental validity of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. Recent studies have highlighted how the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype is associated with depressive symptoms among Chinese American adolescents. In addition, research has found that boys and girls that experienced being stereotyped as perpetually foreign were more likely to experience discrimination. The Chinese American adolescents in the study that spoke with an accent had more challenges during interactions with more Americanized peers and potentially suffered ridicule, leading to self-consciousness and potentially to depressive mental

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

49

health problems as well (Kim et al., 2011). It should be emphasized that the patterns of association between the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and adjustment are different for AAs and other ethnic minorities. The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype can operate differently for different ethnic groups. For example, American history—with wars in Japan, Korea, and Viet Nam, and fears of the Yellow Peril with regard to Chinese immigrants—is rife with conceptions of Asians (and thus Asian Americans) as foreign and dangerous enemies (Huynh et  al., 2011). These historical racial conceptions are evidenced in the Life article, “How to tell Japs from Chinese” (Miles, 2012). This point is especially relevant to their commentary on how the separate but related Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and Model Minority Myth effect AAs in higher education leadership. Specifically, for example, AAs are highly underrepresented as chief executive officers in higher education. Chan and Wang (1991) and Hune and Chan (1997) pointed out that Asian American faculty members are not identified as potential administrators and are not mentored to take these positions. Stereotypes of Asian Americans as lacking the right leadership style because they are “quiet or passive evoke ideas of their foreignness. Although they are the model minority and are hard-working, something else keeps them from being fully embraced by the majority at the highest levels of higher education; hence, they continue to be marginalized” (Ng et al., 2010, p. 119). The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype can be applied to academia and its impact on AAs. According to Ng et al. (2007) Cultural theorist Said’s (1978) influential work on the theory of Orientalism also provides ample thought for how the Occident has imagined the place of the Orient as a means for dominance and control, including the means of representation as reified into the daily structures of institutions such as education. (p. 98)

In addition, Rizvi and Lingard (2006) stated: Orientalism is best understood as a system of representations, a discourse framed by political forces through which the West sought to understand and control its colonized populations. It is a discourse that both assumes and promotes a fundamental difference between the Western “us” and Oriental “them.” It is a manner of regularized interpreting, writing about and accounting for the Orient, dominated by imperatives, perspectives, and ideological biases politically marshaled to self-justify imperial conquests and

50 

A. WU

exploitation. In this sense, the Orient is an imagined place that is articulated through as an entire system of thought and scholarship. (p. 296)

The status quo has been the West’s position of cultural superiority and reinforced orientalist policies and attitudes. “Orientalism is best understood as a system of representations, a discourse framed by political forces through which the West sought to understand and control its colonized populations” (Ng et al., 2007, p. 98). In this sense, the Orient is the answer to the question, “Where are you from?” As a common question that most people have asked and have been asked upon meeting someone for the first time, the face value of the question seems rather harmless. However, it may pose a threat to one’s personal identity if it calls into question membership in a group to which one belongs (Armenta et al., 2013). The assumption that some ethnic minorities do not fit the definition of what it means to be American may manifest itself in subtle, covert marginalizing incidents, such as questioning an individual’s hometown, complimenting his/her command of the English language, or mistaking him/ her for a foreigner (Liang et al., 2004). These behaviors represent a contemporary form of racism called racial microaggression, whereby racism is disguised in supposedly benign behaviors and comments (e.g., Where are you from?) that convey strong messages of exclusion and inferiority (Sue et  al., 2007). Even when the intent of perpetrators, who can be of any ethnic or racial group, is not malicious or racially motivated, in these seemingly harmless occurrences ethnic minorities, such as AAs, are told that they are somehow less American than European Americans. Wu (2002) describes the questioning of AAs’ origin (i.e., Where are you from? No, where are you really from?) as a typical routine: People whose own American identity is assured are perplexed when they are snubbed in this manner, and my White friends of whom I have asked this question are amused at best and befuddled at worst even if one of their parents is an immigrant or all their grandparents were. They deserved to know why “Where are you really from?” is so upsetting to Asian Americans even if it carries no offensive connotation to them. (Wu, 2002, p. 80)

According to Wu (2002), the commonality that unites AAs is being afflicted by the perpetual foreignness stereotype/syndrome; AAs are both figuratively and literally returned to Asia and ejected from America.

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

51

Additional research has posited that White Americans who question AAs on their nationality and English abilities cause AAs to feel marginalized, leading to feelings of stress (Wong-Padoongpatt et  al., 2017). WongPadoongpatt et  al. (2017) stated that due to the ambiguous nature of Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype microaggression threat, AAs suffer from uncertainty on how to respond due to difficulties in determining racial motivations. By incorporating a variety of Asian stereotypes and applying them to one group of AAs, the segment reinforces the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and denies the diversity of AA groups. There is a wide range of AAs from different ethnic backgrounds and experiences, including socioeconomic status. Museus and Vue (2013) defined AAs as follows: The term “Asian Americans” includes individuals of Bangladeshi, Cambodian, Chinese, Filipino, Hmong, Indian, Indonesian, Japanese, Korean, Lao, Malaysian, Pakistani, Sri Lankan, Taiwanese, Thai, and Vietnamese descent. “Pacific Islanders” encompasses Native Hawaiian, Guamanian/Chamorro, Samoan, Tongan, Fijian, and other Pacific Islander populations. (p. 1)

The 2010 U.S.  Census Bureau reported that AA racial categories included 48 different ethnic groups and more than 300 languages spoken, with a full range of socioeconomic and demographic backgrounds (CARE, 2011). Institutional and societal racism and discrimination is key to understanding the historical racism toward AAs, stemming from the Yellow Peril label, to the Chinese Exclusion Act to the internment of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II, form the central foundation of subordination AAs have been subjected to during the course of modern US history. Next, the necessity to challenge and dispel the dominant ideology of the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype applied to AA groups. The contemporary experiences of AAs and their challenges facing the microaggressions and the impacts of the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, demonstrates the application of new experiential knowledge that has the potential drive awareness and prompt new scholarship for positive change and increased diversity in AA senior leadership opportunities. Finally, the application of transdisciplinary perspective, business, academic- individual points of view by AA professionals

52 

A. WU

and higher education faculty members brings an awareness of this area of discrimination by elucidating individual AAs’ experiences. Without recognizing the institutional and historical foundations of microaggressions, the Model Minority Myth, and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype and the framework it applies to the perspectives of current AA faculty members that face discriminatory environments, there will be continued marginalization and discrimination current multicultural American experience.

Treated as an Outsider Participants interviewed of this book shared that their experiences as AA faculty members included examples where colleagues treated them as outsiders or foreigners. They shared specific experiences where their AA identity was questioned based on factors such as national origin, religious background, or language skills. Participants shared their experiences of being considered as outsiders and foreigners, not as Americans. Some of the participants shared experiences where they were perceived as non-American, especially Nick, who was treated with stereotypical Asian customs and labeled foreign by non-­ AAs colleagues. Nick shared: So, I definitely, I mean I’ve had, when people meet me they bow and certain individuals, usually older and usually mid-White male and I’m thinking to myself like, “Why’re you doing that? But how do you know that that’s appropriate for me?” And I know that they haven’t, didn’t bow to their other, the other people that they met. So, yeah, I felt a little weird about that. So I think I felt like that when I ran into old White professionals and they’re about to retire and they fought in Vietnam or something like that and they’re like, “Hey, you’re an Oriental,” and they just kind of hit me on the arm in a joking manner. So the time when I was running into these goons, or maybe I shouldn’t … When I was running into these ignorant individuals I was younger and I would just laugh it off.

This is an example of the orientalism or exoticism of the sense of foreignness of AAs. As mentioned, the triangulation of AAs, other minorities, and White racial constructs has created separation and disregard for AA representation in higher education and business. “This reality is evident by the fact that even high-achieving Asian American groups such as East

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

53

Asians and South Asians, who may appear to be the model minority, remain either not fully integrated or seen as White” (Ng et  al., 2007, p. 121). Sean, who self-identified as mixed race Asian American, explained the differences in perception of being labeled foreign as a mixed-race person versus as a non-mixed-race person and how it negatively shapes careers: The fullbloods, especially when they have accents, are certainly viewed as foreign. But in our particular environment, we have a few in humanities. There are some in other colleges, so I don’t see how they are affected as much. But in the humanities, there are very few AAs, that, and in the social sciences. And our constitutions are much more African American, much more Hispanic, so just in terms of racial politics, the AAs get pushed to the side a lot as disempowered and less relevant. That’s more the political experience that I think we see in our college. But I’m sure in the sciences, especially, the foreign tag is more destructive to AA faculty members.

Denise reflected not only on her experience as an Asian American, but also as a woman of color, as well as the effect of being treated as an outsider on a combination of levels: And I’m treated as an outsider for a multitude of reasons. But once I start speaking, I am less of an outsider in terms of a foreign person, like an Asian from Asia. But instead, I’m treated as an outsider by other identities or other ways that people are perceiving my identity. And I’m also treated as an outside as a new person, too. So at [institution], being the only woman of color with one level of being treated as an outsider, as being an Asian American with another level, and then being new was another kind of level as being treated as an outsider. I think the context of how you define being treated as an outsider, because for someone like me, I’m always already challenging those stereotypes and perceptions. It’s part of who I am as a person. That one’s hard. So I would say that often comes up in terms of people’s expectations of my cultural knowledge. I think that that’s come up in terms of what people think I should be working on or I can be working on. Sometimes, I assume that because I’m Asian, I should be able to go do Asian things, which I can. But the fact that you expect me, that’s problematic. I would want to be involved in that Asian culture of it. Again, I can, but the expectation or the assumption is what’s problematic. But again, I have a particular way of thinking about that, as that just reveals a little bit more to me about who you are and your knowledge about Asians and Asian Americans.

54 

A. WU

Modern day media tends to depict Asian women as aggressive others: impulsive, capricious, and inscrutable (Hai & Dong, 2019). These images all relate to the continued perception of AAs as perpetually foreign, an illustration of modern day U.S. race relations. The violence and youth imagery depicts AA women characters as “quick, direct, impulsive, and explosive actions and reactions help delineate the caprice of the Asian woman characters’ personality against the social norms that constrain normal white to have rational, thoughtful, and intelligent behaviorism” (Hai & Dong, 2019, p. 89). Jim commented on one of the prevalent microaggressive questions AAs receive, being asked where one is from; the asker is wondering what Asian country the person is from, and not expecting him/her to be from somewhere in the U.S. The assumption of foreignness immediately labeled him as an outsider at a PWI: Yeah, I think where that happens most often is if somebody asks me where in Asia I am from, not assuming that I’m Asian American. The only time I can think of was when … I don’t know how many years ago this was, when a couple of people it dawned on them that I was Asian American as opposed to Asian. That caused some confusion on their part. I automatically react with, “The stereotype just kicked in.”

Contemporary research shows an overwhelming propensity to more readily ascribe the American identity to European Americans rather than to ethnic minorities (Armenta et  al., 2013). Even when AAs are clearly understood as explicitly American, such as the Chinese American reporter in the Life article, implicitly, in the minds of both European Americans and some ethnic minorities (Asian Americans and Latino/as), being American is equated with being White (Armenta et al., 2013). The diversity of AAs is discounted as a result of grouping all AAs into a classification of across the board academic success and then marred by cultural fears of a new Yellow Peril meritocracy times (Ng et al., 2010). Sam shared an experience where he faced the stereotypical assumption that Asians are not considered Christian. This experience of being labeled an outsider is an example of preconceived stereotypes by higher education staff at the instructional level: I went to one of the examiners and he said to me, point-blank, looking at my face, he said, “Well, it’s unfortunate that you chose such a Christian lit-

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

55

erature to study because you not being Christian, couldn’t possibly understand.” I said, “What? What am I if I’m not Christian? I’m Christian, essentially, if my mom made sure to send me to Sunday School, and that’s my background. I went to schools that had religious Christian backgrounds, like [institution] courses. I sang in a choir there. I don’t know anything else. Why me?” He said, “You’re a Christian? Oh, well, okay.” The problem was, he thought I was some kind of foreigner, Asian foreigner. He knew I born and raised … I’m like third generation, for crying out loud. To him, I was still different, apart. I was a foreigner, an alien. He alienated me like that. So he, in the exam, asked me questions … I couldn’t understand where he was coming from about these Christian characters in Christian works of literature. I said, “Holy shit. No wonder, no wonder I’m having trouble. No wonder I had trouble. This guy talked … There was, I was some kind of a cheating Asian … an alien. Then, with a shock, I realized what specific works, for instance, he had asked me about in the oral exam, where he thought honestly that I think so … He thought that I was reading a work by John Milton from a Samurai perspective, and he knew nothing about nothing of that. He just assumed.

This type of covert threat appears to be experienced commonly by many members of ethnic minorities in the U.S.: people who may consider themselves to be just as American as their European American counterparts, but may also be aware that they are viewed as less American than are European Americans. In addition, there remains a persistent cultural stereotype that members of various ethnic minority groups are foreigners and being American is often equated to being White. Some ethnic minorities in the U.S. are typically classified as foreigners and are labeled with the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype (Armenta et  al., 2013). It is well documented in research findings about AAs being mistaken as a foreigner, or lacking leadership skills, or their absence in other management positions (Huang, 2012). Ben gave an example of being perceived not just as an outsider, but also as a person of unequal, second-class status. As a faculty member, being considered an international student and being denied access to information by administrative staff was clearly an effect of microaggressions: Yeah. And I think that again the earlier days when you’re kind of being introduced to a new environment getting to know people, and then you have an older generation of faculty members around and staff too. And I remember one incident where I came in, this was maybe three months after

56 

A. WU

I returned to [institution], and was trying to get, I don’t know, I mean some information or file from administrative assistant. And this was an older woman, and she just assumed, first of all, that I was not a faculty member, and I think she was assuming I was an international student by the way as she was talking to me, and pretty much question why I was asking for these files, and questioned my authority to have them. So yeah, I mean, I played along and wanted to really test to see how far she would take it. But when she denied … As she was denying me access to the file somebody stepped up and said, “Oh no, this is professor [Ben].” And her face turned beet red. But I mean those things happened to me. And I mean I have been invited to talks, and would be sitting in the audience as the stage is getting started, and people would sit next to me and not make assumptions about phones and stuff like that. And I just get, I mean, to me it’s always an interesting social experiment. So I don’t correct them, and just always try to pass to see seat how long and how far they would take it in this situation. This happened to be maybe about 5, 7 years ago.

This reduced status, not just labeled as a foreigner but also patronized as a student when Ben as a professor mirrors Pierce’s experience with microaggressions, “that it was not so much what the white student said, but how he said it—the patronizing tone, the unapologetic stance, the demanding demeanor—all important subtextual context to understanding how the white student attempts to diminish the status of Pierce’s position as a Harvard professor” (Solórzano & Huber, 2020) Nicole shared another example of being an outsider, namely the perception that AAs are foreign and not able to speak the English language. It is possible that international faculty members are not as proficient in English as native speakers, but to ascribe lack of English language skill to all that appear to have Asian heritage places AAs such as Nicole in the position of outsiders. So, the only time this has actually happened to me is graduate school, when I was a teaching assistant. And I remember that one of my student review said that, “Thank God she speaks English because I saw her name on the schedule, and I was like, Oh no. Another FOB [fresh off the boat], and here we go again.” So I’m really glad that at least the department has one native English speaker. No, not here. Not in California. But my very first teaching position was in Vermont, and in Vermont there aren’t very many Asian people at all. And so I think that when students first saw me they would talk very loudly and slowly just in case I didn’t speak English. And my maiden name

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

57

is [redacted] and it’s very unreadable to the native American tongue, and so that will be the only time where my perceived persona was not what it was.

In the media, AAs have been portrayed as perpetually foreign, despite the fact that many have lived in the U.S. for multiple generations. They also speak native English, contrary to the history of television and movies where Asians and AAs have spoken with Asian accents (Hai & Dong, 2019). One of the participants indicated that he did not face perceptions of being an outsider. Chris shared that having work experience at multiple institutions with diversity in colleagues: No, I can honestly say that I’ve never been … Yeah, at [institution 1], at any of these places. [Institution 1], [institution 2] in particular there were other Asian-American people around me, so I never really felt as though any one of us were singled out because of our ethnicity.

Many of the participants described experiences where colleagues treated them as outsiders or foreigners. Their non-AA colleagues made assumptions about their national origins by directly asking about their Asian country of origin. Participants shared examples of times when their proficiency in the English language was questioned. In addition there were incidents where participants were considered foreign due to religious stereotypes and international students. AAs that are perceived as outsiders are subject to the effect of being marginalized and isolated from colleagues, supervisors, and students at PWIs.

References Allred, N. (2007). Asian Americans and affirmative action: From Yellow Peril to model minority and back again. Asian American Law Journal, 14, 57–84. Armenta, B. E., Lee, R. M., Pituc, S. T., Jung, K., Park, I. K., Soto, J. A., Kim, S. Y., & Schwartz, S. J. (2013). Where are you from? A validation of the foreigner objectification scale and the psychological correlates of foreigner objectification among Asian Americans and Latinos. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19, 131–142. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0031547 CARE. (2011). The Relevance of Asian Americans & Pacific Islanders in the College Completion Agenda. Washington, DC: Author. Chan, S., & Wang, L. C. (1991). Racism and the model minority: Asian-Americans in higher education. In P. G. Altbach & K. Lomotey (Eds.), The racial crisis in

58 

A. WU

American higher education (pp. 43–67). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. Chin, F., & Chan, J. P. (1972). Racist love. In R. Kostelanetz (Ed.), Seeing through Schuck (pp. 65–79). Ballantine. Chou, R. S., & Choi, S. (2013). And neither are we saved: Asian Americans’ elusive quest for racial justice. Sociology Compass, 7, 841–853. Chou, R.  S., & Feagin, J.  R. (2015). The myth of the model minority: Asian Americans facing racism. Paradigm Publishers. Chou, R. S., Lee, K., & Ho, S. Y. (2016). Asian Americans on campus: Racialized space and white power. Routledge. Davis, G., & Huang, B. (2013). Raising voices, lifting leaders: Empowering Asian Pacific Islander American leadership in higher education. American Council on Education. Franklin, E. (Producer), & Rothery, M. (Director). (1971). Bruce Lee: The Pierre Berton Show. [Television Broadcast] CHCH-DT. Gee, B., Peck, D., & Wong, J. (2015). Hidden in plain sight: Asian American leaders in Silicon Valley. https://www.ascendleadership.org/resource/resmgr/ Research/HiddenInPlainSight_OnePager_.pdf Hai, Y., & Dong, H. (2019). Asian American woman cinematic image: The exotic beauty and/or perpetual foreigner. China Media Research, 15, 85–92. Huang, B. (2012). Navigating power and politics: Women of color senior leaders in academe. (Doctoral dissertation). https://drum.lib.umd.edu/handle/1903/ 12724 Hune, S., & Chan, K.  S. (1997). Special focus: Asian Pacific American demographic and educational trends. In D. Carter & R. Wilson (Eds.), Minorities in higher education: Fifteenth annual status report (pp. 39–67). American Council on Education. Huynh, Q., Devos, T., & Smalarz, L. (2011). Perpetual foreigner in one’s own land: Potential implications for identity and psychological adjustment. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30, 133–162. https://doi.org/10.1521/ jscp.2011.30.2.133 Kil, S. H. (2012). Fearing yellow, imagining white: Media analysis of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Social Identities, 18, 663–677. https://doi.org/10.108 0/13504630.2012.708995 Kim, S. Y., Wang, Y., Deng, S., Alvarez, R., & Li, J. (2011). Accent, perpetual foreigner stereotype, and perceived discrimination as indirect links between English proficiency and depressive symptoms in Chinese American adolescents. Developmental Psychology, 47, 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0020712 Liang, C. T. H., Li, L. C., & Kim, B. S. K. (2004). The Asian American racismrelated stress inventory: Development, factor analysis, reliability, and validity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 103–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 0022-0167.51.1.103

3  PERPETUAL FOREIGNER STEREOTYPE: THIRD CLASS AMERICANS 

59

Miles, H. (2012). WWII propaganda: The influence of racism. Artifacts. https:// artifactsjournal.missouri.edu/2012/03/wwii-­p ropaganda-­t he-­i nfluence-­ of-­racism/ Murjani, M. (2014). Breaking apart the model minority and perpetual foreigner stereotypes: Asian Americans and cultural capital. The Vermont Connection, 35, 79–90. Museus, S., & Vue, R. (2013). Asian American and Pacific Islander students’ transition to college: A structural equation modeling analysis. The Review of Higher Education, 37, 45–76. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2013.0069 National Archives. (n.d.). The Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. https://www.archives.gov/education/lessons/ civil-­rights-­act National Archives Commemorates the 25th Anniversary of the Civil Liberties Act. (2013). https://www.archives.gov/press/press-­releases/2013/ nr13-­118.html National Park Service. (n.d.). Interning Japanese-Americans. https://www.nps. gov/subjects/worldwarii/internment.htm Ng, J., Lee, S., & Pak, Y. (2007). Contesting the model minority and perpetual foreigner stereotypes: A critical review of literature on Asian Americans in education. Review of Research in Education, 31, 95–130. https://doi.org/10.310 2/0091732x07300046095 Parks, K. R. (2004). Revisiting Manzanar: A history of Japanese American internment camps as presented in selected federal government documents 1941–2002. Journal of Government Information, 30(5–6), 575–593. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.jgi.2004.10.003 Pierce, C. (1974). Psychiatric problems of the black minority. In S. Arieti (Ed.), American handbook of psychiatry (Vol. 2, pp. 512–523). Basic Books. Rizvi, F., & Lingard, B. (2006). Edward Said and the cultural politics of education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 27(3), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300600838744 Solórzano, D., & Huber, L. (2020). Racial microaggressions: Using critical race theory to respond to everyday racism. Teachers College Press. Sue, D., Capodilupo, C., Torino, G., Bucceri, J., Holder, A., Nadal, K., & Esquilin, M. (2007). Racial microaggressions in everyday life: Implications for clinical practice. American Psychologist, 62, 271–286. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003 -­066x.62.4.271 The Pluralism Project. (n.d.). The Asiatic exclusion league. http://pluralism.org/ document/the-­asiatic-­exclusion-­league/ Tuan, M. (1998). Forever foreigners or honorary whites? The Asian ethnic experience today. Rutgers University Press.

60 

A. WU

U.S.  Code: Title 50. (n.d.). Title 50- war and national defense. https://www. govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-­2015-­title50/pdf/USCODE-­2015-­ title50.pdf Unrau, H. D. (1996). Manzanar, National Historic Site California, the evacuation and relocation of persons of Japanese ancestry during World War II: A historical study of the Manzanar War Relocation Center. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-­1-­4614-­4166-­3_15 Wong, K. (2005). Americans first: Chinese Americans and the Second World War. Temple University Press. Wong-Padoongpatt, G., Zane, N., Okazaki, S., & Saw, A. (2017). Decreases in implicit self-esteem explain the racial impact of microaggressions among Asian Americans. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 64, 574–583. https://doi. org/10.1037/cou0000217 Wu, F. H. (2002). Yellow: Race in America beyond Black and White. New York, NY: Basic Books. Zhu, Z. (2013). Romancing ‘Kung Fu master’—From ‘Yellow Peril’ to ‘yellow prowess’. Asian Journal of Communication, 23, 403–419. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/01292986.2012.756044

CHAPTER 4

Model Minority Myth: Voice of Asian American Academics

“There’s a famous saying in the NBA that I love. It’s, ‘Not everything is right when you win and not everything is wrong when you lose. To be Asian American in today’s political climate, it seems like it’s a big ‘L’ all across the board. But to be able to disassociate ourselves [and understand] not everything is wrong when you lose.” —Jeremy Lin, April 2020

At the beginning of 2012, Taiwanese American, Harvard-educated, point guard Jeremy captured the attention of the sports world over a three week span. He led the New York Knicks basketball team to 7 straight wins and a record of 10 wins in 13 games (Cox, 2019). Lin’s status as a professional athlete not only dispelled the Model Minority Myth faced by AAs, but also challenged stereotypes on AA masculinity. A stereotype that labels Asian-­ Americans as nerds, geeks, a group that are wimpy, not athletic (Samuel, 2017). Asian American men are seen as “emasculated”, “weak”, and “effeminate”, racist stereotypes that can be traced back to white insecurities over the male Chinese labor force during and after the construction of the transcontinental railroad in the late nineteenth century (Salesses, 2020). Towards the middle of the 3 week span, called “Linsanity”, Lin even outscored Los Angeles Laker superstar Kobe Bryant. It was during this nationally televised home game, that Lin scored 38 points to Bryant’s 34 points (Cox, 2019). © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0_4

61

62 

A. WU

Despite Lin’s success and achievement at the highest level of professional sports, he still faced racial stereotypes and discrimination stemming from the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. As Lin has come to terms with his experiences, he has leveraged his public status to bring his voice on fighting discrimination and illuminating his experiences as a Taiwanese American. In many ways AAs that achieve the highest levels of education and academic positions at college and universities face the same challenges of racial stereotypes and discrimination. And just like Lin, their voices need to be heard and experiences shared.

Model Minority Myth Microaggressions experienced by AAs often have foundational roots in the Model Minority Myth racial stereotype. Historically, AAs have been labeled using six stereotypical categories: “the pollutant, the coolie, the deviant, the Yellow Peril, the model minority, and the gook” (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p. 7). All six of these images portray a person of Asian heritage as an alien body and a threat to the American national family: From the 1850s onward the first Asian Americans, the Chinese, were stereotyped by White officials and commentators as “alien,” “dangerous,” “docile,” and “dirty.” At that time, such negative images were not new to the White racist framing of Americans of color. They had precedents in earlier White views of African Americans and Native Americans. (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p. 7)

The early stereotyping of male Chinese immigrants was similar to the historical and contemporary constructions of African American men as hypersexual, aggressive, and dangerous; stereotypes of Asian women were portrayed as a cunning dragon lady or servile lotus blossom, both eroticizing Asian women, especially in film and literature (Chou et  al., 2016, p.  22). In contemporary times these stereotypes of Asian women have perpetuated, and the stereotypes of Asian men have changed to being weak and emasculated. Both of these continuing and evolving racist stereotypes serve to reinforce White men as the superior (Chou et  al., 2016, p. 22). A salient, recent example of the racist stereotype of the age-old stereotype of Asian women as heartless dragon ladies occurred then the chancellor of the University the chancellor of the University of Illinois–Urbana Champagne, Phyllis Wise, an Asian American, did not grant her students a snow day (Chou et al., 2016). Wise was mocked on social media with

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

63

broken English and compared to North Korean dictator Kim Jong Un. In comparison, white chancellor Joe Gow at the nearby campus of University of Wisconsin–Lacrosse did not face mockery. Instead, students used humor on social media and compared Gow to Star Wars character Luke Skywalker, leading classes in a snowstorm (Jaschik, 2014). Chou et al. (2016) noted that: Wise holds the most powerful position at the flagship state university in Illinois, and was born in the United States.

and As President Barack Obama has shown, holding leadership in the highest positions in the United States does not protect people of color from racist stereotyping.

Chou and Feagin (2015) pinpointed when the Model Minority Myth was most likely first constructed. As a response to African American and Latino (especially Mexican American) protests against discrimination, White scholars, political leaders, and journalists developed the Model Minority Myth in the mid-1960s to suggest that all Americans of color could achieve the American dream by working quiet and hard as AAs such as Japanese and Chinese Americans instead of protesting discrimination in the stores and streets as African Americans and Mexican Americans were doing. The essay “Racist Love” by Frank Chin and Jeffery Paul Chan (1972) described the White majority’s positioning of AAs as a model minority: The privileged foreigner is the assimilable alien. The assimilable alien is posed as an exemplary minority against the bad example of the Blacks. Thus the privileged foreigner is trained to respond to the Black not the White majority as the single most potent threat to his status. The handicapped native is neither Black nor White in a Black and White world. (p. 72)

This new racial positioning of AAs was a significant departure from how AAs had been depicted in the media traditionally (Zhou, 2004), especially as the Yellow Peril during the late nineteenth century. The Model Minority Myth postulates that Asian immigrants from Asian countries such as China, Japan, Korea and all other nations on the Asian continent,

64 

A. WU

followed the economic opportunities in America. Wu (2002) described the stereotype of immigrants arriving virtually penniless, bringing barely more than the clothes on their backs: “Their meager physical possessions are less important than their mental capacity and work ethic. Thanks to their selfless dedication to a small business or an advanced degree in electrical engineering-­or both-they are soon achieving the American Dream” (p. 42). According to Chou and Feagin (2015), the creators of this manufactured model minority image were not AAs but influential Whites for their public ideological use and exemplified in a 1960s articles such as William Peterson’s New  York Times essay, “Success Story Japanese American Style,” (Peterson, 1966) suggesting that Japanese Americans were more successful than native born White Americans; that same year a U.S. News and World Report (1966) article, “Success Story of One Minority Group in U.S.” wrote about at a time when Americans were overcome with worry about the plight of racial minorities but one such minority, the nation’s 300,000 Chinese Americans were winning wealth and respect by the power of its own hard work (Huang, 2012). The Model Minority Myth stereotype creates a cultural expectation that all AAs are smart, hardworking, and wealthy (Murjani, 2014). Additional research indicates that AAs are viewed positively by Whites, but mainly in the areas of educational or income achievements (Chou & Feagin, 2015). Contemporary news media has also highlighted the juxtaposition of AA exclusion and social label of foreignness with the open admiration of the stereotyped success of AAs, similarly reported in the 1966 U.S. News & World Report article. Much of this success has been attributed to inherent cultural characteristics, such as Confucianism, have been attributed as main drivers in the apparent success of AAs. “Popular magazines such as Time and Newsweek highlighted [AAs’] Confucian-style ‘rugged individualism’; Asians did not need government support to make it in U.S. society” (Ng et al., 2007, p. 97). As the model minority, AAs are seen to be singularly focused on hard work with a tunnel vision approach to achieving higher education. The Model Minority Myth was further captured in the writings of psychologist Philip Vernon, who described Asian immigrants as an inferior species used for unskilled jobs, never to be accepted as equals to Whites but able to survive and flourish as high achievers educationally and professionally. Vernon’s caricature of AAs as the model minority included seven Asian elements (as cited in Wu, 2002):

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

65

• Adherence to accepted conventions of social behavior. • Cohesion not only within a family but also with kin and the family ancestors. • Discouragement of egocentricity and recognition of obligations to others. • Loyalty and obedience to the authorities, employers, and the state. • Motivation for educational achievement from entering school until maturity. • Firm control, not permissiveness, from about three years up. • The need for hard work to gain success and honor the family. (p. 41) Elements that have contributed to the persistence of the Model Minority Myth include: a large proportion of Asian Americans graduating from college, the socioeconomic status of AAs since the 1970s, the phenomenal rise of Japan and other Asian countries as major economic powers in the 1980s, and the immigration of many wealthy Asians to the U.S., leading to the perception that Asian Americans are better off economically than Whites (Suzuki, 2002). High rates of educational achievement have become a general Model Minority Myth representation of AAs. Research has concluded that AAs approach socioeconomic parity with Whites as a result of overachievement in educational attainment. However, instead of gaining equity in the labor market, AAs experience discrimination due to the need for higher investment in education to reach similar socioeconomic rewards as do Whites. Additional studies have reported that AA men are required to have more education and work longer hours than White men to achieve similar annual incomes, 17.7 years as compared to 16.8 years of education and 2160 hours as compared to 2120 hours of work (Sakamoto et al., 2012). The Model Minority Myth perpetuates the stereotype of AAs’ overachievement in education and financial success, despite the reality of economic discrimination. Research has suggested that Asian Americans might be positioned as a “racial bourgeoisie,” a racial middle status between Whites and other people of color (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p. 17). This placement of the White position maintains their dominance and diffuses hostility toward all other lower racial class status, including AAs, to serve as “scapegoat during times of crisis” (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p. 17). Chou and Feagin also suggested that this middle status is a result of other racial minorities, such as African Americans or Mexican Americans,

66 

A. WU

being allowed fewer opportunities by Whites. The use of AAs as a divisive measuring stick for other Americans of color places racial minorities against each other, in addition to isolating AAs from White Americans. An example of racial minorities being pitted against each other can be found in the area of affirmative action; AAs are encouraged to view African Americans and programs from them as threats to their own upward mobility. Likewise, African Americans are led to see AAs as a group that has usurped what was meant for them (Allred, 2007). Kim’s (1999) research on the Model Minority Myth has identified the overgeneralization of AA success, homogenization of a diverse population, and racial discrimination as a critique of American society: The myth’s Teflon quality, its stubborn survival, suggests that its value lies less in truth telling than in erecting a racially coded good minority/bad minority opposition supportive of the conservative imperative to roll back minority gains while appearing nonracist. (p. 118)

AAs are continued to be cast as interlopers in a Black/White racial discourse; being neither Black nor White, Asian Americans rarely gain visibility and voice as racial minorities, leading to the understanding of how AAs are positioned within the confines of Black/White discourse and racial meanings of how AAs uphold racial status quo, marginalizing peoples of color. (Ng et al., 2007, p. 96) The triangulation vis-à-vis White and Blacks experiences by AAs while at the same time being valorized and discriminated have historical roots in the initial experiences of AA immigrants. In the context of the Model Minority Myth, racial status has perpetuated White racial power and AA oppression in U.S. society. In contrast, however, Ng et al. (2007) provided evidence of AA groups that are not in the top achieving echelon, offering a counterexample to the model minority stereotype: As disaggregated data shows, Yeh (2004–2005) argues that research needs to focus on non–East Asian American subgroups to identify barriers to low academic persistence rates due to immigrant/refugee status, academic under preparedness, first-generation college status, language barriers, low socioeconomic status, family demands and obligations, and cultural adjustment. (p. 112)

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

67

There are perceptions that AAs as the model minority (Chou et  al., 2016) that stem from the successes of East Asians that immigrated to the United States towards the end of the twentieth century. The authors continue to describe those AAs as college-educated with middle class careers, living outside of the inner-city Chinatowns. And even with these apparent success stories, these AAs are still subjected to racial stereotype and discrimination: In fact, the white-crafted “model minority” stereotype creates cleavages in creating multiracial coalitions as Asian Americans are stereotyped as “near white.” Additionally, what is often downplayed is the existence of the “FOB” (Fresh Off the Boat) population, who are “poorly educated and deficient in English, live in Chinatowns, and ply the low-wage service trades or sweatshop manufacturing plants typical of inner cities.” The bifurcation of the Asian American population is one not recognized by the mainstream American public, and not well represented by the mainstream media. (Chou et al., 2016)

Gupta et al. (2011) stated that positive stereotypes are contributing to the myth of the Model Minority. The portion of Asians with a bachelor’s or graduate degree, although higher than any other group, does not illustrate that twice the proportion of Asians in comparison to Whites have less than a ninth-grade education. Gupta et al. also reported that the annual median income for Asian households in 2003 was about $53,635, at which time Asians were more likely to live in poverty when compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Similar to the findings of Sakamoto et al. (2012), Gupta et  al. demonstrated that Asians that hold the same educational attainment as Whites earn significantly less income. AAs have faced structural discrimination and stereotypes that have been negativity reinforced by the model minority label, a prevailing stereotype to describe AAs times (Ng et al., 2010). There are complexities regarding the negative effects of the Model Minority Myth and how it applies to racism and discrimination faced by AAs in American society.

Negative Effects of the Model Minority Myth Sociologist Claire Jean Kim (as cited in Chou & Feagin, 2015) described quite well the price paid for becoming the White-proclaimed label of a model minority:

68 

A. WU

By lumping all Asian descent groups together and attributing certain distinctively “Asian” cultural values to them (including, importantly, political passivity or docility), the Model Minority Myth sets Asian Americans apart as a distinct racial-cultural “other.” Asian Americans are making it, the myth tells us, but they remain exotically different from Whites. Beneath the veneer of praise, the Model Minority Myth subtly ostracizes Asian Americans. (p. 19)

Another study found that AAs were rated high on family commitment, work ethic, intelligence, and socioeconomic status, and were rated low on patriotism, marriageability, and desirability to live in the same community (Parks & Yoo, 2016). The attribution of both positive and negative stereotypes has been used dominate and perpetuate racism and inequity toward AA groups, as demonstrated by elements of the positive Model Minority Myth and negative Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. Researchers such as legal scholar Mari Matsuda and historian and journalist Vijay Prashad have specifically targeted the model minority stereotype as a form of anti-Asian racism (Chou & Feagin, 2015). Matusa suggested that Asian Americans might be positioned as a “racial bourgeoisie” (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p. 17), a racial middle status between Whites and other people of color. The purpose of this racial class structure was to protect the White position at the top by diffusing hostility toward them and setting up Asian Americans as the “scapegoat during times of crisis” (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p. 17). Prashad added to this discussion by stating that because AAs are termed model minorities, they come “to be the perpetual solution to what is seen as the crisis of Black America,” noting that “it is easier to be seen as a solution than as a problem. We don’t suffer genocidal poverty and incarceration rates in the U.S., nor do we walk in fear and a fog of invisibility” (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p. 17). In fact, additional scholars have posited that AAs have been placed in a separate third class of racial existence, not part of the White majority and not part of the Black minority, a third outlying foreign group: “Asian Americans are ‘racially triangulated’ vis-à-vis Whites and Blacks through two interrelated processes of ‘relative valorization’ (Whites valorizing Asian Americans relative to Blacks) and the process of ‘civic ostracism’ (Whites constructing Asian Americans as foreign and Other)” (Ng et al., 2007). Assigned with the model minority stereotype, AAs are seen to be singularly focused on hard work with a tunnel vision approach to higher education achievement. Researchers have posited that in addition to AAs facing

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

69

the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, other forces also potentially cause discrimination: The question of AA inclusion in both academic and business organizations can provide insight into the overall issues of AA leadership opportunities. In U.S. society, two of the main environments that have high levels of AA involvement are higher education and high tech. In fact, it can be seen that robust involvement in higher education enabled AAs to establish careers in high technology fields, even to flourish with numbers comparable to the White majority. Yet, the question remains as to why there is a substantial percentage of AA employment in education and tech, but a clear lack of AAs in leadership positions in these two areas.

Wong (as cited in Huang, 2012) emphasized the stereotype that AAs are “hard workers, and not interested in advancing in leadership, impacted their recruitment as potential candidates for senior level positions, and thus they [are] often passed over for promotions” (p. 89).

Effects of the Model Minority Myth in Business, Technology Industry, and Academics Gee et al.’s (2015) article “Hidden in Plain Sight: Asian American Leaders in Silicon Valley,” provides quantitative metrics and attempts to elucidate the factors that have led to underrepresentation of Asian American leadership diversity in Silicon Valley. Gee et al. revealed that technology organizations showed disparity in placement of AAs in leadership roles; “Asians were found to be 27.2% of the professional workforce, but only 13.9% of executives in the professional workforce at Google, Hewlett-Packard, Intel, LinkedIn, and Yahoo” (p. 3). A recent report by the social media giant Facebook, further demonstrates the clear separation of AAs in senior management versus AAs in staff roles. At Facebook, in the Tech category, Asian employees are represented at 41% in comparison with White employees at 53%. Yet at the senior level, Asian employees are represented at 19% while White employees are represented at 71% (Williams, 2014). Gee et al. (2015) approached issues with AA leadership in the tech valley with an AA self-assessment model, identifying “three major Asian leadership gaps: a gap in awareness and expectations, a gap in role models, and a gap in behavior” (p. 4). The authors proposed an AA self-driven solution by resolving issues of “Cultural deference to authority and the reality that

70 

A. WU

deference often implies weakness; ineffective communications and influencing skill; Political naiveté/dexterity–understanding how organizational business decisions are made; Aversion to risk-taking in business and career” (p. 15).

Critique of Hidden in Plain Sight: Asian American Leaders in Silicon Valley The self-ownership approach is presented as a good faith approach in achieving a level of self-determination for AAs, yet in doing so it perpetuates the model minority stereotype and largely ignores the social construct of discrimination and prejudice against AAs. In addition, this approach furthers the bias and stereotyping of AAs as managers detailed by Gee et al. (2015); “many managers expect Asians to be good workers but do not expect them to be potential leaders. This phenomenon was demonstrated in a 2010 study conducted by Dr. Thomas Sy” (p. 18). This further reinforces the stereotype of the AA employee lacking management soft skills, reducing the value of the employee to one who is a good, technically proficient worker. Gee et al. presented a balanced solution of both individual and environmental changes to enable AAs’ professional growth. Microaggressions, the Model Minority Myth, and the perpetual foreigner stereotype, as discussed in this chapter, create an imbalance that requires more environmental or institutional change. In fact, Gee et  al. (2015) contacted over 1000 AA managers in their study, demonstrating the strong presence of AA leadership talent. Any professional development and training will have little impact unless structural and cultural changes in corporations or institutions are also enacted.

Effects of the Model Minority Myth in Academia The lack of AA leadership in business organizations is part of the social construct of societal discrimination and inequality. There are striking similarities between the issues of AA leadership roles in business and academia. The American Council on Education released a brief titled, Raising Voices, Lifting Leaders: Empowering Asian Pacific Islander American Leadership in Higher Education. In the educational field, only 1.5 percent of college and university presidents are Asian Pacific Islander Americans…[and]…Asian Pacific Islander Americans lead all other racial minority groups in the

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

71

percentage of full-time tenured faculty members at 7 percent, but they occupy just 2 percent of chief academic officer positions and 3 percent of deanships. (Davis & Huang, 2013, p. 1) These statistics point to disparity with AA equity in senior positions as a reflection on the existing framework of higher education administrative policy. It also reveals the need for scholarship to examine solutions that will correct traditional higher education power structures to allow for individual AA proactive career change, as supported by Gee et al. (2015). The inequality in representation suggests these limited roles are tokens, “stereotypical assumptions about what tokens “must” be like, such mistaken attributions and biased judgments, tend to force tokens into playing limited and caricatured roles” (Kanter, 1977, p. 4882). These limitations placed on tokens, as described by Kanter (1977), become useful for dominant group members by allowing dominants to make use of already-­ learned expectations and modes of action.

I Am Not the Model Minority Participants described how colleagues and supervisors at PWIs were stereotyped during their experiences as faculty members. They provided examples of being labeled as passive, high achieving, and presumed to have math backgrounds. Participants shared the additional impacts of being marginalized by pervasive stereotypes. The Model Minority Myth—the stereotype that virtually all AAs are self-sufficient, well-educated, and upwardly mobile—is a label placed upon AAs, incorrectly defining a diverse group to be singularly focused on hard work with a tunnel vision approach to higher education achievement. Although AAs are considered the “model minority and are hardworking, something else keeps them from being fully embraced by the majority at the highest levels of higher education; as a result, they continue to be marginalized” (Ng et al., 2007, p. 119). Denise shared an example of feedback from others regarding being passive. Passivity is one of the strongest elements of the Model Minority Myth, which is connected to the myth that AAs lack active leadership skills: I’ve literally gotten that feedback before. People not understanding that my style is very much I’m not gonna speak before I know who’s in the room. And I’m not gonna speak before knowing enough. But that’s not to say that I don’t jump in because I can jump in. I’m not afraid or anything like that,

72 

A. WU

but I do have a tendency, and this is also grounded in my social justice orientation and my values, is that I have to speak to understand and learn if I’m gonna have any kind of impact. So I’m gonna spend the time. But then what happens is people are like, “She’s the quiet Asian woman. She’s not gonna contribute anything.” And then when I speak up, sometimes you can visibly tell people’s surprise. [Denise’s] there, she has something to say. But it’s all strategic, the ways in which we decide to show up and speak up or not speak up. It’s all strategic to a certain extent. But that often happens and especially with a new person, so people don’t know what to make of me when that happens. And it throws them off a little, but then when I see them thrown off, I am affirmed in that I knew you were seeing me as an Asian American woman, and that’s information for me. So that when I interact with you, you’re probably gonna see me through the lens of being a quiet, submissive, Asian American woman. Which in itself is not bad, because there are quiet, submissive Asian American women out there. I don’t wanna disempower those folks, but that is not me. That’s absolutely about the model minority stereotype. Absolutely. I think that being relegated to do supportive sometimes is about that. Often times, people blend in leadership roles, people challenging me in particular ways. It’s all about that. And there’s almost sometimes no outside of the model minority stereotype because it’s so pervasive. People don’t even recognize that’s it’s coming into play when they’re interacting with me. But I don’t wanna say that every interaction is like that, but I think sometimes people just don’t realize that it informs a lot of the ways that they interact with me. So I would say yes, it’s very much present.

The model minority stereotype presents AAs as not having the right leadership style because they are quiet or passive evokes ideas of their foreignness. Although they are the model minority and are hardworking, there is something else that keeps them from being fully embraced by the majority at the highest levels of higher education; hence, they continue to be marginalized. (Ng et al., 2010, p. 119) Jim described common aspects of the Model Minority Myth: passivity and presumed mathematics expertise: One never knows for sure whether you get treated differently. But I’ve always had suspicions that I got stereotyped. The presumption that I’m going to be a little shyer, the presumption that I’m going to be more math-­ oriented. I don’t think I have, just because I guess I’ve done more things to try to break the stereotype than I should have. So I guess when people get to know me it’s less of a case of the stereotype.

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

73

Sam shared the perception of being singularly focused on hard work, and also being in some respects a token minority: Yeah. It was early on when I was in Renaissance English literature. This was actually [institution]. I said I was one of three of 50 faculty members who was actually from [state]. Here I am. They know that I am continuing my graduate studies, even though I was teaching at the [institution] full-time in Renaissance English literature. Man, I was like the darling … They might have even said golden boy, except my hair’s not yellow … the golden boy of the department, ‘cause look … Here’s a local guy, a minority guy. He could be a student in our classes and he is a doctoral candidate doing serious Renaissance English literature research and writing and studies. They loved it, but as soon as … still working for them part-time in the summers and things like that, I changed to Asian-American Literature.

This concept role encapsulation is supported by tokens as qualified minorities who are limited due to discrimination, represent the premise of affirmative action policies as previously mentioned, however tokens in organizations have been known to be criticized as unqualified hires hired in order to satisfy a quota and only because of differentness as opposed to professional or technical qualifications. (Surratt, 2012, p. 22) Ben and Sean described additional issues with the AA passivity assumption, as part of the Model Minority Myth. In addition, another element of the Model Minority Myth, technical skill, emerged in Ben’s response. Oh, no doubt racial stereotypes play. And I mean, there it works in a way that effect the day to day interactions and decision making. You know what I mean? But there was … and it was most obvious to me when I entered a new environment and as I get to be at a certain place for long period of time. And now at [institution] is the point here, I mean, around 20 years. At 25, if you count the time I spent there as a graduate student, I think those early periods were always certain assumption and play about there being an Asian American male about passivity about maybe technical skills, that kind of stuff rather than leadership skills, for example, something that Dave would overemphasize on technical or social or leadership skills, the so called soft skills, and things like that.

“Asians and Asian Americans are generally stereotyped as being nonconfrontational or timid,” says Lee, the former publisher of Hyphen, a magazine about the Asian-American experience. “So they may be

74 

A. WU

overlooked for leadership roles because they’re not thought of as leadership material. This has nothing to do with their actual skills or abilities. Part of the solution is companies making a concerted effort to address bias in the promotion process to ensure it’s more fair for everyone.” (Harkinson, 2015, para. 5) Sean’s experience with the passivity stereotype extended to interactions with students who tried to resist her authority as a professor in subtle microaggressive manner: I can tell you that I think, as a faculty member, a lot of times students will maybe press me a little bit more because they think maybe I’m, again, more gentle and more accommodating. Male students, because I’m small in stature, will often ignore whatever rules I’m giving the class, so that they turn in papers instead of passing them up in the desks they line down, walk up to me in the front of class, and look down and hand it to me. So, I mean, there are just these very subtle things that I couldn’t be sure that it was racial or gender-based or anything else.

The historical context once again is evidenced in thematic model behavioral traits of AAs—“unobtrusiveness, diligence, industriousness, and docility” (Chun, 1980, p. 10)—and their being relegated to second-class citizens at the expense of changing politics. In addition, Chun (1980) stated that it was “vacuous at best are the dichotomous idioms of success vs failure and the rhetoric that a group is a success merely because it is faring better than other disadvantaged groups” (p. 10). Nicole shared her experiences as being perceived as the model minority more by students toward faculty members, not colleagues. The myth of lacking soft skills, a form of lack of leadership traits effecting AA faculty members’ ability to interact with students: I believe that there are those stereotypes present, but I don’t think that they are amongst colleagues. I think they’re perceptions amongst students to faculty members. Because I think that as a Asian faculty member, students sometimes have the impression that we’re unapproachable or that we are going to be really mean. And because of that they kind of I guess interact with us a little bit differently than say a White man. But, again, with colleagues I don’t think there’s anything like that. Definitely. So, definitely a lot more in graduate school when we’re teaching assistants and we don’t know the answers to questions for students. Or even with other faculty members. And there’s the impression that, obviously because you are Asian, you

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

75

should know how to do that or because you are Asian you must have gotten A in this class. And that definitely has not been the case for me in my academic career.

Nicole’s experience is another example of the model minority myth, AAs in elite universities are often associated with academic rigor (Chou et al., 2016). In reality, AAs are not a monolithic group and have different levels of academic success. Although he had not personally been labeled as a model minority, Nick experienced the challenge of being in discussions on AA students being stereotyped as self-sufficient: I was in a meeting once and someone said, “Oh the Asian student is doing just fine,” and I mean, “Just look at the data,” and the issue is that the data is not just aggregated and if you look at them just aggregated you’ll see that Southeast Asians, you’ll see that Pacific islander students perform right around where Black and Brown students perform academically. And so, I haven’t been labeled a model minority but the argument for model minority has come up and I’ve had to use my knowledge about the Model Minority Myth to push back on the psychology that all the Asians gotta fight and that, you know, and that I essentially argued for the need to support the Southeast Asians and Pacific Islanders we have on campus.

Nick’s recollection is once again an example of the myth of the model minority monolith. Many AAs are from Southeast Asian low-­socioeconomic status (SES) households, working-class backgrounds. In fact, many AAs are not doing just fine, “There’s plenty of Asians in the country who just don’t have sh*t. These are the ones who operate the small Burmese laundry shops that don’t have air conditioning or who wake up at 7 every morning, 365 days a year to go to work in some sh—ty, poorly conditioned building (Chou et al., 2016). Ian shared a unique, proactive approach to dealing with the Model Minority Myth in advance of potential microaggressive experiences: No, because I always make sure that I tell everyone from the very beginning that I am not the model minority. Most of my colleagues know who I am, and I’m very outspoken, and in a sense, I’m more “American” than I am Asian.

76 

A. WU

In summary, the data showed that participants were labeled as passive yet high performing professionals. This stereotyping included being considered quiet, shy, or unapproachable. Such labels often led to participants sensing the need to purposefully increase their contribution to discussions as AAs in the workplace. In addition, some participants experienced the generalization of AAs being high achieving faculty members and students. The Model Minority Myth are very much examples of a racial microaggressions that impact AA faculty members’ careers.

Racial Stereotypes Participants expressed the manifestation of stereotypes into microaggressions in their experiences and shared examples of how they have been affected by negative experiences with colleagues and supervisors. In addition, participants shared the additional career impacts of such microaggressions at PWIs. The psychological effect of such subtle racism further reinforces institutional issues of dominant racist ideology and create negative stress and psychological trauma on the AA individual. As the authors note, AAs and other minorities such as Latino/Hispanic Americans consider such subtle experiences of racism to insult and invalidate their participation in their own country due to a structural worldview that they are foreigners in their own land. As mentioned in prior research, labeling AAs as proficient workers but lacking in leadership traits such to cultural and ethnic generalizations is a primary example of microaggressions faced by AA professions during their career paths. Overt examples of racism in contemporary U.S. culture are rare due to increasing social awareness; the nature of racism has therefore become more insidious, covert and private. Thus, the manifestation of microaggressions as a common form of racism and discrimination by the White institutional power over people of color. Denise shared the experience of being perceived as not making contributions in the workplace and creating misconception from colleagues and supervisors. Despite an organized, meticulous, strategic approach, Denise was labeled as being quiet and not a contributor: I would say because I’m new to my job here, I think that people are … I’m not that young, but then I am that young. So I think a lot of it is how people perceive my performance of self. The way we all carry ourselves, people also respond to that. And so I think when people perceive me, and I have a

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

77

t­endency to be very … I spend a lot of time observing, and listening, and trying to understand before I actually say something. And often times, I feel like there’s this shift with the individual in the room where they begin to put me into this, “She’s a quiet Asian woman,” and because I’m quietly listening, and observing, and I’m watching. I mean, that’s pretty common, so much so that I’ve gotten feedback before from supervisors about I think that your voice is really important. You’ve gotta speak up more and contribute more.

In The Myth of the Model Minority, Chou and Feagin describe Asian Americans who have internalized this stereotype and deal with racism by ignoring it quietly (Chou et al., 2016). As shared by the participants in this book, non AA feel comfortable in making racist comments to AAs without reservation. This experience is described as “the model minority stereotype and mentality create a positive feedback loop in which non-Asians can make racist remarks without fear of resistance” (Chou et al., 2016). It is not AAs acquiescing into the model minority role, but the power dynamic of management that can prevent them from addressing this racism. Jim suspected that there are stereotypes that can affect an AA’s career: I’m of the opinion that in my [institution] situation that’s, I don’t know, 50,000 people counting employees. I hear enough stories about people being treated differently, both overtly and subjectively. Now in my experience, I just have a suspicion that I get stereotyped. Well, yesterday for example, I was talking to a guy who works here. He’s a PhD, works in a staff capacity. He’s been told point blank that he’s only going to go so far in this organization.

Sam illustrated the issues of AA faculty members facing limitations in ethnic or Asian American Studies departments with respect to what was considered stereotypical AA scholarship. The deficit: One of the reasons why I wanted to participate in this research of yours is because at a place like [institution], the idea that an ethnic studies program or department is kind of like entry-level … what they do is throw a bunch of introductory courses and still … or high-level scholarly work. This idea’s still around. It has to do with a school’s administration, too. It’s not just the [institution]. The idea goes something like this. Maybe one of these days, a department or a program in ethnic studies or in Asian-American studies, in

78 

A. WU

particular, will not be needed. Why? So we can eliminate it and save some money in the budget this way. Why? Because we’re gonna hire somebody in the English department who knows Asian-American literature, somebody in the History department who knows Asian-American history and sociology, and so forth.

[institution] for a while, and still probably today, toys with this idea, and in doing so, kind of … sometimes very direct and explicitly, tells our department of American Ethnic Studies that our work is not as exciting as the work done, let’s say, by specialists in ethnic studies in the History department. The reason for this, though, is because in the History department, that person has to follow the expectations and standards…. It’s all standards, the disciplinary work of history. That’s what that person has to concentrate on. Because these expectations and standards and disciplines are already set and always under development so this seems like newer and newer, exciting work is being done by these historians, where in ethnic studies- in the history department, that’s the impression that the University gets. Our work in an Ethnic Studies department is inter-disciplinary, so we do all kinds of stuff. I can get credit in my department for the work I do outside of the classroom, in the community, as a stage actor, ‘cause I’m doing Asian-American scripts. My department encourages our scholarly participation in community organizations. You’re never gonna hear the History department saying, “Oh, that’s really good. We’ll add that to your credit,” or the English department. When you add to other questions you will be asking, but we may be doing extra work like this, but getting less credit, even than a rank-and-file faculty member who happens to be doing Asian-American or ethnic history in the History department. Ben shared the specific issues of the passivity and leadership stereotypes faced by AA faculty members and institutional focus on international versus AA experiences. A salient issue was revealed: the combining of Asian and Asian American representation, creating an overgeneralization of experiences effecting AAs at PWIs: Oh, no doubt racial stereotypes play. And I mean, there it works in a way that effect the day-to-day interactions and decision making. You know what I mean? But there was … and it was most obvious to me when I entered a new environment and as I get to be at a certain place for long period of time. And now at [institution] is the point here, I mean, around 20 years. At 25, if you count the time I spent there as a graduate student, I think those early

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

79

periods were always certain assumption and play about there being an Asian American male about passivity about maybe technical skills, that kind of stuff rather than leadership skills, for example, something that Dave would overemphasize on technical or social or leadership skills, the so called soft skills, and things like that. But now not happy, but at an institution for so long I mean, I don’t see it playing in to how my colleagues or students treat me, but certainly that played in the early part of my career. So another way it plays in, I think and I see it all the time is regarding admission of students. And certainly, that this is an issue with undergraduate admissions as you see stories are coming out about that regarding a particular university at this time. Harvard that is being challenged. Their admissions practices that being challenged in the courts. But I think there’s a certain assumption that our Asian American graduate students, and that they’re less likely to be risk takers and more or less likely to ask questions in class and that kind of thing. And so I think the faculty members largely, broadly speaking, I think that is something that they still struggle with, and they challenge for some of them, even though we have at even at [institution], we have a critical mass, so significant representation of Asian Americans. And I think they focus over emphasize the international students experience, their experiences with the international and an overgeneralized that experience into American born, or those Asian Americans that would, and race and then U.S. So I think it still present such a challenge for a lot of faculty members, especially in working with students.

The stereotype of AAs lacking leadership skills is evident in social science research “Social scientists are often trained to distance themselves from emotions. It is something we have to do to be “objective,” yet this type of mindset is central to supporting white supremacy” (Chou et al., 2016). In both undergraduate and graduate training, the knowledge factories, historically white colleges and universities (HWCUs) are white institutionalized space. There is, as Wendy Moore theorizes (Chou et al., 2016): 1. racist exclusion of people of color from positions of power in the institution. While some universities now have people of color in the upper echelons of leadership, they are still too few. 2. The HWCUs then develop a white frame that organizes the logic of the institution; this can be seen in the admissions policies, hierarchy of organizations on campus, faculty makeup, and so on, which goes unquestioned and seen as normal. (p. 106)

80 

A. WU

Both Nicole and Sean shared experiences interacting with students and the stereotypes that effected their roles as faculty members. Nicole shared: I believe that there are those stereotypes present, but I don’t think that they are amongst colleagues. I think they’re perceptions amongst students to faculty members. Because I think that as an Asian faculty member, students sometimes have the impression that we’re unapproachable or that we are going to be really mean. And because of that they kind of I guess interact with us a little bit differently than say a White man. But, again, with colleagues I don’t think there’s anything like that.

The positive image of the Model Minority Myth, despite the inaccuracies thereof, does not equate to positive attitudes toward AAs. AAs are both considered successful and marginalized at the same time. White college students believed that AAs had traits of intelligence, ambition, obedience, and at the same time were likely to be nerdy, antisocial, and unassimilable. Sean stated: You know, it’s hard to be able to pin something like that down because they always seem so quiet. And in my particular case, again, I can never be sure that they’re gender stereotypes or if it’s racial because I’m being perceived as Hispanic, or because I’m maybe perceived because they know that I’m Asian or mixed. It’s hard for me to pin down any of those things.

Nick described the challenge of identifying stereotypes that could affect his ability to be hired, thus effecting his career trajectory: I wouldn’t say. So I believe they’re always at play and they’re always kind of subversive. At that minimum subversive so in my context that are previous and current, they’ve been at most subversive and because of that I may not have been able to overtly see those. I can think of, you know and this is I have to go with it being just a feeling I have inside of me. That probably could never be confirmed but I think sometimes I wasn’t hired for certain position because of the way that I spoke or the way that I looked. So I mean I don’t have a full head of hair, I’m balding so I just decided to cut it like shave it; to be bald. And in … perhaps that might you know me being a darker complexion, that might come off as like, “Oh, he looks like a thug.” Secondly, [Asian ethnicity] are the most incarcerated API in the state and so there’s also my last name being [redacted] and so I… that also could play a part into, “Oh this guy … another thug” or something like that. So I’ve

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

81

definitely felt that when I’ve tried to apply for other places where my speak may not have been, I guess, middle-class-White enough for them. But in terms of the workplace where I actually work regularly I would say there are minimal and I’m very lucky for that to occur.

Chris and Ian were the only participants that did not consider stereotypes having effect on their careers, citing institutional awareness as a factor. Ian said, “Wow. Racial stereotypes, no, not really. I can’t think of one.” Chris shared that the multiple institutions at which he has worked were sufficiently aware of diversity and sensitivity toward different racial backgrounds: Yeah, I can honestly say that I don’t think that’s ever been the case, because I think I’ve been in institutions where they’re quote unquote “enlightened” enough, or some might say, politically correct enough, that that would never fly if they tried to treat me any differently, because of my racial background. So that was the case certainly at [institution 1], that was the case at [institution 2]. And at [institution 3], I mean, I was there a total of eight years, as a grad student and as an employee. Grad student, researcher and an instructor, involved in all of those capacities, I don’t think I was ever treated any differently by colleagues because of my ethnicity. And at [institution 1], to be honest, I mean, my interactions with other faculty members are so limited that I can’t tell you a time when I had a real meaningful conversation outside of one or two times, with other faculty members. So I don’t think there was even room for [institution 1], in my interactions with other employees for that to even happen.

Participants often noted that stereotypes of AAs led to microaggressive effect in their work environments. Participants described experiences where perceptions led supervisors to question participants’ contributions due the Model Minority Stereotype. Other participant examples describe AA faculty members reaching career path obstacles and AA faculty members being stereotyped as not having leadership skills. One participant shared the belief that he was not hired for positions due to negative AA stereotypes, considered as non-model minority.

82 

A. WU

Not a Social Problem Participants shared being labeled as successful people of color, evidenced by the perception of being grouped into White color lines by White colleagues, being told that AAs are doing well, and the fact that that AAs are considered superstars at the university level. Participants felt confusion and lack of surprise at times when perceived with a lack of racial reality. In spite of this denial, participants of all Asian ethnic backgrounds shared that many microaggressions invalidate their experiences of discrimination. The theme of denial of racial reality is closely related to the Model Minority Myth, where AAs are labeled similar to Whites and are perceived to experience minimal socioeconomic or educational disadvantages. AA faculty members are affected by the overgeneralization of AA success in society. These stereotypes of success create a narrative that college leadership could use to disregard the reality of racial discrimination faced by AA faculty members in the workplace. Chris shared, My personal opinion of this is that I don’t think it’s a stark binary … one of those answers, but I think it’s some sort of blend. And I think the majority is that these institutions tend to think of Asian-Americans probably more along White color lines than they do as minorities at this point, because I think there are enough Asian-Americans in higher ed in general as a student population, that that type of … The percentage that Asian-Americans make up these student bodies can’t be ignored by the administrators, so I think that they tend to think of Asian-Americans overall … By “they,” I mean loosely these, I guess, institutions that, I agree, are generally run by White people for lack of a better term. I think they tend to see Asian-Americans more along White color lines, than they do as minority color lines.

Over the last 50 years, the narrative of AA success in society at large became a monolithic stereotype: Asian American’s have been celebrated as a “model minority” for their “superior” cultures that encourage a strong work ethic, a respect for elders, and a reverence for family. More important, they have been celebrated for their high rates of educational, occupational, and income attainment and low high school dropout rates, as well as low rates of teen pregnancy and incarceration. They are declared to be on their way to becoming “White.” (Zhou, 2004, p. 100)

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

83

Jim stated, Well, I guess I have to give some context to this. I think first and foremost, being a tenured faculty member, a tenured full professor in a school at a location in which you want to be at is about as good as it gets. I think it’s particularly good in the business school realm because we are treated so well. It’s remarkable how well we’re treated as a group, with that context there is really no way to know how some of these stereotypes operate. I recall some conversations I’ve had where … these are close friends of mine who inadvertently say, “Well, you know, White guys like us really don’t understand those people.” I’m thinking, “Geez, that seems off for him to say right in front of me,” but nonetheless it was this sense of acceptance in this group of person, just another White guy. When that would happen that would be a strange kind of experience, but these are very well-meaning people who would make that mistake.

This statement from Jim reveals a situation where in some respects, he was placed into the non AA group and was exposed to unwelcome prejudiced attitudes from non AA colleagues. According to Chou and Feagin (2015), similar to other Americans of color, AAs serve as pawns in the racially oppressive system maintained at the top by Whites. They commented that: White Americans may prize Asian Americans relative to African Americans in certain limited ways so as to ensure White dominance over both. Whites may sometimes place or consider Asians “nearer to Whites,” a relative valorization, because of Asian American achievements in certain educational and economic areas. (p. 19)

Nick shared his thoughts on the realities of AAs being perceived as having no issues, but in reality AAs not being a monolithic group with unique socioeconomic challenges: With that said, in the current district, race is definitely prevalent. We could be talking about it in more ways I think, but definitely … I don’t think people play the race card. No one ever says that sentence in my current district. No one plays the race card in my district. It’s just part of the conversation about supporting the students who need the most help. So where I’m at now, we do have a population of Southeast Asians and because now I have relationships but there’s also a pretty strong AA contingent in the district

84 

A. WU

that I feel more confident to bring up the issues of Southeast Asians. We cannot leave out our Southeast Asians, our refugees, and we can’t leave out our Pacific Islanders because if we just lump all the Asians together then everyone’s going to say, “Oh, Asians are doing fine,” when the Southeast Asians, when you just aggregate, don’t do well at all. So definitely when there are conversations of race now, I definitely get that in there.

The Model Minority Myth was a stereotype created from the successes of East Asians who immigrated to the U.S. towards the end of the twentieth century. Southeast Asians, as described by Nick, had a very different experience contrary to the Model Minority myth. Southeast Asian Vietnamese immigrants in the United States arrived as refugees fleeing a war-torn country, they left their home country under horrendous conditions, without preparation, without control over their final destination, and with the exception of a small elite group, most Vietnamese refugees hailed from disadvantaged socioeconomic backgrounds; the majority of Vietnamese refugees had minimal formal education, few marketable job skills, little English-language proficiency, and scant knowledge of the ways of an Western society (Chou et al., 2016). Nicole shared the same sentiment as an AA faculty members being generalized as high achieving. An assumption that can limit AA faculty members’ support at PWIs, if AA faculty members are generalized to be high achieving: I think that there’s a lot of misconception about an AA faculty member from colleagues, some students, and also from the outside. Because I think that when people hear that, “Oh, you teach at a university,” they assume that you’re an amazing superstar, and that’s not always necessarily the case because AA everywhere.

Ben shared his personal journey and his experiences with bias, stereotype, and racism, which contradict the denial of racial reality: Growing up as an immigrant, and I just have to put this in, you just deal with so much stuff. I mean, nothing surprised me. So the workplace and the biases and stereotypes they don’t even come close to what I experienced trying to negotiate through from kindergarten, I mean, from first grade through college, I mean the kind of racism I faced there was nothing compared to what I dealt with him. I was better prepared to be a weapon in my career. So I actually, yeah, I mean up to this point I think I felt it’s come up

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

85

short in terms of my expectations about how negative or how racist the academia is. And I think certainly it has changed a lot since I entered it, and since I experienced as a graduate student.

The lifelong challenges of racism Ben faced, especially as a child, is shared by an experience faced by another AA. An AA adult recollected, wanting to audition for a 5th grade play Return to Oz as Dorothy and was told by a girl next to her that she could not be Dorothy because she is Chinese. The AA adult said that that time, “I felt so stupid. It was that horrible embarrassment where you get hot, and red, and sticky, as if your skin is crying tiny, boiling tears. It’s that feeling when someone says to you, “Who do you think you are?” And you feel like you’re nobody. I felt like I was nobody” (Solórzano & Huber, 2020). Sam shared, You know social scientists, especially sociologists, would say … now I’m talking about Asian American sociologists. They would say, “Well you guys are gonna have a hard time making yourselves being heard in academia because you’re not a social problem. We social scientists study social problems and we don’t pay attention if you’re not a social problem. Asian Americans have not been a social problem.

Participants shared that either institutions considered AAs as Whites or they were in situations where they were included in discussions with White colleagues as part of their group. Other participants shared that there were perceptions that AAs were a monolithic group that faced no challenges based on their racial background or were not social problems. There was a connection of the AA immigrant experience and long term experiences from childhood to adulthood in relation to negotiation of reality versus perceptions of doing fine was AAs.

Summary In conducting this research, I learned that participants generally have experienced the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, the Model Minority Myth, and additional stereotypes that led to microaggressions. These experiences shaped their career experiences at PWIs. With respect to the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, most participants faced experiences of being labeled as an outsider or foreign. Specific

86 

A. WU

examples included being mistaken for international students, having others assume that they lacked proficiency in the English language, being label as Oriental, and being asked where they are from (with the assumption of being foreign). Participants also experienced being labeled based on the Model Minority Myth, which mainly manifested in the form of being considered passive. Additional labels, albeit experienced to a lesser extent, included self-sufficiency, being singularly focused on hard work, and not having the right leadership style. Participants shared that they experienced additional stereotypes and the effect as relating to microaggressions at the workplace that effected their careers. The perception of being passive, the inability to contribute during meetings, and perceptions from supervisors of needed to increase their voice. Also, examples of the career path obstacles, and lack of soft skills for leadership. Attached to the passivity stereotype, participants were labeled as being unapproachable and mean, with an extreme example of being an Asian criminal stereotype based on physical appearance. Participants additionally shared that their experience with racism and discrimination as AAs was discounted or invalidated, and in fact being stereotyped as a minority group that did not experience such disadvantages in society.

References Allred, N. (2007). Asian Americans and affirmative action: From Yellow Peril to model minority and back again. Asian American Law Journal, 14, 57–84. Chin, F., & Chan, J. P. (1972). Racist love. In R. Kostelanetz (Ed.), Seeing through Schuck (pp. 65–79). Ballantine. Chou, R.  S., & Feagin, J.  R. (2015). The myth of the model minority: Asian Americans facing racism. Paradigm Publishers. Chou, R. S., Lee, K., & Ho, S. Y. (2016). Asian Americans on campus: Racialized space and white power. Routledge. Chun, K. (1980). The myth of Asian American success and its educational ramifications. IRCD Bulletin, 15, 2–13. Cox, G. (2019). Linsanity revisited: How Jeremy Lin became an instant NBA superstar. Daily Hive. https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/jeremy-­lin-­linsanity­raptors Davis, G., & Huang, B. (2013). Raising voices, lifting leaders: Empowering Asian Pacific Islander American leadership in higher education. American Council on Education.

4  MODEL MINORITY MYTH: VOICE OF ASIAN AMERICAN ACADEMICS 

87

Gee, B., Peck, D., & Wong, J. (2015). Hidden in plain sight: Asian American leaders in Silicon Valley. https://www.ascendleadership.org/resource/resmgr/ Research/HiddenInPlainSight_OnePager_.pdf Gupta, A., Szymanski, D.  M., & Leong, F.  T. L. (2011). The ‘model minority myth’: Internalized racialism of positive stereotypes as correlates of psychological distress, and attitudes toward help-seeking. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 2(2), 101–114. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024183 Harkinson, J. (2015, May 14). Asians are kicking ass in Silicon Valley, so why are so few in the boardroom? Mother Jones. http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-­ drum/2015/05/asians-­tech-­glass-­ceiling-­hidden-­plain-­sight-­ascend-­study Huang, B. (2012). Navigating power and politics: Women of color senior leaders in academe. (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from https://drum.lib.umd.edu/ handle/1903/12724 Jaschik, S. (2014) Snow hate. Inside higher Ed. https://www.insidehighered. com/news/2014/01/28/u-­illinois-­decision-­keep-­classes-­going-­leads-­racist-­ and-­sexist-­twitter-­attacks Kanter, R. (1977). Men and women of the corporation: New edition. Basic Books. Kim, C. J. (1999). The racial triangulation of Asian Americans. Politics & Society, 27, 105–138. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032329299027001005 Murjani, M. (2014). Breaking apart the model minority and perpetual foreigner stereotypes: Asian Americans and cultural capital. The Vermont Connection, 35, 79–90. Ng, J., Lee, S., & Pak, Y. (2007). Contesting the model minority and perpetual foreigner stereotypes: A critical review of literature on Asian Americans in education. Review of Research in Education, 31, 95–130. https://doi.org/10.310 2/0091732x07300046095 Parks, S. J., & Yoo, H. C. (2016). Does endorsement of the model minority myth relate to anti-Asian sentiments among White college students? The role of a color-blind racial attitude. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 7, 287–294. https://doi.org/10.1037/aap0000056 Peterson, W. (1966). Success story, Japanese American Style. New York Times Magazine. http://inside.sfuhs.org/dept/history/US_History_reader/ Chapter14/modelminority.pdf Sakamoto, A., Takei, I., & Woo, H. (2012). The myth of the model minority myth. Sociological Spectrum, 32(4), 309–321. https://doi.org/10.108 0/02732173.2012.664042 Salesses, M. (2020). ‘Good-looking for an Asian’: How I shed white ideals of masculinity. The Guardian. https://www.theguardian.com/us-­news/2020/ oct/23/asian-­american-­masculinity-­white-­male-­insecurity Samuel, E. (2017). Five years ago, Jeremy Lin took New York by storm, smashing stale stereotypes of Asians in the process. New York Daily News. https://www.

88 

A. WU

nydailynews.com/sports/basketball/knicks/daze-­linsanity-­5-­years-­jeremy­lin-­ny-­storm-­article-­1.2974623 Solórzano, D., & Huber, L. (2020). Racial microaggressions: Using critical race theory to respond to everyday racism. Teachers College Press. Surratt, D. (2012). Exploration of perceptions held by African American male student affairs administrators at predominantly white institutions through the conceptual frameworks of Herzberg, Cose, and Kanter (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses (UMI No. 3617187). Suzuki, B. H. (2002). Revisiting the model minority stereotype: Implications for student affairs practice and higher education. New Directions for Student Services, 2002(97), 21–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/ss.36 US News & World Report. (1966). Success story of one minority group in U.S. https:// www.dartmouth.edu/~hist32/Hist33/US%20News%20&%20World%20 Report.pdf Williams, M. (2014). Building a more diverse Facebook. http://newsroom.fb. com/news/2014/06/building-­a-­more-­diverse-­facebook/ Wu, F. H. (2002). Yellow: Race in America beyond black and white. Basic Books. Zhou, M. (2004). Are Asian Americans becoming ‘White?’. Contexts, 3(1), 29–37. https://doi.org/10.1525/ctx.2004.3.1.29

CHAPTER 5

Motivation: More than Just Work(ers)

“Daniel and Grace have been important and valued members of Hawaii Five-0 for seven seasons. We did not want to lose them and tried very hard to keep them with offers for large and significant salary increases. While we could not reach an agreement, we part ways with tremendous respect for their talents on screen, as well as their roles as ambassadors for the show off screen, and with hopes to work with them again in the near future.” —CBS, 2017 “I will not be returning to Hawaii Five-0 when production starts next week. Though I made myself available to come back, CBS and I weren’t able to agree to terms on a new contract, so I made the difficult choice not to continue…I’ll end by saying that though transitions can be difficult, I encourage us all to look beyond the disappointment of this moment to the bigger picture. The path to equality is rarely easy. But I hope you can be excited for the future.” —Daniel Dae Kim, 2017 “There were a number of factors spanning the show that affected the non-renewal of my contract. I’m grateful for the lessons learned, but I chose what was best for my integrity. I know that people are always trying their best, and everyone’s coming from their own backgrounds. Throughout the whole series, I kept trying to see the best in everybody. Would I do it all over again? I wouldn’t be so quick to say yes… I’m still figuring stuff out. Sometimes people are just really good at burying stuff, and I think I’m like that.” —Grace Park, 2018 © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0_5

89

90 

A. WU

As the only state in the U.S. where the majority of the percentage of the population is Asian/AA/Pacific Islander/Indigenous, it was refreshing to see CBS productions reintroduce the TV show “Hawaii 5-0”, in a contemporary form. Recent primetime television lacked representations of diversity, especially AA shows and characters (Suhas, 2017). Hawaii 5-0 was an opportunity to present AAs as part of the entertainment media culture that greatly needed positive representation of AAs. The marketing for the 2010 TV show reboot prominently displayed two AA characters, Kono Kalakaua and Chin Ho Kelly, played by actors Grace Park and Daniel Dae Kim, respectively. After 7 seasons, it was reported that Kim and Park could not reach contract deals that would give them pay equity with the show’s two White stars Alex O’Loughlin and Scott Caan. It was believed that CBS’s final offer to Park and Kim was 10 to 15 percent lower (Holloway & Ryan, 2017). Instead of acquiescing to inequity in compensation, Park and Kim had the social/economic platform to refuse and elect to not continue with the TV show. The ability to refuse a smaller deal is a luxury that many underserved, underrepresented minorities do not possess. According to the U.S.  Census bureau, AAs still trail Whites in personal median income, despite recent increases in earnings (Austin, 2012). It was courageous for Kim and Park to take a stand for pay equity and lose potentially millions of dollars in the remaining 2 seasons of the TV show. The statements made by Park and Kim represent the difference in reactions to discrimination faced by AAs, but is joined by the common message they were treated differently. Park’s response was more tempered, introspective, highlighting the complexities of navigating the experience of inequality. Kim’s response was equally introspective, but directly addresses the difficulties on the path to equality. Not surprisingly, CBS’s statement lacked empathy and instead presented a sanitized message that only reinforced the company’s power structure over minorities. Only 50 years prior, during the one season of the Green Hornet TV show, Bruce Lee’s salary was only 20% of his White co-star, Van Williams (Nguyen, 2020).

The Perceived Career Paths of AA Faculty Members Research participants consistently shared that their career paths were primarily influenced through impact at the workplace, students, and relationships with management. They were motivated in their careers to create change in institutions and student success. In addition, many participants

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

91

described their relationships with management as being important, the exception of cases of tenure or focused AA faculty members’ academic interests. Four additional separate themes emerged as participants answered the research question by describing how they perceived their career paths: potential for individual and community growth/change; accomplished things that we can be satisfied about; token minority; good relationship with management.

Perceived Potential for Individual and Community Growth/Change Overall, participants shared that factors such as student success, societal and structural impact at institutions added to their job motivation and often led to increased contributions to diversity and AA success at institutions. Despite the challenges of the framing of racial stereotypes such as the Model Minority Myth and being labeled as honorary or new Whites, AA faculty members remained motivated and showed great resilience in accomplishing their goals. AA faculty members demonstrated an understanding of the larger context in which their motivations in the workplace could lead to societal and cultural change in the U.S. Participants’ motivations were mainly described in two categories: making an impact and student success. Denise, Ben, and Chris shared their motivation in terms of making an impact and the establishment of a career path includes individual, societal, and institutional growth prior to retirement. Denise shared: My motivation is really focused on what kind of impact can I have in my work. And because of my social justice values, my commitment to change, the way I think about it is how do I position myself to be able to have the kind of impact people need to support equity and social justice you know, informed work. And it doesn’t necessarily have to be in the areas of equity inclusion. For example, I’m in professional development right now. So because equity inclusion, perspectives and values should be infused in everyone’s work across the institutions. So for me it’s about how do I support that type of justice work in higher education. So that’s what motivates me. How am I a tool for this type of change and how can I support the institution’s growth towards greater equity inclusion. That’s what gets me up every day, and that’s what motivates me to work with students and with faculty members and staff, is that potential for individual and community growth and change.

92 

A. WU

Ben stated, What motivates in my work I think is impact. Impact is the bottom line for me. I’ve written about this more recently. I’ve been reaching the point where I’ve been invited to be more reflective by my work and I think the bottom line for me is to have an impact to when I retire in 10 years, I want to make sure I made a positive difference, I’ve made some improvements along the way. Improvements in terms of fostering greater inclusiveness while getting us closer to equity, reducing racial antipathy. I think in the end that’s what drives me. Also now than ever I turn toward more ground level type of work where I can leverage research to influence decision making and influence how we design policy. So that’s become, I’ve reached that stage where that kind of work has become very important for me.

Chris explained that making a difference (impact) is his main motivator. However, his motivation was strongly connected to student success in his courses: What motivates my work? I think knowing that I can make a difference in the way that students perceive quantitative analysis. That’s my main motivator. To make sure that … especially with students who are apprehensive about quantitative anything. I am mostly driven by making those students do a 180 during the course of my class and help them see that this stuff is really useful. And not only that, it’s actually not that terrible to learn. It’s not as hard as they think it is. So those are my main motivations.

The data regarding the participants’ career paths indicted that they placed a high value on student success, especially feedback from students. For example, Sam, Nicole, Sean, Ian, and Nick shared that student success was the primary motivator in their careers. Sam stated: Towards the end of my career, I must say that mostly it was the students, and I had 200 students, more than that, a year, but it was mostly the students. I say this because my research, I didn’t have to use my ongoing research so much anymore in order to develop new courses or to revive old courses in new ways, that all the research I had done for this purpose had already been done, so my courses were filled with prior research. Research was not my main motivation anymore. I could continue, but it wasn’t with the idea, previous idea, that I do this research in order to make courses and other purposes as well. I wasn’t a person who felt that, for its own sake, research is valuable to me. It needs to be put, for me, to some purpose like

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

93

courses. On top of that, it was a long time that I realized that the people on campus who knew on a daily basis what I was doing, what I was studying, what I was lecturing and everything, were the students in my classes. I mean, they were closer to me than most of my colleagues in that sense. And ­vice-­versa. I knew my colleagues less than their students knew them. And I thought this good. That’s what makes us bigger than ourselves, that our daily interactions included not only the students, but the interactions with colleagues inside the university, which doesn’t know necessarily what it is that we’re doing in the classroom. It was that mix of knowing and not knowing that I felt motivated me. Yeah. It was always like looking forward to the next discussion with someone because of what we find we need to say to the person and we need to hear from that person.

Nicole said: I think what motivates me is seeing students succeed and having them come back and tell me that what I did to them, not that it’s a bad thing, but what I taught them at the lower level really did help them later on, even though they weren’t able to actually see it then.

Sean described three main career motivators: teaching students, serving as a role model, and contribution areas beyond students, to diversity politics: So there’s three aspects, right? Teaching, research, and service. In research, editing the diary of a [redacted] immigrant from the nineteenth, from the 1800s, the nineteenth century, which I think is a really important contribution for the field, so that motivates me to be able to bring his voice up. In teaching, I’ve only taught Asian American literature once, although mostly that’s because I’ve been trying hard to arrange my schedule so that I can have a better balance with my kids since I’m a single mom. So I haven’t chosen to do a lot of extra classes in Asian American literature, although that would be exciting for me. But what motivates me there in large part is the brown female students that my classes seem to attract. And they’re general education classes, so they’re not the ones that are prized by most of my colleagues in my department, but it just gives me a tremendous amount of satisfaction to be able to draw those diverse students, and to allow them to hear a voice of another brown female woman, who they haven’t seen very much in their educational careers. And in terms of service, it’s always, again, diversity driven. It’s nice to be able to have a seat at the table and to make sure that, some of our issues, are paid attention to and not just disregarded

94 

A. WU

to. I would say in all three aspects of the job, I am motivated to contribute to the diversity politics of our current age.

Nick expressed that initially student success motivated him, then it shifted to addressing inequalities in societal structures: So, my motivation has evolved ever so slightly. Like, I just wanted to teach math at first, and I definitely wanted to help those people who hated math. I wanted them to get through the math classes, whether they would pass it or learn some math or change the way that they viewed it. And as I’ve learned more about society and social inequities that I’ve modified it ever so slightly to my motivation is now to transform students, I guess educators and also systems of education that really break these inequities. I mean, someone said the goal of education isn’t to get out of poverty, it’s to end it and so I really live by that. And so, I’m teaching math now, so I’m going to do that through my math class. So that includes learning mathematics, but also how math is used in the real world and how students and other individuals can use mathematics to make decisions and critique, I guess, bullshit structures.

Ian very directly pointed out that teaching was his motivation, stating, “Well, I love to teach, and it’s my students that motivate [me] and their curiosity.” The participants shared several detailed examples of working with students as sources of motivation in their work, including student growth and change, teaching students the usefulness of analysis, and students directly providing feedback regarding faculty members teaching successfully. Participants also shared examples of being motivated to influence students as individuals and, on a larger scale, to influence societal structures.

Accomplished Goals About which AAs Can Be Satisfied Participants consistently shared a high level of job satisfaction at their respective institutions. Their career decision-making, accomplishments, job stability, and growth were all factors associated with their levels of satisfaction and led avoidance of dissatisfaction. AA faculty members have been found to be engaged in research and spend more time on dissertation or thesis committees at higher rates than other faculty members. The literature suggests that such increased

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

95

involvement indicates that there is no statistically significant effect on overall job satisfaction with these two factors. However, participant responses regarding satisfaction levels provided insight on the experiences of recognition of academic research success and autonomy to pursue career goals. Denise, Sam, Ben, Sean, Nick, and Ian shared their high levels of satisfaction with their faculty careers. A key factor of career satisfaction as a source of motivation for participants was career recognition. Student recognition was overall with their career choice and consistently reported student recognition and contributing to student success as a motivating and satisfying factor. Regarding student recognition, Thomas stated: I think the last thing that I spoke to you about was when I was where I was at, the decision that I had made, and trying to be very intentional about the work that I do and I think because of that my satisfaction levels are pretty high now. And I think that’s because I’ve taken time to be really thoughtful about where I’m going next, and then the work that I’m doing, and also thinking about the potential growth and opportunity that each position offers me, so I would say pretty high right now. There’s always other factors.

Denise shared: So I would say a high level of satisfaction. I’ve had to navigate big career decisions that were also about what’s best for me and my family and so those factors definitely equate into the level of satisfaction. And I’ve had to pass up opportunities, or I’ve had to make certain decisions that were really hard as a woman, as a parent. But that’s also a factor into those intentional decisions. But we can talk more about that later if you want.

Sam stated, I’m very, very satisfied. This is an oral kind of statement assessment. Day by day, course by course or whatever. Of course, there are a lot of problems and hassles and things like that, but my career in education has been a career worth living. I think I’ve accomplished things, I think my colleagues have accomplished things that we can be satisfied about, but I’m not talking here about self-satisfaction, just congratulating ourselves or something like that, or the money I made because that’s not much. But again, a little example of this. It was probably 1990 or so. There was an annual conference of the Modern Language Association, which is a big literary professional organiza-

96 

A. WU

tion, pretty much worldwide. And [name removed] was an African American scholar at the African American Institution, the [institution]. He got up to introduce our program and he said, “[Name removed] there is involved in Asian American literature,” he says, “Imagine I can say Asian American ­literature and many of you here in this audience, you understand what I’m talking about.” He says, “Five years ago, if I said Asian American, you would’ve thought Asian. You don’t even understand that they’re Asian American.” Right? That felt so good. To hear [name removed] saying that, in effect, he learned in the past five years that Asian Americans are not same as Asians, and vice versa. And I said, “Gee, maybe we did accomplish something, small as it is that people understand that there is a category called Asian American. Not to be confused with Asian.” This, today, is like in American politics, national politics. Where the politicians, most of them I will say, do know how to say Asian American and not simply confuse the term and the group with Asian or foreign. How that translates further into what we do then in our work on the campus is another thing. But I think, yeah, either our … How can I say? Work with the terminology of our culture and the epistemology that is to see the knowledge that we have, it gradually has made a difference, and that’s so satisfying.

Ben said, I think it exceeded my expectation in positive ways. As I mentioned this wasn’t a career path that I had set out for. Even after I received my PhD, I knew I wanted to work in higher education but I didn’t know what exactly I wanted to do. Fortunately, I went to the right place, worked with the right people, had accumulated the type of experiences that helped me ask the right questions and was smart enough to make sense of it. I think in terms of what I expected and things like that I think it’s exceeded my expectations. Compared to most people I’ve had a pretty smooth ride in terms of getting support from my institution and being recognized in different ways that helped to inspire my work. I think it’s been … I could have done a lot worse. I could have done a lot worse. I can’t complain. The work has changed a lot. I think academic work has changed quite a bit. It isn’t a profession that would be encouraging my kids to enter. I think the next decade or so we’re gonna see the work change in ways that’s much more sensitive to pricing and cost and whatever federal or state support would continue to slow. So yes, I feel very lucky to have been part of this for the time that I spent my career at an institution where I did always feel like I had a lot of autonomy and that I felt pretty free to pursue the kind of work that I thought was important.

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

97

Sean shared, I have a very high satisfaction level, the fact that I’ve never applied for another job, and I’m at a place in my career, being a full professor, where I feel very fortunate to have the job stability and the schedule that I’m able to have. So I think it’s been a really good field for me.

Nick stated, I would definitely say that I’m above satisfied, like, more than just satisfied. I would say I’m satisfied and then some. I think it’s been fulfilling and I’ve had good relationships. I’ve had, I guess, the ability to grow and the ability to innovate and I’ve gotten support with it. I’ve also had run-ins with individuals, but I’ve had support from others that have helped me turn those into learning experiences. So, overall, more than satisfied with my experience as an educator.

Although they did not feel highly satisfied, Nicole and Chris still reached general satisfaction levels with their careers. Chris said, “I’d say [I’m] relatively satisfied.” Nicole stated, I definitely think that I have had to find a balance between family and career, and because of that I’m okay where I am. I’m not trying to achieve being a full professor at another institution or anything like that. I think that being where I am allows me to be with family a lot more.

Ian reflected on his own accountability for career satisfaction as it related to opportunities for job promotion along his career path: I wish I could’ve performed better. I’ve been here for 21 years and I’m still an assistant professor, so I get the sense that they need me ‘cause they don’t wanna fire me or they don’t wanna can me, but I don’t get promoted. But there are a lot of reasons for not getting promoted though. It has nothing to do with being AA.

Participants shared the following elements of high job satisfaction: navigating career decisions and having careers that made their lives feel like they were worth living. Additionally, participants expressed that they could have performed much worse, but feel fortunate having job stability and not needing to apply for other jobs. In general, participants reported

98 

A. WU

having high levels of job satisfaction within their careers as faculty members.

Token Minority Participants shared various examples of job experiences in which they were asked to participate in committees or manage tasks solely based on their AA identity and their influence as faculty members at PWIs. Examples included advising Asian students, participating in committees as perceived model minorities, or being a target hire into a department as the only AA. Tokenism is an issue that handicaps members of racial/ethnic minority groups who find themselves working alone or nearly alone among members of another social category (Niemann, p. 2). Tokens experience three overarching perceptual phenomena: • Visibility; tokens become more visible than they are in more ethnically balanced groups • Contrast; differences between Whites and ethnic/racial minorities are exaggerated • Assimilation; perceptions of tokens are distorted to conform to preexisting stereotypes and generalizations about members of their group (Niemann, 2003, p. 2) Ian, Sean, and Nicole stated that they had experienced situations where they were selected into a group as token AAs. The participants were fairly certain that such experience would either part of their careers at PWIs or unexpected due to their identity as an AA. Ian said, So it’s hard to say. Well, when I first came to [institution], the number of minorities was less than it is now, and I remember when I would be asked to join communities, I was treated as an equal, and they gave me equal responsibility, but I always had this notion that I would be token minority over there ‘cause I would be sitting in the room with White guys, you know?

Sean shared, In short, a student accused the campus police of racial profiling a Black student and had filed suit, and the campus was doing its own internal investigation. And I was selected as the faculty member in conjunction with an

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

99

outside police, a former university police had coming out that agency to conduct this internal investigation. So, I’m pretty sure I was chosen because I was perceived as being a minority. I didn’t have any criminal background experience, no sociological experience whatsoever. So I don’t know why else I would’ve been chosen except that they wanted an outside faculty member and again, being AA and being mixed, they may have found me more gentle, kind, or less aggressive than a lot of the African American faculty members or Hispanic faculty members that they could have chosen.

Nicole stated, There has been maybe one or two occasions where, I guess, when there are students who have trouble, who are of Asian descent they’ll often ask some of the faculty members who are Asian to talk to them a little bit more and show support for them because our campus is very culturally diverse and so they feel that finding faculty members who are basically the same color will help them.

Sam shared in rich detail being selected as a token AA, describing the effect of being made to feel like a second-class citizen on his career path: I was hired by [institution] by the English Language and Literature department there, as well as a program in American culture. I was hired and as being sort of like targeted. I was a target of opportunity hire. I’m not supposed to know this, but my department chairs, they knew that I must know this. Anyway, we’re pretty casual about it, but it goes something like this. Target of opportunity hires, back in those days, were mostly minority faculty members who were hired because that group, that racial group, was under-­ represented among the faculty members of the university. It didn’t apply to Asian-Americans because there were a lot of … There was adequate representation of Asian-American faculty members in the sciences, especially. The university as a whole was not lacking in Asian-American professors, but there was nobody else in the English department, nobody else in a program in American culture. I think even nobody else in the History department at that time was Asian-American. The department chair, that is in English department, made the argument to the university that I could be the target of opportunity hire because I am Asian-American and I teach Asian-­ American studies. Neither category yet existed in the English department or the university. They thought American studies. He said, “If you combine these two, you see that he is, in and of himself, representative of an under-­ represented category.” So they hired me. Because it was … Target of oppor-

100 

A. WU

tunity people are not supposed to be told that they’re targets because the feeling is they may feel like they are like minorities … How can I say … a second-class citizen who came in by the backdoor or something. When I gradually learned that this was how I got hired, and at the same time there conservative elements on the campus of University of [redacted] who said, “These poor guys … you see? They got given like an affirmative action deal and they are second-class on this campus. How must they feel, being second-­ class?” Hey listen. I got reviewed, evaluated more than any White faculty members anywhere on this campus. You think I should feel inferior? Forget it, man. I’m all the stronger because I am in this position of being hired under very adverse conditions, in fact, and yet I was hired.” You get my logic there? Yeah. That kind of thing … Whenever in my career it’s come up with some kind of question that, “Well, maybe you got your break because of affirmative action or something like that, “ I say, “Well, even if it was called affirmative action, that’s all right by me because I got evaluated more than you did and I came out with a job.” That’s very true. That’s what happened. I know how people got hired ‘cause I was in the department, and in administrative positions, too, in those departments. I knew that the so-­ called target hires were evaluated much, much more strictly and highly, and discussed by far more university officials than the regular White person hire.

Denise also shared an experience with tokenism, not only as an AA but also as a woman of color, and how it eventually caused her to change her career path to another institution: So my last semester [at the institution], things were coming to a head in terms of some student activism. And the student activists were very much in my space in the centers. And that’s the space that they were using to organize themselves to engage in organizing their protests. And for me, it was a simple, “Yes, absolutely use the space if you want to, but unless you want me to help you, figure your stuff out. I’m gonna just stay here on the side. And I think I was very intentional with doing that because I wanted … My style in working with students was always to challenge the support, guide, but never be director. So they had asked me to be in a couple of their organizing meetings and I was like, “Yeah, I can totally be in your organizing meetings.” But I was very clear, like, “I’m not gonna tell you what to do. I will give you feedback.” So that happened and then they planned their protest. It ended up being a very, very powerful protest, but what had happened was my boss, my supervisor, the VP of student life at that time really unhappy. And he said, “This should have never happened. Why did this happen?” And I said, “Well, you shouldn’t feel mad about this because the students are doing what the university’s asking them to do, to engage. [Institution] is an

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

101

institution that prides itself and sells itself as a social justice-oriented institution. Students come to [institution] or went to [institution] to get a particular kind of education. And I told him you don’t need to feel worried or threatened by this. This is evidence of our efficacy in an educational ­institution. They are actively engaging in the education we have provided them. So I don’t see this as anything of that. And so he said, “Well, the President’s not happy that this happened. This is bad press. So I would like you to go out and I would like you to control the students and make sure that this does not rise to the level of demanding time with the President again.” To which I laughed because I said, “If I have that power to control students, the world would be a very different place, but unfortunately I don’t have that superpower.” As much as I like to think I have that superpower. And I said, “I will take what you want me to do under consideration. However, I need to be clear with you on what your expectations are.” And so this is an example of his expectations for me, not only in my role, but also me as Asian American and as a woman to go and to provide that emotional labor, to calm students, to appease and be able to get students to express themselves in more proper ways instead of having a public protest, it was definitely in play. And sending me someone because he could’ve sent anybody. He himself could’ve had a conversation with these students and that would’ve easily also sent the same message, but it was the way in which he told me to go out and to do this. I was very racialized and very gendered. And also, as an API woman, as a caregiver, he found me as someone who at that time I felt like he had expected me to be someone who didn’t wanna make ways much more compliant, much more able to provide that emotional labor that he needed, and he wanted me to be able to do. And that kind of emotional labor is often expected on the backs of women of color when it comes to unhappy students. This ultimately led to my departure with [institution], but that was one of the moments where I really felt like the way that you’re talking to me and your expectations for what you want me to do beyond my role here.

Conversely, Chris and Ben expressed the understanding that they were a minority in a larger group but, due to their academic work, they were not labeled or selected as tokens. Chris shared, I think there were some meetings when I was at my research group at [institution’s] Research Center where sometimes either in internal meetings or conferences I would be the only Asian American in a room usually full of White people. To be honest, initially I didn’t really think about that. Sometimes, I think pretty rarely, I would notice that I would be the only non-White person in the room. But, that didn’t really affect me much, if at

102 

A. WU

all. I think with our research center and in the field of academic research in general, and especially when it comes to quantitative research, there isn’t much room for making biases based on race or ethnicity because the answers are usually relatively Black and White. So there’s no room for interpreting someone else’s remarks, or interpreting someone else’s research in a different way because you’re gonna see some quantitative finding, or some type of result, that doesn’t leave that much room for one person’s opinion, or judgments, or biases to change that perception. I think I’ve been fortunate to be in settings where it’s just not as political. There’s no room for misinterpretation of someone’s thoughts or feelings because a lot of what I’ve done in the past has been pretty analytical work.

Ben said, But I think being an immigrant, I think you’re always very mindful of the differences that you have in so many different ways, but certainly culturally and what I just mentioned in language and physically as being of Asian descent. But I think in terms of my colleagues and in my profession, I think they recognize that I’m obviously not somebody who looks like them, talks like them, and I entered the profession in my area from primary work around the state of higher education when the people doing that work wasn’t really that diverse, but I think they recognize that there’s a certain rank to the difference, and I’m treated that as a positive rather than negative aspect.

Many of the participants have experienced a tokenism as AA faculty members, or a subset of AA groups, chosen for situations such as job tasks or groups at their institutions. They were placed in committees or requested to manage student issues primarily based on their AA heritage instead of their scholarship or academic qualifications. Two outlier participants did not consider themselves as tokens in the workplace. Instead, they perceived their experiences as AA faculty members among non-AAs to be based primarily on their academic work with little influence of bias.

A Good Relationship with Management Participants discussed how significantly their relationship with management influenced their career paths. Their experiences included examples of how they have been influenced as faculty members and management in both positive and negative experiences at PWIs. Participants additionally

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

103

shared their frustrations with management turnover and lack of management presence. Factors in the critical faculty-management relationship include: company policy and administration, supervision, interpersonal relationships, and working conditions. Participants provided clear examples of the complexity of institutional administration and navigating the nuances of professional and personal interpersonal relationships with managers. Denise shared, So those relationships are immensely important on two levels. Number one, the obvious level, which is, I can’t get anything done if I don’t get along with my boss. There is that professional and I would say often political level and those relationships need to be nurtured and cultivated and at times where you prepare yourself to be able to push back. Because it’s an inevitability, right? It’s inevitable. You’re going to have to push back to management in some ways, so in preparing for those moments, you know I spend a lot of time talking and also seeing management as people and individuals as well. And so tending to those relationships are really important. And no one ever wants to look bad. And management in particular, so often the work that they do is immensely important, so often times I think about well how is the work I’m doing reflecting on them and can I support their work by doing work that makes them look good? So that’s the nurturing and that’s the tending to that I think needs to happen with management. I think the other level is and the kind of relationship that I have individually is again, go back to my previous answer about creating space for people to be themselves. So I was saying that the second level is about the kind of workplace environment that I want to create for myself. Because if I don’t like coming to work, if I am surrounded by colleagues that I don’t like working with, that’s not a happy day. So it’s all about cultivating and fostering relationships that make the work environment a place that I want to come back to and also feel like I can be effective and I can be changed and I can do really good work and I can feel good about the work that I’m doing on a daily basis.

Sam said, The importance is to realize what and how you can influence or effect the administration, to you understand American and the university in ethnic terms. I think I might put it that way, because they may not know. They just assume such a non-ethnic norm that you got to crack that barrier somehow and get them to see things in ethnic terms. A good example here. When we first got here, the then president of the university, did a very real talk to the

104 

A. WU

university about how important it is to incorporate different students into environments or different classroom and diversity and all that sort of thing that. I went up to him and said to him afterwards. That every time he talked about different, he would mean students of color, right? “To me, you are different.” And he said, “Huh?” You see? Automatically, the way he talks was condescending. We do this to manage people who are different from us. And the College of Education was operating on that principle. Yeah. That’s just one of the small, but pervasive ways, that we need to dismantle in dealing with the management.

Ben went into particular detail concerning the relationship between faculty members and management, especially from a unique management perspective. He placed important value on involvement of faculty members and management in one’s career path in order to foster a successful work environment and gain the trust of the highest level of leadership at an institution: A lot of people would point to me as management these days so not sure how to answer that. I think one thing that has added to my work at [institution] is to expand beyond my work within my department and to branch out to work in multiple sectors at the university. I think it’s so important to, I think this one’s usually after you know that you’re pretty secure with your appointment for some of us after earning tenure that you have to invest your efforts back into the university if you expect the university to invest in you. It’s a two-way street. I think a lot of junior people even after they’ve been tenured view it as I’m going to continue to do my work and they’re always looking outward rather than inward. Inward meaning within campus community and applying their energy back into the campus. Maybe because I degreed at [institution] but I always think that this is such a great place to do work, do my work but not just supporting how my work is relevant nationally or internationally, but how it’s relevant on campus. So I’ve gotten involved in so many different parts of university life, both in student affairs, athletics, certainly central administration and it’s really helped, and across different departments. It’s helped so much how I do the work that I do and I feel like I could always find allies and support and to get things done as I feel like I need to get things done to do that. I have a lot of administrative responsibilities now that are at very high level at university without having any specific title where I do work closely with the highest level of our administration, the chancellor and the provost and feel like they really respect what I have to say. They call on me for advice that my opinions really matter a great deal and I really work hard in making sure that other people get on the

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

105

radar. To circular coming back to what I was saying before, this is where I hope other people would step up too because those of us who are doing this kind of work, we’re not trying to hog it. We’re really trying to spread it because there’s so much of this work and we really need other people to help take it on. I think at issue right now is other people stepping up to do it. For me there have been great benefits in doing that. Great benefits. So certainly comes at a cost to scholarship. No doubt about it because this is not the kind of work that you just show up for and leave. They’re about relationships that you have to cultivate. They’re about making sure that you’re doing the homework to be influential. It’s not easy work but it is important work and there are certain rewards. As I said for me, being I guess at the table with whatever you want to call management or leadership let’s say, decision makers of the university has its advantages to be sure. No doubt. You have to put in the time to do that. No one expects you’re going to be somebody … you have no track record of that and suddenly been invited to sit there. You’ve got to build your track record. Have to build it just as you’ve got to build your publication record. Just as you have to build your scholarship and the time to do it is after you get tenure and you have to invest your university.

Nicole stated, I think it’s really important to have a good relationship with management. It doesn’t necessarily have to be best friends. But I think that getting to know them well helps in a lot of things like promotions and really maintaining your job and also having them come to your defense whenever that may be needed.

Sean shared her frustration with management due to turnover in leadership roles: Management at the university level is very frustrating. And I’m at an institution where our deans have changed more often than every four years. I know, usually … we call them MPP’s, these Management Personnel. On average they will change every 4 years. But in our education they’ve changed much more frequently. So, our strategy often is to wait them out. Sometimes we get deans, and deans who are very friendly and supportive of diversity efforts, and other times we get deans who are not. And so our strategy is we try as hard we can to set through measures. When we have less support of deans, we wait ‘em out. And we keep pushing the issue, but when have an interim, for instance, that’s the time when we can really get a lot of our measures past. We have the wait, and we get as much as feedback as we can.

106 

A. WU

So when we have a more supportive dean, we can push things through right away. And I think that’s the way we manage them, we kind of keep our … we keep our eye on their politics, but at arm’s length distance in terms of personal relationship.

Ian, Jim, and Chris shared different views on their career paths, which featured a less involved relationship with management. Ian said: As a current employee, I don’t really have that much of a relationship with them. I talk to the dean periodically. I’m not sure if our department head would be considered part of management, but besides our department head, our department chairs, I have very little contact with the management, upper management certainly.

Jim shared, Because I’m a tenured full professor I’m kind of buffered by it, I just am, and I am a former associate dean, and I did that for 12 years. I guess I’d say I’m very well-respected in my business school, and obviously it’s an important thing, but I don’t give it much thought. I’m kind of in a I can do what I want to do situation.

Chris said, Boy, that is a really loaded question because at one point I thought it was pretty important to have a good solid relationship with say, for example, the dean of that school, or other higher ranking people within the school of Ed, or faculty members who had been there for a long time and have influence. I thought it was important to have those types of strong relationships. But, now as a result of numerous conversations that I’ve had with “management,” I think those relationships are pretty much worthless and I find my role to be pretty limited. It’s something that I’m fine with and I think that they’re fine with because I don’t think they want to hear me talk about how to change this or that for its students. I think they’re fine with me having a limited role just teaching this one class. So all this to say that I don’t think it’s really important, personally speaking, to have any type of relationship with management.

Most participants considered their relationships with management to be highly important, whether they had mainly positive or negative experiences. Participants reflected on the mutual exchange or career benefit in

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

107

having a positive relationship with management. Other participants shared frustrations concerning management turnover or lack of support for AA faculty members, but still voiced the importance of working together with management. For some participants, relationships with management were not as important due to limited interactions with management or experience serving as management and faculty members.

Summary In answering the research questions, I learned from participants that their perceptions’ on AAs’ career paths are influenced by motivation, satisfaction, and relationships with management. Participants described their career motivation as having an impact at institutions and creating student success. For them, having an impact at work included supporting equity and social justice and fostering greater inclusiveness. Participants reported both high and moderate levels of career satisfaction. The relationship between faculty members and management was considered to be highly important. The relationship was perceived on two general levels: professional and personal. The professional level involved being able to influence administration and the personal level encompassed being able to control one’s own immediate work environment. Most participants reported facing tokenism in the workplace. As AAs, they were selected for roles that were based on their AA background, not professional or academic qualifications. The participants that did not stress the importance of their relationship with management cited having very little contact with management, being tenured, or having a limited role at their institution. Ultimately, positive or negative relationships with management had an influence on their careers as AA faculty members. Overall, participants considered management a key part of their career paths as AA faculty members. In sum, three of the eight themes—perceived potential for individual and community growth/change, accomplished things that we can be satisfied about, and a good relationship with management—were extensions of the original theoretical framework of this book (with the exception of token minority). Also, four of the eight themes—treated as an outsider, I am not the Model Minority, racial stereotypes, and not a social problem— were part of the foundational themes established by literature in prior chapters. The effectiveness was evidenced in the participants’ statements and narratives as AA faculty members have identified, managed and

108 

A. WU

navigated on the most part with success on the relationships with their students, colleagues, and supervisors. Participants also were highly motivated by student success, influencing societal change, and relationships with management. During the investigation, the participants reflected a generosity and openness to discuss race and career in rich detail. The dialogue provided a deeper understanding and appreciation of the participants’ experiences as AA faculty members at PWIs. As a result, I believe the book achieved the goal of honest and full narrative responses to the research questions through the use of the two interview protocols and data collection process. It is important to note that the findings did not achieve saturation due to the small sample size, therefore there may be AA faculty experiences that are not represented in this book. The participants engaged in a discourse with the researcher, allowing for direct conversation on their experiential realities as they related to microaggressions and their careers. The environment of trust that was established during the investigation allowed the participants to reflect, albeit sometimes with slight apprehension due to the sensitivities of the questions, and provide critical data on microaggressions. In addition, I discovered that microaggressions effected the participants through the entire spectrum of their academic careers, from undergraduate years, to graduate education, and as higher education faculty members. As evidenced by their narratives, participants later gained experience and knowledge through their academic careers in responding to microaggressions. There were many similarities in the factors that contributed to the perseverance of AA faculty members at PWIs. They strongly identified with points of motivation, satisfaction, and effect of tokenism in the workplace. Participants communicated feelings of dedication to the students, overall satisfaction with their careers, and areas for additional discussion to bring more awareness to their experiences as faculty members. Participants ultimately shared what they wished for additional change and improvements in their careers as AA faculty members at PWIs. Despite the recent improvement to AA faculty career experiences, research findings demonstrate that the majority of the participants experienced historical discriminatory stereotypes and microaggressions, which had an effect on their careers at PWIs. These findings will be discussed in Chap. 6, along with how they will impact future higher education policy and future scholarship.

5  MOTIVATION: MORE THAN JUST WORK(ERS) 

109

References Austin, A. (2012). A closer look at Asian-American income. Economic Policy Institute. https://www.epi.org/blog/asian-­american-­income/ Holloway, D., & Ryan, M. (2017). Daniel Dae Kim, Grace Park Exit ‘Hawaii Five-0’. Variety. https://variety.com/2017/tv/news/daniel-­dae-­kim-­grace-­ park-­hawaii-­five-­0-­1202484329/ Nguyen, B. (Director). (2020). Be Water [Film]. ESPN. Niemann, Y. (2003). The psychology of tokenism: Psychosocial realities of faculty of color. In Handbook of racial & ethnic minority psychology (pp.  100–118). SAGE Publications, Inc. Suhas, M. (2017). ‘Hawaii Five-0’ Isn’t Letting Kono & Chin disappear without an explanation. Bustle. https://www.bustle.com/p/why-­arent-­ kono-­chin-­on-­hawaii-­five-­0-­daniel-­dae-­kim-­grace-­park-­left-­after-­making-­a-­ difficult-­decision-­2480625

CHAPTER 6

Conclusion: The Emergence of New Tokenism

“The recent mass murder of Asian Americans in Atlanta is only one of the thousands of racially motivated incidents against the AA (Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders) community in the past year. Fueled by moronic politicians’ references to COVID-19 as the “China virus” or “kung flu,” hate crimes against Asian Americans increased in 2020 by 150 percent and, as daily attacks around the country show, it’s only getting worse.” —Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, 2021

In honor of the National Basketball Association’s (NBA) all-time leading scoring and noted civil rights activist, the league created the Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Social Justice Champion award to recognize a player that best incorporates Abdul-Jabbar’s strive for social justice and racial equality (NBA, 2021). Having grown up in the Dyckman housing projects in New  York City, Abdul-Jabbar was exposed to governmental injustices toward African Americans such as the murder of Emmett Till and the Harlem riots of 1964 and helped to organize a boycott of the 1968 Olympics in reaction to the assassinations of Malcolm X and Martin Luther King Jr. (Johnson, 2021). In addition, along with other famous African American athletes he supported world champion boxer Muhammad Ali’s decision to refuse entry into the U.S.  Army during the Vietnam War (Burns, 2021). © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0_6

111

112 

A. WU

Abdul-Jabbar spoke on the history of protests that influenced social justice in the U.S.: For me, it is trying to show that what Black Americans must deal with has been experienced by other marginalized groups. All of us at one time or another have been targeted by the dominant group. So, we must understand that all of us are in the same boat and we have to stick up for the rights of every marginalized group, not just the ones that we’re in that causes controversy, but to look at other issues. (Landrum Jr., 2021)

In his April 2021 Hollywood Reporter article on AA stereotypes, Abdul-Jabbar pointed out the demeaning media AA stereotypes of the last fifty years of Asian males as grateful, sexless servants and Asian women as beautiful, demure, sexy servants in need of protection from gun toting White males remain. He also commented on the recent 150 percent increase in incidents of AA hate and how easily violence towards AAs is triggered, with the appearance that attackers are just waiting for any opportunity to express their ignorance (Abdul-Jabbar, 2021). Most importantly he identifies the repeated violence towards AAs is an outcome of the foundational issue of the degrading perception of AAs by non-AAs: the infantilizing of women and emasculation of men that creates a conscious and unconscious environment that permits persecution of those considered less worthy of respect that Whites (Abdul-Jabbar, 2021). In this final chapter I revisit the issues faced by AAs faculty at PWIs and examine how the participant testimonies draw connections to prior scholarship and theoretical frameworks from the data that was gathered from nine AA higher education faculty members. Just as Grace Park and Daniel Dae Kim postulated at the beginning of Chapter 5 about the future AA equity after experiencing unequal treatment, the voices of AA faculty have been heard through their testimonies in the prior chapter. There will be a discussion in this chapter on the findings in this book as it relates to reducing racist microaggressions for higher education institutions, administrators, faculty members, and policymakers. Most importantly, I will provide recommendations on the steps to bring more equity to AA faculty and future research. As mentioned in chapter one, the purpose of the research in this book was to provide insight into the perceptions and day-to-day experiences of AA faculty members and strengthened the connection among the Model Minority Myth, and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, and microaggressions as obstacles for AAs in higher education career advancement at PWIs. Participant interviews were conducted to address the following questions:

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

113

1. How do Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders (AA) faculty members perceive their career experiences in higher education? 2. How does the Model Minority Myth shape AA faculty members’ experiences at Predominantly White Institutions (PWIs)? 3. How does the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype shape AA faculty members’ experiences at PWIs? 4. How do microaggressions, stemming from the MMM and PFS, effect AA faculty members’ careers at PWIs? As previously discussed, this book’s goal was to provide a scholarly contribution in two areas: (a) research regarding the career experiences and opportunities of AA faculty members at higher education institutions; and (b) contributing to the existing body of literature by applying the construct of microaggressions to the theories of the Model Minority Myth and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. The research conducted for this book has contributed to the significance of these elements by connecting the daily work experiences of higher education faculty members who identify as AA, and with the context of career tenure and promotion. Microaggressions have created not only discriminatory experiences for AA faculty members at PWIs, but also challenging obstacles for AAs in both higher education career leadership opportunities and the U.S. society as a whole (Teranishi et al., 2009). In addition, the research provided a multi-perspective approach to understanding the lack of leadership roles held by AAs in higher education institutions. The research incorporated unique frameworks and provided new information for other researchers who are investigating the ways in which the frameworks of microaggression, the Model Minority Myth, and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype can be used to promote further scholarship in this neglected area. These theories were conceptualized into the negative career effects AAs experience as a result of microaggressions in the workplace. The research focus on AA higher education faculty members provided valuable data that will inform policymakers and leadership in higher education institutions about ways to transcend traditional discriminatory power constructs with respect to AA faculty members’ experiences in leadership roles and career environments. The qualitative approach to this book was focused on the individual experiences of each participant and the connections among these experiences. The themes that emerged with greater frequency will inform policymakers in higher education regarding

114 

A. WU

how to support AAs in administrative roles and strengthen the mission of diversity at most colleges and universities. This investigation also sought to identify factors that create career obstacles that can potentially delay AA faculty members from assuming leadership roles at PWIs. The findings aim to help policymakers and executive boards within higher education increase recruitment, strengthen retention, and better utilize the collective experience and skills of highly qualified AAs. The theories of the Model Minority Myth and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype were examined as they apply to the construct of microaggressions experienced by AA faculty members in higher education. It was important to gain an understanding of racial issues stemming from social constructs and frameworks. Utilizing the framework of these two key areas, researchers will also better understand the discriminatory experiences faced by AAs. The historical blemishes of discrimination toward AAs, that stemmed from the Yellow Peril label (Zhu, 2013), to the CEA (Kil, 2012), to the internment of Americans of Japanese descent during World War II (Ng et al., 2007), form the central foundation of oppression to which AAs have been subjected during modern U.S. history (Chou & Choi, 2013). Modern day experiences of AAs and the challenges of their career path obstacles further demonstrated the application of new experiential knowledge that has the potential to drive awareness and prompt new scholarship for positive change and increased diversity in AA senior leadership opportunities. Finally, the effects of microaggressions to individual academic and business points of view by AA faculty members that brought an awareness of this area of discrimination by elucidating their unique experiences. A recognition of historical and racial frameworks in relation to the daily perspectives of current AA faculty members better addressed the marginalization and discrimination that is influencing equity of AAs in the current multicultural American society. This book examined the effects of microaggressions, the Model Minority Myth, and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, all critical issues faced by AAs in higher education leadership advancement. The continuing discrimination and prejudice resulting from real life experiences, both professional and personal, related to the aforementioned theories and concepts serve as forces that perpetuate the marginalization of AA faculty members. To this day, many AA faculty members still face longstanding historical racial obstacles and limitations that have relegated the diverse AA group to third class and perpetually foreign status, leading them to be incorrectly perceived as unsuited for leadership. According to Davis and

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

115

Huang (2013), “individuals, even those most familiar with higher education in general, fail to recognize that Asian Pacific Islander Americans are underrepresented in senior leadership” (p. 4). At the time of writing this book, there was limited established research on individual AA faculty members’ career advancement experiences and the challenges faced. Microaggressions and discrimination toward not just AA faculty members, but AAs as a whole, remain ongoing issues in the U.S. (Stack, 2016). The continuing presence of microaggressions and discrimination toward AAs as demonstrated in the media was alarming due to historical overt discrimination such as the CEA (Kil, 2012) and Japanese Internment during WWII (Ng et  al., 2007) that were seen as obstacles that have been transcended. At the highest level of government, microaggressions were evident. Examples outside of higher education included the current President of the U.S. questioning the origin of an American of Korean descent, thus reinforcing the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype (Guillermo, 2015). This type of overt discrimination perpetuated and indirectly validated the use of subvert microaggressions toward AAs. This book utilized semi-structured interviews with nine AA higher education faculty members. The participants were AA faculty members with early to middle-level career experience. The study examined whether microaggressions, defined as “brief and commonplace daily verbal, behavioral and environmental indignities, whether intentional or unintentional, that communicate hostile, derogatory or negative racial slights and insults that potentially have harmful or unpleasant psychological impact on the target person or group” (Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007a, p. 72), effect AAs’ career progression. The primary research question for this study, investigated in the form of 24 exploratory questions posed to nine U.S.-based AA faculty members via recorded, transcribed phone interviews over two 1-hour sessions. The construct of microaggressions was used as the fundamental framework for this book. Sue, Bucceri, et  al.’s (2007a) article, “Racial Microaggressions and the Asian American Experience,” provides a salient definition on the evolution of microaggressions; “The ‘old fashioned’ type where racial hatred was overt, direct, and often intentional, has increasingly morphed into a contemporary form that is subtle, indirect, and often disguised” (p. 72). Microaggressions reinforce institutional issues of dominant racist ideology and create negative stress and psychological trauma on the AA individual. Originally coined by Harvard University professor Chester M. Pierce (1974), microaggressions are considered more often

116 

A. WU

than not, that the issuing of microaggressions by the dominant race elicits little or no effect on the perpetrator. Additional theories that contributed to the construct of microaggressions included the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. The Model Minority Myth applied to the stereotype of Asian Americans as model minorities, especially in education. The image of supposed academic achievement of Asian Americans is used as a beacon to highlight the prototypical American success story (Ng et al., 2010), stereotyping AAs as a monolithic group to be admired and emulated by others. The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype presents the argument that some ethnic minority groups, AAs for example, are considered as other in the majority White society in the U.S. Ethnic minorities have experienced “discrimination, awareness of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, conflict between ethnic and national identities, sense of belonging to American culture, and demographics” (Huynh et al., 2011). The research also drew upon Tuan’s (2013) definition of the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype as occurring when AAs are “portrayed in extreme and simplified terms, either as perpetually foreign or as honorary members of an exclusive party hosted by whites” (p.  253). Chou and Feagin’s (2015) description of the Model Minority Myth as framed by White views of AAs as high achievers, but at the same discount the achievements as being conducted by “foreigners, nerds, or social misfits” (p, 14). The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype theory, the Model Minority Myth theory, and the construct of microaggressions formed the framework for the research in this book. This scholarship provided additional meaning regarding the career experiences of AA faculty members, the effects of microaggressions, and perceptions/experiences of their career paths in relation to microaggressions, resulting in eight themes. Four themes arose from AAs’ statements describing their experience as faculty members at PWIs and can be organized under 2 groups: Participant challenging microaggressions: Theme: Treated as an outsider Theme: Racial stereotypes Participants reflection on microaggressions: Theme: I am not the Model Minority Theme: Not a social problem.

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

117

Participants had generally experienced all four themes at their respective institutions. In addition, most participants faced experiences from colleagues and students being labeled as outsiders or foreigners. Specific examples included perceptions of being international students, others assuming their lack of English proficiency, being labeled as Oriental, and being asked where they are from (with the assumption of being foreign). In addition, participants experienced being labeled with the Model Minority Myth, manifesting mainly in the form of being considered passive (Chou & Feagin, 2015). Experiences related to this phenomenon, the inability to contribute during meetings and supervisors perceiving that they needed to increase their voices. This was a representation of direct effects as relating to microaggressions at the workplace that effected their careers. Additional model minority labels included, albeit to a lesser extent, self-sufficiency, being singularly focused on hard work, and not having the right leadership style. Lastly, participants were labeled as being unapproachable and mean, with an extreme example of being labeled with an Asian criminal stereotype based on physical appearance. Participants additionally shared that their experience with racism and discrimination as AAs was discounted or invalidated, an in fact being stereotyped as a minority group that did not experience such disadvantages in society. The following sections explore the themes that emerged in the data collection on participants’ experiences as AAs at PWIs. In the minds of both European Americans and some ethnic minorities (Asian Americans and Latino/as), being “American” is equated with being White (Armenta et al., 2013). The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype assumes that ethnic minorities do not fit the definition of what it means to be American and may manifest itself in subtle, covert marginalizing incidents, such as questioning an individual’s hometown, complimenting his/ her command of the English language, or mistaking him/her for a foreigner (Liang et al., 2004). Participants shared their experiences of not being considered Americans, but instead as outsiders/foreigners. Researchers have identified an overwhelming propensity to more readily ascribe the American identity to European Americans rather than to ethnic minorities (Armenta et  al., 2013). The data gathered in this study substantiated the common experience of AAs being perceived as outsiders or foreign by non-AAs, supporting Chou and Feagin’s (2015) statement that AAs are constantly being saddled with the identity of Asian foreigner. Many of the participants described experiences where colleagues treated them as outsiders or

118 

A. WU

foreigners, made assumptions of their national origins, by directly questioning their Asian country of origin. In addition, participants shared examples of when their proficiency in the English language was questioned, contributing to Sue’s (2010), description of being perceived as an alien in one’s own land. Notably, there were incidents where participants were considered foreign due to Asian religious stereotypes and international students when in actuality they were Christian and faculty members. These two specific examples demonstrated microaggressions extending the subcategories of religion and academic position. The findings revealed that the automatic assumption of AAs as non-American outsiders continues to be a consistent and prevalent experience. Ng et al. (2010) stated that the Model Minority Myth stereotype presented AAs as not having the right leadership style because they are quiet or passive, evoking ideas of their foreignness. This stereotype labels virtually all AAs as self-sufficient, well-educated, and upwardly mobile, incorrectly defining a diverse group as singularly focused on hard work with a tunnel vision approach to higher education achievement. The findings suggested that AAs were still considered to be hardworking, but certain factors kept them from being “fully embraced by the majority at the highest levels of higher education; as a result, they continue to be marginalized” (Ng et al., 2007, p. 119). The factors included being labeled as passive yet high performing professionals. This label of passivity contributed to what Sue (2010) described as societal stereotypes of AAs as inhibited, poor leaders and managers, and deficient in relationships. Other aspects of the model minority stereotype faced by the participants included being considered quiet, shy, or unapproachable. Such labels often led to them to consider the need to purposefully increase their contributions to AAs in the workplace. In addition, some participants experienced the generalization of AAs being high achieving faculty members and students. A surprising finding was that a participant took a proactive approach in announcing his non model minority identity, taking the position of being more American than Asian. The literature states that AAs have accepted that to survive in the U.S., they need to be more Americanized, thus perpetuating the dominant racial framework of minorities seeking the favor of Whites by attempting to fit in as much as possible (Chou & Feagin, 2015). In addition, this approach was reminiscent of Joe Chiang self-identifying to avoid discrimination from the U.S. government (Wong, 2005). Participants noted that stereotypes of AAs led to microaggressive effects in their work environments and career paths. There were instances of

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

119

management perceiving the lack AA faculty members contributing due to being stereotyped as quiet. This finding was consistent with the literature in that participants were marginalized and considered quiet and nice, but not as leaders (Davis & Huang, 2013). One participant shared an experience of an AA faculty member reaching a career ceiling despite having academic qualification but remaining as staff. This led to the assumption of not being considered for a leadership role due to AA stereotypes. Participants also shared experiences with gender-based AA stereotypes leading to microaggressions behaviors from colleagues and students. This finding corroborated with Ng et  al.’s (2007) discussion of AA women struggling with marginalization due to racism and sexism; challenges in establishing authority, credibility, and objectivity in the classroom; and the resistance they face from students. One participant shared feeling suspicious that he was not being hired for a position due to negative minority criminal stereotypes in which he was considered a non-model minority. The lone contrasting finding consisted of a participant stating that he was not able to think of one example of a racial stereotype at his institution. This experience stood in contrast to common experiences of AAs as evidenced by prior research and the data collected for this book. Participants shared situations where they found themselves considered as Whites along racial color lines or were in situations where they were included into discussion with White colleagues as part of their White group. Similar to the Model Minority Myth, where AAs are labeled similar to Whites and experience minimal socioeconomic or educational disadvantages. While the intent of the aggressor may be to compliment the Asian American individual by saying that Asians are more successful than other people of color, the negating message is that Asians do not experience racism— denying their experiential reality of bias and discrimination. (Sue, et al., 2007, p. 94) One participant described a conversation with White colleagues and being included in the colleague’s White perspective, causing confusion and surprise. Other participants shared that there were perceptions that AAs were a monolithic group that faced no challenges based on their racial background or were not social problems. This finding contributes to Sue, Bucceri, et al.’s (2007a) description of AAs being perceived stereotypically as a successful minority group and Museus and Vue’s (2013) confirmation that AAs are often grouped into a monolithic model minority that is perceived to achieve universal academic and occupational success. There was

120 

A. WU

the connection with literature on the AA immigrant experience and long-­ term experiences from childhood to adulthood in relation to negotiation of reality versus perceptions of doing fine was AAs (Chou & Feagin, 2015). As with prior themes, the participant responses resulted in confirmation of the racial stereotypes faced by AA faculty members at PWIs. Consistent with the scholarship of AAs’ experiences as being associated with the label of model minority success and confronting the daily challenges with racial hostility and discrimination (Chou & Feagin, 2015), participants in this study faced experiences of the Model Minority Myth label. Four themes became apparent in terms of how AA faculty members perceive their career paths at PWIs and thus provided answers to this research question: (a) perceived potential for individual and community growth/change, (b) accomplished things that we can be satisfied about, (c) token minority, and (d) a good relationship with management. According to the participants, AA faculty members perceived that three key areas influence their career paths areas: motivation, satisfaction, and relationship with management. Participants described their career motivation as having an impact at institutions and creating student success. For them, having an impact at work included supporting equity and social justice and fostering greater inclusiveness. Participants reported both high and moderate levels of career satisfaction. The relationship between faculty members and management was considered to be highly important. The relationship was perceived on two general levels: professional and personal. The professional level involved being able to influence administration and the personal level encompassed being able to control one’s own immediate work environment. Most participants reported facing tokenism in the workplace. As AAs, they were selected for roles that were primarily based on their AA background, not professional or academic qualifications. The participants that did not stress the importance of their relationship with management cited having very little contact with management, being tenured, or having a limited role at their institution. Ultimately, positive or negative relationships with management had an influence on their careers as AA faculty members. Overall, participants considered management a key part of their career paths as AA faculty members. Most participants experienced situations of tokenism in the workplace. They believed they had been selected for roles primarily based on their AA background, not based on professional or academic reasons.

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

121

Achievement, the work itself, and responsibility were several key examples of motivation d escribed by the participants. The participants often described experiences of workplace motivation very positively, without mentioning stereotype issues or microaggressions. In contrast to their negative career experiences, these motivators were considered opportunities for social justice and systematic positive change. The examples included working with students as sources of motivation in their careers. Additional examples described included effecting student growth and change, teaching students the usefulness of analysis, and students directly providing feedback about faculty members teaching successfully. Participants were also motivated by influencing students as individuals, as well as influencing societal structures on a larger scale. The finding is consistent with Kwong’s (2018) statement that AAs have a desire to serve populations with a vision of professionalism and altruism. Participants reported high levels of job satisfaction within their careers as faculty members. In addition, participants shared navigating career decisions and experiencing careers worth living as elements of high job satisfaction. They shared a tremendous amount of pride with their career satisfaction and paths. This career satisfaction contributes to what Ali (2009) finds especially AAs deriving substantial satisfaction to their academic careers. Even with the participants who described moderate job satisfaction, job stability and work/life balance were still elements of their job satisfaction. In avoiding dissatisfaction, participants shared that they could have performed much worse, but perceived their job stability as a measure that prevented them from seeking other employment opportunities. Many of the participants experienced tokenism as AA faculty members, chosen specifically for situations such as job tasks or committees at their institutions because of their AA heritage. They were placed in such groups or requested to manage student issues primarily based on being AAs instead of their scholarship or academic qualifications. The participants also suspected their selection was due to perceptions of being passive or having similar ethnic backgrounds as students. Kanter (1977) described, “The few of another type in a skewed group can appropriately be called ‘tokens,’ for … they are often treated as representatives of their category, as symbols rather than individuals” (p. 4,422). What was particularly relevant to AAs was the application of role encapsulation, a part of the tokenism process. Conversely, two participants shared experiences as AA faculty members among non-AAs with experiences that focused primarily on their

122 

A. WU

academic work with no effects of tokenism. The findings in this study suggested that the quantitative and ethnic studies fields have less occurrences of tokenism. AA faculty members in these fields did not consider themselves to be tokens in the workplace. Most participants in this book considered their relationships with management to be highly important, whether they were reporting positive or negative experiences. Participants reflected on the mutual exchange or benefit for their careers that resulted from having a positive relationship with management. Other participants shared frustrations concerning management turnover or lack of support for AA faculty members, but still voiced the importance of working together with management. Some participants did not perceive relationships with management as important due to limited interactions with management or experience serving as management/faculty members. They provided clear examples of the complexities of institutional administration and navigating the nuances of professional and personal relationships with managers. The importance of relationships contributed to AAs being conscious of communications with management and attempting to remember discussion topics to relate with executives, especially when they were from mutually different backgrounds. A surprising aspect of the participants’ responses was the exclusion of a direct need for more AAs in management. Instead, they felt that strengthening their relationships with management, increased communication, and decreased management turnover would better support the relationship between AA faculty members and management.

Findings The research conducted for this book yielded compelling results with strong implications for higher education administration policy and practice. This qualitative investigation utilized the process of semi-structured interviews of AA faculty members at PWIs that revealed in rich detail how they perceived their career experiences at PWIs. During the discussions, the participants described their experiences and shared their collective enthusiasm about sharing perspectives to promote future scholarship. In addition, the participants wished to improve the experiences of other AA faculty members and propel structural change in higher education and society in general. The research revealed that AA faculty members at PWIs were mostly highly satisfied with their career experiences and expressed increasing

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

123

levels of satisfaction as their careers progressed in higher education institutions. Participant responses indicated that despite dealing with microaggressions and stereotypes, the slow but continuous increase of AA faculty members and relevant programs at PWIs built an awareness and presence. This demonstration of the participants’ perseverance and workplace motivation contributed to their academic, professional, and personal values that have helped them navigate the challenges of microaggressions. Despite the finding that participating AAs have high job satisfaction, participants discussed the having to face the challenges and obstacles of historical and contemporary racial stereotypes faced by AAs. These negative perceptions AA faculty members as the model minority (Chou & Feagin, 2015), and perpetually the outsider, not American (Ng et  al., 2010), as it related to being professionals and academics on predominantly White college campuses. Consistent with the literature, participants expressed frustrations and concerns about being stereotyped as part of a passive model minority (Chou & Feagin, 2015) and the effects of such stereotypes on their daily work experiences and careers. Despite the challenges of microaggressions and stereotypes experienced by AAs at PWIs, two participants presented different experiences, they had little to no experience with microaggressions that had the potential to effect their careers. The findings were not consistent with the literature on microaggressions faced by AAs (Sue, Bucceri, et al., 2007a). Based on participant responses, despite dealing with microaggressions, the gradual increase in awareness and presence of AA faculty members at PWIs, especially with higher education administration, demonstrates their perseverance and academic, professional, and personal values that have helped them navigate such historical and structural challenges. The combination of motivation by student success and institutional impact, in particular the satisfaction of receiving positive recognition from students. These findings were aligned with recognition as a motivating factor that leads to job satisfaction. The participants were constantly motivated and highly satisfied by academic success and direct feedback from their students. More specifically, the source of the motivation was the opportunity to impact students to succeed in the areas the participants were teaching. Throughout this study, the participants did not mention salary as a motivator or factor in job satisfaction. Their satisfaction and motivation were based on the contributions and progressions they made as faculty members. In addition, as AAs gained experience working as faculty members, increasing opportunities to contribute to

124 

A. WU

institutional and societal change, such as social justice and diversity politics, became additional motivators. Overall, the findings of this book indicated that AA faculty members consider their satisfaction linked to student success, societal impact, and the effects of those two factors in creating gradual increased awareness of AA faculty members and programs at PWIs. It is important to note that despite AA faculty members reporting overall satisfaction, as part of increased awareness of AAs at PWIs, prior and continuing experiences of microaggressions still created obstacles to their professional development. Participants discussed having to face the challenges and obstacles of historical and contemporary racial stereotypes that created negative perceptions of AAs faculty members and academics and the limitations in Predominantly White Institutions. Consistent with the literature, participants expressed frustrations and concerns about being stereotyped as the passive Model Minority (Chou & Feagin, 2015). The Model Minority Myth has continuously labeled AAs as a group that lacks leadership qualities because they are quiet or passive evokes ideas of their foreignness. Many participants shared examples of being labeled as passive and quiet, and having experienced colleagues act surprised when they contribute to a discussion. These examples closely mirror the literature because model minority stereotypes present AAs as quiet or passive, not having the right leadership style and thus evoking ideas of foreignness (Ng et al., 2010). Additional literature supports the stereotype of managers expecting Asians to be good workers, but not to have potential leadership qualities (Gee et al., 2015). Ultimately, this leads to a salient question examined for this study based on research such as the following statistics presented by Davis and Huang (2013): Only 1.5 percent of college and university presidents are Asian Pacific Islander Americans and Asian Pacific Islander Americans lead all other racial minority groups in the percentage of full-time tenured faculty members at 7 percent, but they occupy just 2 percent of chief academic officer positions and 3 percent of deanships. (p. 1)

How do microaggressions impact AA faculty careers? The Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype was consistent with studies of ethnic minority experiences assuming that some ethnic minorities do not fit the definition of what it means to be American (Liang et  al., 2004). Many

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

125

participants in this book reported instances in which colleagues treated them as outsiders or foreigners (Tuan, 1998). In addition, consistent with the literature, non-AA colleagues made assumptions about participants’ national origins by directly asking about their Asian country of origin. In addition, participants shared examples of when their proficiency in the English language was questioned. The literature in this study referenced deeper historical racial discrimination that has framed the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype. From the historical foundation of racism and oppression, AAs have been subjected to discrimination during the course of modern U.S. history. Next, the necessity to challenge and dispel the dominant ideology of the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype applied to AA groups. These historical injustices have had a contemporary impact on the societal experiences of AAs. Microaggressions toward AAs, the Model Minority Myth, and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype demonstrate the foundational connection between the Yellow Peril label, CEA, and Japanese Internment during World War Two. These findings indicate that these connections are clear and present in the experiences of contemporary AAs, reinforcing the subtle nature of racial microaggressions (Sue, Bucceri, et  al., 2007a). The research indicates how these modern day challenges are framed by the historical foundations of racial discrimination. The participants were perceived as outsiders and non-American, reporting incidents such as being referred to using as the antiquated term Oriental, a historical placement of AAs’ otherness as a means of dominance and control (Ng et al., 2010). Additional examples of perception as an outsider include a participant being assumed not to understand Christianity due to others assuming the participant was foreign, when in fact the participant was Christian (and not foreign). A participant of Southeast Asian descent reported being given the Yellow Peril label because others perceived him as a thug and a threat due to his shaved head and darker complexion, ultimately believing him to be dangerous and foreign (Huynh et al., 2011). Such representations of long-standing historical racial bias and discrimination that were examined demonstrates a need for institutional support systems to educate and immediately correct misrepresentations of AAs. There needs to be more support and equity for AA faculty members at PWIs, giving added opportunities for a more positive image of AAs and additional support and awareness in increasing levels of AA diversity through recruitment and promotion of AAs at PWIs. In addition, the findings indicate the alarming continuation of nearly 200 years of

126 

A. WU

discrimination toward AAs (Chou & Feagin, 2015), creating an immediate need for the need for higher education leadership and stakeholders to build more awareness of cultural and historical racism, stereotypes, and discrimination, and encourage a stronger community for discussion and feedback among AA faculty members, especially due to the sensitive nature of race and the workplace themes. The findings indicate that AA faculty members experience racial stereotypes and discrimination and yet are able to navigate those challenges through perseverance and coping strategies. Some participants leveraged experiences of racism prior to their roles at PWIs, during childhood or immigration, and this early exposure prepared them for similar challenges in the workplace. A participant stated that such prior challenges had better prepared him for racism in academia, reporting that he had weaponized those experiences to his advantage. Other participants were able to accept the opportunity to be found in lesser roles or scraps (Chou & Feagin, 2015), such as teaching unfavorable classes at PWIs. A compelling statement by a participant, described a coping strategy of being more American than Asian. Tuan (1998), describes this assimilation as a strategy to of avoidance and diverting attention away from one's Asianness. The conformity to White expectations is a protective adaptation strategy AAs have demonstrated by trying hard to be American, by acting and being White to fit in with peer groups (Chou & Feagin, 2015). It is this disassociation with one’s own Asianness, in the hopes of being seen as an individual (Tuan, 1998, p. 1018), that demonstrates the need for future exploration on issues around intersectionality. In general, most of the participants tolerated the experience of microaggressions; even though they felt frustrated and treated inequitably, they had the perspective to seek opportunities to gradually engage in constructive discussions on AA issues. They adopted this approach while focusing on the true motivations and satisfaction gained from their impact on students and scholarship. The goal of this study’s recommendations is to eliminate the continuing implicit bias of microaggressions at PWIs. Contrary to the overall research finding that AAs at PWIs experience microaggressions, especially stemming from the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, two participants presented different experiences. Based on these participant responses, they had little to no experience of microaggressions that could potentially affect their careers. These participants reported working in the ethnic studies and statistics fields of study. One participant shared that the field of statistics is

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

127

quantitative and objective, removing the aspect of interpretation and eliminating bias and personal judgments that could lead to microaggressions. The participant in ethnic studies stated that virtually all of the colleagues in his department during the last 20 years were AAs or Asian, creating an environment essentially devoid of racism or discrimination against AAs. These specific environments may substantiate the stereotype of AAs as “technical workers, but not as executives” (Chou & Feagin, 2015, p.13). Despite AA faculty members in this study mostly having expressed the effects of microaggressions in the workplace, these unique perspectives of having little to no such experiences even more strongly demonstrates the significant challenges AA faculty members at PWIs must face as evidenced by the findings of this study. The findings indicate that the career fields of AA faculty members are diverse and not confined to limited categories of careers (Chou & Feagin, 2015), just as AA ethnicities (Museus & Vue, 2013). Unfortunately, the other seven AA faculty members in this research are in different fields of study where they have not been immune from experiencing microaggressions. These findings elucidate the representation of a demographic of AA faculty members that experience an absence of microaggressions due to specialized environments, but do not accurately represent the racial issues faced by AAs at PWIs or in society as whole. AA faculty member careers that have little or no effects of microaggression or microaggressions suggest there needs to be more opportunities for research on participants that are in the ethnic and statistics fields of study.

Model Minority Tokenism Model Minority Tokenism has emerged from the contemporary societal context and contracts of AAs in current U.S. higher education environments. The contemporary challenge presented to the frameworks of microaggressions, the Model Minority Myth, and the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype comes in the form of the recent influx of international students from Asia, primarily China, and the effects on AA faculty members. In the 2014-15 academic year, Chinese students studying in the U.S. increased by 10.8% to 304,040 (Allen-Ebrahimian, 2015). This increased population of Chinese students has led to significant tuition revenue for U.S. institutions. For example, at the University of Illinois at Urbana-­Champaign, tuition revenue from Chinese students consists of about a fifth of the institution’s revenue. The revenue has become so critical to the institution’s

128 

A. WU

finances that in 2018 the university paid $424,000 to insure itself in the event of a drop of enrollments from Chinese students (Bothwell, 2018). The theoretical frameworks utilized in this book were established 40-50 years ago and no longer apply directly to the emerging social contexts and constructs of this rapidly growing demographic. Model Minority Tokenism is the concept that has been developed through the findings and theories of this study. The theory of Tokenism, as representative of their category rather than independent individuals (Kanter, 1977), does not apply adequately to the emerging new experiences of tokenism AA faculty members will potentially face at PWIs. Model Minority Tokenism was not only based on the foundation of Kanter’s (1977) theory, but also is defined by AA faculty members being selected as tokens framed by the Model Minority Myth into the situations that are presumed to be AA or Asian environments. As faced by AAs in this study, tokenism included experiences of being selected into committees based on their AA ethnicity mainly as representatives of under-represented categories. Emerging Model Minority Tokenism included experiences of being selected as AAs into roles management considered best suited for the model minority: passivity in controlling students and perceived rapport with and understanding of international students, primarily from Asia, with which AAs may have little or no experience. The concept of Model Minority Tokenism is supported by a participant of this study describing institutions’ recent focus on overemphasis on international students’ experience. In addition, the participant expressed concerns regarding overgeneralization of the international experience into AAs experiences, presenting challenges for AA faculty members, especially in working with those particular students. Conceptually, Model Minority Tokenism postulates that due to the influx of international Asian students, there will be an increased need for AA faculty members to fill roles to support the goal of institutional revenue growth. The experiences of AA faculty members placed into these new roles will present additional challenges of AA role encapsulation.

Recommendations The purpose of the following recommendations is to better understand and correct the issues that AA faculty members face at PWIs and provide perspectives on how to better support their scholarship and future contributions to higher education. The framework of the Model Minority Myth

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

129

theory, the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype theory, and construct of microaggressions applied closely to the findings of this study. The recommendations based on these outcomes mirror the presuppositions of the Model Minority Myth and Perpetual Foreigner Stereotypes, stemming from historical racial discrimination that still exists in the AA faculty members’ experiences at PWIs. The majority of the participants reported that their AA identity influenced how their colleagues and managers perceived their role as faculty members. Participants generally described positive career experience outcomes as a result of motivation and satisfaction from student impact and success and their impact on institutions and society. The theories and construct attributed in this study drew both the negative and positive outcomes at PWIs and remained theoretically consistent; however, there is a change based on tokenism in the workplace that is relevant to the current higher education environment. The study findings indicate the need for continued research and institutional recommendations for higher education leadership and policymakers in executive level administration at PWIs. The book findings indicated that the participants continue to experience the historical and societal barriers that have significantly blemished the experience and recognition of AAs as part of American society. With respect to AA faculty members at PWIs, annual comprehensive AA diversity training and development of institutional management will better support AAs’ careers. Such trainings should be also conducted at higher education association organizations (Gee et al., 2015). An effective example was shared by a participant during an association meeting. A renowned non-AA scholar shared a greater understanding and recognition of AA programs, the gained knowledge of differentiating AA and Asian scholarship. The book found that participants expressed a lack of presence, support, or contact as factors leading to less effective relationships with supervisors. Required AA diversity training will yield increased opportunities to develop positive relationships, provide clear expectations of both faculty members and management, and gain a better understanding of issues faced by AAs higher education. This knowledge building has the potential result of forging a stronger relationship between AA faculty members and management. As the gaps in AA diversity awareness are addressed with annual training, expectations for scheduled quarterly follow up training and discussion with strategic timelines for concrete benchmark goals. These benchmark goals need to include the identification of outstanding

130 

A. WU

and qualified AA faculty as leadership role models. Concurrent with training, institutions need to consider additional opportunities to expand the consideration for AA faculty member candidates for future leadership positions. On the macro level, higher education institutions need to enact additional strategic plans and execute programs to recognize and promote AA faculty performance and behaviors that dispel racial stereotypes, prejudice, and discrimination. Thus, colleges, universities, and search firms must continually explore creative ways of identifying, developing, and advancing diverse leadership talent (Davis & Huang, 2013). This is critically important due to new leadership trends suggesting that individuals who see leadership as interdependent, collaborative, empowering, multicultural, and as a collective process are needed (Kezar et al., 2006). Through required training and development, stronger working relationships will present more equitable opportunities, including leadership roles, and serve as a catalyst in the gradual removal of external or internal career obstacles for AAs at PWIs.

Future Research This book was designed to explore and further understand the effects of microaggression on AA faculty members at PWIs. The population studied was a narrow representation of AA faculty members, but nonetheless it was an initial contribution to the body of literature that supports the exploration of their workplace experiences. Higher education institutions need to better support career experiences and opportunities for AA faculty members because the increasing demographics among AA college student populations across the U.S. creates an ongoing requirement for AA faculty members populations to better reflect the ratio of AA faculty members in leadership roles and support a diverse college student population. A prior study recommended additional research in the area of AAs at PWIs to better support diversity at colleges and universities (Surratt, 2012). As a continuation of this study’s research, a recommendation for future research is to conduct a similar study with AA faculty members with an increased population size. With the larger study population of AA faculty members who are employed colleges and universities, a more detailed understanding of the experiences AAs could provide increased scholarship on understanding of the effects of microaggressions. Another recommendation for future research is to further explore the intersection of other sub-categories of AAs and their experiences as faculty

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

131

members at PWIs. Although this study focused on AAs, grouping participants based on their specific AA backgrounds may be important for future studies in order to yield more data. Such further exploration of AA identities might include religion, creed, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, ancestry, age, or other protected statuses. These categories were not examined individually and were generally combined during this study. Given the growing complexity in AA diversity and the non-­ monolithic backgrounds of AAs, a deeper exploration into multiple identities could further critical future scholarship.

Conclusion AA faculty members at predominantly White colleges and universities across the country have contributed to the mission of institutional diversity. Despite the significant presence of AAs in higher education as faculty members and their even greater prominence as students, they continue to experience historical, societal, and contemporary racial stereotypes that manifest as microaggressions. This research provided continuing evidence about the effects of microaggressions and the perseverance of AAs as they struggle to establish their scholarship and contributions to institutions that may not be inclusive or supportive of their diverse American backgrounds. The Model Minority Myth theory, the Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype theory, and the construct of microaggressions were all evidenced in the research data collected from the participants. There was no evidence of departure from these theories, and no different theories emerged on AA faculty members’ experiences at PWIs. This book sought to investigate the experiences of AA faculty members at PWIs in order to increase the scholarship about the participants’ experiences as described through their daily experiences and perceptions as well as to inform college and universities on the ongoing challenges faced by AA faculty members at PWIs. Findings strongly demonstrated that AA faculty members were highly motivated and satisfied with effecting positive change for students and their gradual emergence from historical racial inequities. However, the realities of microaggressions experienced by AA faculty members exposed the perpetuation of negative career experiences and at the same time provided insight to the AA community, which will greatly benefit from the study participants’ narratives. Their perspectives and shared experiences have validated their dedication as educators, service to students and academia, and continuously bring diversity to their

132 

A. WU

respective academic fields. Higher education leadership and policymakers needed to underscore the importance of improving the career experiences of these academics and educators, strive to build more openness and tolerance for diversity, and recognize significant obstacles AAs continue to face during their career paths. Institutions were strengthened by the contributions of AAs, reinforcing the need to better protect and support AA professionals who are dedicated to diversity in American higher education.

References Abdul-Jabbar, K. (2021). Kareem Abdul-Jabbar: Hollywood Must Do More to Combat Asian Stereotypes. Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved from https://www. espn.com/nba/stor y/_/id/31437539/nba-­c reates-­k areem-­a bdul­jabbar-­social-­justice-­champion-­award Ali, P. (2009). Job satisfaction characteristics of higher education faculty by race. Educational Research and Reviews, 4, 289–300. Allen-Ebrahimian. B. (2015). Chinese students in America: 300,000 and counting. Retrieved from https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/11/16/china-­us-­colleges­education-­chinese-­students-­university Armenta, B. E., Lee, R. M., Pituc, S. T., Jung, K., Park, I. K., Soto, J. A., et al. (2013). Where are you from? A validation of the foreigner objectification scale and the psychological correlates of foreigner objectification among Asian Americans and Latinos. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 19, 131–142. Bothwell. E. (2018). Insuring against drop in Chinese students. Inside Higher Ed. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2018/11/29/ university-­illinois-­insures-­itself-­against-­possible-­drop-­chinese-­enrollments Burns, K. (Director). (2021). Muhammad Ali [Film]. Florentine Films. Chou, R. S., & Choi, S. (2013). And neither are we saved: Asian Americans’ elusive quest for racial justice. Sociology Compass, 7, 841–853. Chou, R.  S., & Feagin, J.  R. (2015). The myth of the model minority: Asian Americans facing racism. Paradigm Publishers. Davis, G., & Huang, B. (2013). Raising voices, lifting leaders: Empowering Asian Pacific Islander American leadership in higher education. American Council on Education. Guillermo, E. (2015). ‘Are You from South Korea?’ Harvard student speaks out about Trump event. NBC News. Retrieved from http://www.nbcnews.com/ news/asian-­a merica/are-­y ou-­s outh-­k orea-­h ar vard-­s tudent-­s peaks­out-­about-­trump-­n447496 Huynh, Q., Devos, T., & Smalarz, L. (2011). Perpetual foreigner in one’s own land: Potential implications for identity and psychological adjustment. Journal

6  CONCLUSION: THE EMERGENCE OF NEW TOKENISM 

133

of Social and Clinical Psychology, 30, 133–162. https://doi.org/10.1521/ jscp.2011.30.2.133 Kanter, R. (1977). Men and women of the corporation: New edition. Basic Books. Kezar, A., Carducci, R., & Contreras-McGavin, M. (2006). Rethinking the “L” word in higher education: The revolution in research on leadership. Jossey-Bass. Kil, S. H. (2012). Fearing yellow, imagining white: Media analysis of the Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882. Social Identities, 18, 663–677. https://doi.org/10.108 0/13504630.2012.708995 Kwong, K. (2018). Career choice, barriers, and prospects of Asian American social workers. International Journal of Higher Education, 7, 1–12. https://doi. org/10.5430/ijhe.v7n6p1 Landrum Jr., J. (2021). Q&A: Abdul-Jabbar talks new documentary, MLK, social justice. . Retrieved from https://apnews.com/article/ e n t e r t a i n m e n t -­v o t i n g -­r i g h t s -­r a c e -­a n d -­e t h n i c i t y -­s p o r t s -­a r t s -­a n d -­ entertainment-­a9f966faf402f3d18d492d1766c770ca Liang, C. T. H., Li, L. C., & Kim, B. S. K. (2004). The Asian American racism-­ related stress inventory: Development, factor analysis, reliability, and validity. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 51(1), 103–114. https://doi. org/10.1037/0022-­0167.51.1.103 Museus, S., & Vue, R. (2013). Asian American and Pacific Islander students’ transition to college: A structural equation modeling analysis. The Review of Higher Education, 37, 45–76. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2013.0069 NBA. (2021). Kareem Abdul-Jabbar Social Justice Champion Award. https:// www.nba.com/watch/video/kar eem-­a bdul-­j abbar-­s ocial-­j ustice­champion-­award Ng, J., Lee, S., & Pak, Y. (2007). Contesting the model minority and perpetual foreigner stereotypes: A critical review of literature on Asian Americans in education. Review of Research in Education, 31, 95–130. https://doi.org/10.310 2/0091732x07300046095 Pierce, C. (1974). Psychiatric problems of the black minority. In S. Arieti (Ed.), American Handbook of Psychiatry (Vol. 2, pp. 512–523). Basic Books. Stack, L. (2016, October 7). Protest Against Fox Correspondent Accused of Racism for Chinatown Interviews. The New York Times. Retrieved from http:// www.nytimes.com/2016/10/07/business/media/fox-­reporter-­accused-­of-­ racism-­for-­chinatown-­interviews-­on-­trump-­clinton-­and-­china.html?_r=0 Sue, D. (2010). Microaggressions in everyday life: Race, gender, and sexual orientation. Wiley. Sue, D., Bucceri, J., Lin, A., Nadal, K., & Torino, G. (2007a). Racial microaggressions and the Asian American experience. Cultural Diversity and Ethnic Minority Psychology, 13, 72–81. https://doi.org/10.1037/ 1099-­9809.13.1.72

134 

A. WU

Surratt, D. (2012). Exploration of perceptions held by African American male student affairs administrators at predominantly white institutions through the conceptual frameworks of Herzberg, Cose, and Kanter (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. (UMI No. 3617187) Teranishi, R., Behringer, L., Grey, E., & Parker, T. (2009). Critical Race Theory and research on Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders in higher education. New Directions for Institutional Research, 142, 57–68. https://doi. org/10.1002/ir.296 Tuan, M. (1998). Forever foreigners or honorary whites? The Asian ethnic experience today. Rutgers University Press. Wong, K. (2005). Americans First: Chinese Americans and the Second World War. Temple University Press. Zhu, Z. (2013). Romancing ‘Kung Fu master’  – from ‘Yellow Peril’ to ‘yellow prowess’. Asian Journal of Communication, 23, 403–419. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/01292986.2012.756044



Appendix

Interview Questionnaire: 1. What is your current position and how long you have worked in higher education? 2. How did you come to work in higher education? 3. How did you first become involved in AA associations? 4. Can you describe a time when supervisors or colleagues treated you differently because of your AA identity? 5. Can you talk about a time when you were asked to perform job duties, influenced by management’s perception on being an AA? 6. Can you think of a time you might have been treated differently by colleagues because of being an AA? 7. Do you believe that racial stereotypes are at play in your office or in past work environments? Can you describe one or two of them for me 8. Have you been perceived as the model minority during your career in higher education? If so, can you describe the situation? 9. How might you describe the pressure to succeed in your position compared to other not of Asian descent colleagues? Can you describe one or two of them for me? 10. Can you give an example of workplace challenges that you’ve observed other AAs experienced working in higher education? © The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0

135

136 

APPENDIX

11. Have you ever been perceived as an outsider or foreign by others in the work environment? If experienced, how did that make you feel? 12. Have you been a targeted as “foreign” while performing duties of your position? If so, can you describe the experience? 13. How do you think AAs are viewed by management at PWIs, as American or Foreign and why? 14. How would you describe your satisfaction levels with your career in higher education? 15. What motivates you in your work? 16. Can you describe both positive and negative experiences you have had while at work? 17. What strategies have you found to be successful when you worked with your not of Asian or Pacific Islander descent colleagues? 18. Describe the importance you place on your relationship with management? 19. What do you think of the current numbers of AAs in higher education leadership, positions? 20. What is your perception of other AAs in leadership positions in higher education? 21. How do you think AA faculty members are viewed by executive management? 22. Describe the experience being in a meeting or work event in which you were the only AA present? 23. Have you ever been in discussions at work in involving the topic race? 24. What other experiences you would like to discuss as an AA in higher education?

Index

A Abdul-Jabbar, Kareem, 111 Academic journals, 36 Academic qualifications, 102, 107, 120, 121 African American men, 62 Ali, Muhammad, 111 Alien body, 62 Aliens in their own land, 32 American Council on Education, 9, 37, 70 American identity, 16, 50, 54, 117 Americans of Japanese, viii, 14, 44–46, 51, 114 Anti-Asian, viii, 1–3, 28, 68 Anti-Chinese sentiment, 43 Armenta, viii, 16, 34, 46, 50, 54, 55, 117 Arthur, Chester A., 43 Ascription of intelligence, 32 Asian American graduate students, 79 Asian Americans (AA), vii–x, 1–22, 28, 31, 32, 34–38, 41–43, 45, 46, 48–54, 57, 61–86, 90–91, 94,

96–100, 102, 107, 108, 112–117, 119–131, 135, 136 as foreigners, 31 students, 3, 7, 11, 32, 75 Asian-American studies, 77, 99 Asian countries, 63, 65 Asian descent, 68, 99, 102, 125, 135 Asian employees, 7, 9, 69 Asian faculty member, 74, 80 Asian men, 46, 62 Asian Pacific Policy and Planning Council, 2 Asian women, 46, 54, 62, 112 Asiatic Exclusion League, 47 B Barrier, 7, 103 Basic interpretive method approach, 19 Becoming “White.”, 82 Ben, 4, 55, 56, 73, 78, 84, 85, 91, 92, 95, 96, 101, 102, 104 Bias and stereotyping, 16, 70

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 A. Wu, Asian American Educators and Microaggressions, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-23459-0

137

138 

INDEX

Bruce Lee, 41, 90 Bryant, Kobe, 61 Burton, Pierre, 41 C Career change, 71 Career decisions, 95, 97, 121 Career environments, 17, 113 Career experiences, vii, viii, 3, 4, 12, 14, 19, 22, 35, 36, 45, 85, 108, 113, 116, 121, 122, 130, 131 Career impact, 12, 13 Career motivators, 93 Career paths, 10, 16, 17, 33, 76, 90, 92, 102, 106, 107, 116, 118, 120, 132 Career satisfaction, 95, 97, 107, 120, 121 Caregiver, 101 Chan, Jeffery Paul, 63 Chiang, Joe, 48, 118 Childhood, 85, 120, 126 Chin, Frank, 63 China, 1–22, 43, 63, 127 Chinese American adolescents, 48 Chinese Exclusion Act, viii, 11, 14, 28, 43, 51 Chinese immigration, 43 Chinese virus, 2, 27, 28 Chou, R. S., 46, 63–65, 77, 83, 116, 117 Chris, 4, 57, 81, 82, 91, 92, 97, 101, 106 Christian, 54, 118, 125 Chun, K., 6, 74 Civil Rights Act of 1964, 45 Clinton, B., 44 Coding, 18 College presidents, 8, 35 Community Growth, 91–94 Conceptual framework, 35, 36

Confucian stereotype, 42 Coolie laborers, 46 Corporate world, 15 Country of origin, 57, 118, 125 COVID-19, viii, 1, 2, 28 Culture, 2, 17, 21, 27, 28, 33, 34, 37, 53, 90, 96, 99, 116 D Davis, G., vii, 9, 11, 37, 45, 71, 119, 130 de Blasio, Bill (New York Mayor), 5 Deans, 20, 35, 105 Deference, 7, 15, 69 Denise, 4, 53, 71, 72, 76, 91, 95, 100, 103 Discrimination, vii–ix, 1, 3, 4, 7, 10, 11, 14, 17, 21, 28, 32, 33, 35, 37, 41–46, 48, 51, 52, 62, 63, 65–67, 69, 70, 73, 76, 82, 86, 90, 114–120, 125–127, 129, 130 Diversity, ix, 7, 10, 12–14, 18–20, 31, 36, 37, 42, 51, 54, 57, 69, 81, 90, 91, 93, 104, 105, 114, 124, 125, 129–131 politics, 93, 94, 124 Dragon ladies, 44, 46, 62 E East Asians, 52–53, 67, 75, 84 Elite universities, 75 Emasculated, 46, 61, 62 Emasculation of men, 112 Emotional labor, 101 English language, 5, 16, 35, 50, 56, 57, 86, 117, 118, 125 Enlightened, 81 Epistemology, 96 Eroticization of Asian American women, 32

 INDEX 

Ethnic groups, 2, 8, 49, 51 Ethnic minorities, 16, 34, 35, 42, 46, 49, 50, 54, 55, 117, 124 Ethnic studies program, 77 Existing literature, 36 F Faculty members, vii, viii, 3, 4, 6, 8–15, 17–20, 22, 35–38, 42, 49, 52, 53, 55, 56, 71, 73, 74, 76–82, 84, 91, 94, 98, 99, 102, 104, 106–108, 112–116, 118–131, 136 Feagin, J. R., 63–65, 77, 83, 116, 117 Findings, viii, 13, 15, 20, 22, 55, 67, 108, 112, 114, 118, 122–129 FOB, 56, 67 Foreigners in their own land, 16, 17, 33, 76 Foreignness, 6, 15, 16, 31, 32, 47–50, 52, 54, 64, 72, 118, 124 Fostering relationships, 103 Frameworks, vii, viii, 3, 13, 14, 17, 35, 36, 112–114, 127 Frustrations with management, 103 Fullbloods, 53 G Gender, 29, 33, 36, 74, 80, 119, 131 Golden boy, 73 Gold Rush, 43 Google, 6, 69 Gow, Joe, 63 Graduate degree, 19, 67 H Hard workers, 69 Harlem riots of 1964, 111 Hawaii 5-0, 90

139

Higher education, vii–ix, xiii, 3, 4, 6–15, 18–22, 33, 35–37, 42, 45, 49, 52, 54, 64, 68, 69, 71, 72, 91, 96, 102, 108, 112–115, 118, 122, 123, 126–129, 131, 132, 135, 136 administrator, 20 institutions, xiii, 3, 10, 12, 13, 18–21, 35, 45, 112, 113, 123, 130 Ho, S. Y., 46, 63 Honorary whites, 3 Huang, B., vii, 9, 11, 37, 43, 45, 55, 64, 69, 71, 114, 119, 124, 130 Hyphen, 73 I I am not the Model Minority, 37, 107, 116 Immigrant, 31, 43, 47, 50, 66, 84, 85, 93, 102, 120 Impact, 92 Incidents of AA hate, 112 Inclusiveness, 92, 107, 120 Income achievements, 64 Infantilizing of women, 112 Inferior representations, 29 Influencing societal change, 108 Institutional administration, 103, 122 Internal generalizability, 20 International students, 32, 57, 79, 86, 117, 118, 127, 128 Interview protocol, 18 J Japan, 46, 49, 63, 65 Japanese ancestry, viii, 44 Japanese Internment, 11, 44–45, 115, 125 Jim, 4, 54, 72, 77, 83, 106

140 

INDEX

Job satisfaction, 94, 95, 97, 121, 123 Jong Un, Kim, 16, 49, 63, 66, 67, 90, 112 K Kim, Daniel Dae, 90 King, Martin Luther Jr., 111 L Labels, 14, 19, 61, 76, 86, 117, 118 Latino/Hispanic Americans, 16, 17, 32, 76 Leadership, viii, xiii, 6–17, 31, 33, 36, 37, 42, 45, 49, 51, 55, 63, 69–74, 76, 78, 79, 81, 82, 86, 104, 105, 113, 114, 117–119, 124, 126, 129, 130, 132, 136 Lee, K., 6, 7, 10, 11, 34, 35, 41, 46, 63, 73 Life magazine, 47, 48 Lingard, 49 M Malcolm X, 111 Managers, 16, 70, 103, 118, 122, 124, 129 Marginalization, viii, 11, 14, 31, 34, 36, 52, 114, 119 of minority groups, 31 Marginalized population, 8 Mass communications, 28 Mathematics, 72, 94 Matsuda, 68 Media, ix, 5–7, 9, 11, 29, 37, 43, 45, 46, 54, 57, 62–64, 67, 69, 90, 112, 115 Mental health problems, 48–49 MERS outbreak, 27

Microaggressions, vii–ix, 2–6, 8, 10–18, 21, 22, 27–38, 42, 45, 48, 51, 52, 55, 56, 62, 70, 76, 82, 85, 86, 108, 112–119, 121, 123–127, 129–131 Microinvalidation, 32 Middle class, 67 Middle status, 65, 68 Milton, John, 55 Minority color lines, 82 Model Minority Myth, vii, viii, 3, 5–8, 10, 12–17, 19, 21, 35, 36, 38, 42, 45, 49, 51, 52, 61–86, 91, 112–114, 116–120, 124–128, 131 Model Minority Stereotype, 6, 7, 81 Monolithic group, 8, 15, 37, 75, 83, 85, 116, 119 Museus, S., 51 N NBA, 111 Nearer to Whites, 83 Newsweek, 64 Ng, 6, 14, 15, 21, 34, 36, 42, 44, 45, 49, 50, 53, 54, 64, 66–68, 71, 72, 114–116, 118, 119, 123–125 Nick, 4, 52, 75, 80, 83, 84, 92, 94, 95, 97 Nicole, 4, 56, 74, 75, 80, 84, 92, 93, 97–99, 105 1965 Immigration Act, 43 Non-Asians, 77 Non-ethnic norm, 103 O Opportunity hires, 99 Oppression, 66, 114, 125 The O’Reilly Factor, 5 Orientalism, 49, 50 Other minorities, 16, 17, 32, 52, 76

 INDEX 

P Park, Grace, 90, 112 Participants, 4, 13, 15, 19, 22, 37, 52, 57, 71, 76, 77, 81, 82, 85, 86, 90–92, 94, 95, 97, 98, 102, 103, 106–108, 112, 113, 115–129, 131 Passivity, 68, 72–74, 78, 79, 86, 118, 128 Patriotism, 68 Pearl Harbor, 46 People of Color, 33 Perpetual Foreigner Stereotype, vii, viii, 3, 5–7, 10–14, 16, 17, 21, 35, 36, 38, 41–57, 62, 68, 69, 85, 112–117, 124–127, 129, 131 Pierce, Chester M., 16, 28, 115 Prashad, Vijay, 68 Predominantly White Institution, 21 Professional and academic success, 10 Professional development, 70, 91, 124 Professional experiences, 10, 13, 18, 33 Promotions, 69, 105 Psychological trauma, 17, 32, 76, 115 Q Qualitative research, 18, 22, 36 Quantitative research, 18, 102 R Racial bourgeoisie, 65, 68 Racial discourse, 43, 66 Racially triangulated, 6, 68 Racial perceptions, 17 Racial reality, 6, 32, 34, 82, 84 Racial stereotypes, 62, 76–81 Racism, vii, viii, 1–3, 5–8, 10, 13, 14, 16, 17, 28, 30, 32, 33, 42, 45,

141

46, 50, 51, 67, 68, 76, 77, 84–86, 117, 119, 125–127 Racist Love, 63 Reagan, Ronald, 44 Refugees, 10, 84 Relationship with management, 90, 91, 102, 105–108, 120, 122, 136 Rizvi, 49 Role model, 93 Russo-Japanese War, 47 S Said, 49 Sam, 4, 54, 73, 77, 85, 92, 95, 99, 103 Samurai, 48, 55 Scapegoat, 65, 68 Sean, 4, 53, 73, 74, 80, 92, 93, 95, 97, 98, 105 Second-class citizens, 32, 74 Second World War, 47 Self-determination, 70 Silicon Valley, 7, 15, 69, 70 Social inequities, 94 Social justice, 36, 72, 91, 101, 107, 111, 112, 120, 121, 124 Social norms, 54 Social problem, 37, 85, 107, 116 Socioeconomic, 8, 9, 51, 65, 66, 68, 75, 82–84, 119 Socioeconomic groups, 9 South Asians, 9, 53 South East Asians, 9, 75, 83, 84 Stereotypes, vii, 5, 7, 8, 16, 17, 27, 31, 34, 36, 37, 41, 43, 46, 48, 51, 53, 54, 57, 61, 62, 67, 68, 71, 73, 74, 76–78, 80–86, 91, 98, 107, 108, 112, 116, 118–120, 123, 124, 126, 130, 131, 135 Stress, 17, 32, 51, 76, 107, 115, 120

142 

INDEX

Student activists, 100 Student success, 19, 90–92, 94, 95, 107, 108, 120, 123, 124 Superpower, 101 Superstar, 61, 84 Supervisors, 57, 71, 76, 77, 81, 86, 108, 117, 129, 135 Surratt, D., ix, 73, 130

U.S. Department of Labor, 8, 9 U.S. News & World Report, 64

T Taiwanese American, 61, 62 Tenured, 8, 9, 71, 83, 104, 106, 107, 120, 124 The Texas Snake Man, 28 Till, Emmett, 111 Time, 64 Tojo, General Hideki, 48 Tokenism, 100, 102, 107, 108, 120, 121, 128, 129 Token Minority, 98–102 Tokens, 71, 73, 98, 101, 102, 121, 128 Treated as an outsider, 53, 107 Trump, Donald, 2, 27, 28 Tuan, M., 42, 46, 116, 125, 126 Two-way street, 104

W Watters’ World, 5 Wen-hao, Ong, 47 Where are you from?, 34, 50 Where are you really from?, 50 White colleagues, 32, 45, 82, 85, 119 White color lines, 82 White institutional power, 17, 32, 76 White majority, 6, 10, 63, 68, 69 Wise, Phyllis, 62 Women of color, 101 Workplace, ix, 2, 12, 13, 36, 42, 45, 46, 76, 81, 82, 84, 86, 90, 91, 102, 103, 107, 108, 113, 117, 118, 120–123, 126, 127, 129, 130, 136 Wu, 27, 28, 50, 64

U University life, 104 University presidents, 9, 70, 124 Upper management, 106 U.S. Census Bureau, 8, 51 U.S. culture, 17, 76

V Vernon, Philip, 64 VP of student life, 100 Vue, R., 51

X Xenophobia, 1–3, 32, 47 Y Yellow Peril, 3, 13, 43–45, 47, 49, 51, 54, 62, 63, 114, 125