Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion [1 ed.] 9781593327194, 9781593325992

Citation preview

The New Americans Recent Immigration and American Society

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Edited by Steven J. Gold and Rubén G. Rumbaut

A Series from LFB Scholarly Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Second-Generation Korean Americans The Struggle for Full Inclusion

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Dae Young Kim

LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC El Paso 2013 Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013 by LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Kim, Dae Young, 1968Second-generation Korean Americans : the struggle for full inclusion / Dae Young Kim. pages cm. -- (The new Americans: recent immigration and American society) Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-59332-599-2 (hardcover : alk. paper) 1. Korean Americans. 2. Children of immigrants--United States. I. Title. E184.K6K425 2013 973'.04957--dc23 2013000006

ISBN 978-1-59332-599-2 Printed on acid-free 250-year-life paper. Manufactured in the United States of America.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments ............................................................................... vii Chapter One: Introduction ..................................................................... 1 Chapter Two: “Harvard, Harvard, Harvard!”: The Pursuit of Elite High Schools and Colleges................................... 15 Chapter Three: “Not a Deli. That's Too Hard.”: From Korean Immigrant Small Businesses to Professional Occupations .................................................................. 47 Chapter Four: “They Know Only Three Careers-Medicine, Law, and Engineering.”: Second-Generation Job Search and Work Experience ........................................ 65 Chapter Five: “You Drive Anywhere West of Pennsylvania … and People Stare.”: Racial Othering and Its Impact on Second-Generation Identities ....................... 89 Chapter Six: “He Just Avoids Korean Americans Like the Plague.”: Second-Generation Responses to Racialization ............................................................... 109 Chapter Seven: “Politicians, It’s All Talk and No Action.”: The Struggle for Political Integration ................................ 129 Chapter Eight: Conclusion: The Making of Ethnic and Panethnic Identities ........................................................... 159 Appendix A: Binary logistic regression - education .......................... 179 Appendix B: Korean American self-employment and occupation..... 183 Appendix C: Binary logistic regression - politics .............................. 189 References .................................................................................... 193 Index .................................................................................... 217 v

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Acknowledgments

This study would not have been possible without the generosity and encouragement of numerous people all of whose names cannot be mentioned here. A number of people, however, deserve special mention. I would like to thank John Mollenkopf, Mary C. Waters, and Philip Kasinitz for their invaluable support and encouragement during the entire course of the project. Stephen Steinberg and Pyong Gap Min, with usual graciousness and incisiveness, provided me with helpful advice and feedback. During the final stages of writing this book, Philip Kasinitz and my colleagues at George Mason University were also extremely supportive. I would like to thank in particular Joseph Scimecca, Susan Trencher, and Rutledge Dennis for their support and helpful comments on earlier drafts. As with any research, the generosity of survey and in-depth interview participants, who took time from their busy schedules to respond to the telephone and follow-up interviews, brought this project to life. My parents, Jong Wook Kim and Jung Yae Cho, deserve special recognition and appreciation for their unwavering support. Finally, I dedicate this book to my wife, Hyun Mee Chae, and our sons Ryan S. and Brandon Y. Kim.

vii Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved. Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

CHAPTER ONE

Introduction

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

SECOND-GENERATION INTEGRATION OR EXCLUSION? Next time you make an appointment to see a dentist or doctor, or schedule a meeting with co-workers, you may notice that many of the young professionals with whom you come into contact will have last names such as Kim, Lee, Park, or Cho. These young Korean American doctors, dentists, lawyers, engineers, accountants, pharmacists, consultants, and analysts, like millions of children of post-1960s immigrants, represent the new face of an ever more diverse American work force. Yet, because this emerging group of the adult children of Korean and other immigrants is entering an American society undergoing significant racial and ethnic change, a major question that arises for second-generation immigrants breaking into mainstream labor markets as professionals is whether their success in education and occupation translates into social inclusion in other areas of American society. Or is race still an enduring boundary that trumps class (and acculturation) for second-generation immigrants? In the face of an epic demographic transformation spurred by the entry since the 1960s of millions of new immigrants from Latin America, Asia, and Africa, the incorporation of immigrants, and especially their children, is arguably one of the most salient public policy issues at present and will be in years to come. In post-civil rights America, an era that brought the first Black American, Barack Obama, to the presidency, whether secondgeneration immigrants positioned in intermediary positions in the racial order are able to make the same leap into the mainstream is a critical question that needs to be addressed and examined. Especially for second-generation immigrants from middle-class backgrounds making 1 Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

2

Second-Generation Korean Americans

the crucial transition from college to work, the intersection of class with race (and gender) makes the prospects of full assimilation ever more complex and ambiguous. How does being middle-class and raised and schooled in America, but being non-white (and non-Black) affect the prospects of integration for second-generation immigrants? This book asks about 1.5 and second-generation Korean Americans 1 , a middle-class group known for its entrepreneurialism and intermediary position in the racial hierarchy and their prospects for assimilation in the “racial middle.” 2 The adult children of Korean immigrants constitute an important case study because they are a sizable immigrant group, reside in most major metropolitan areas, and are becoming increasingly visible in the mainstream of American society. As a nonwhite immigrant group, but one that is endowed with class and ethnic resources, Korean American struggles for inclusion complicate automatic assumptions of whitening or assimilation. A primary aim of this book is to highlight the challenges immigrant minorities face when they occupy intermediate positions in the racial order given that structural integration in residence, marriage, education, and occupation does not translate into full assimilation in other areas of mainstream American society such as the polity, culture, and identity. A second goal of the book is to examine the identity responses to and coping strategies of second-generation Koreans against exclusion and racial othering. How do second-generation Korean Americans respond to racialization? Do they claim an American identity over ethnic (Korean) or pan-ethnic (Asian American) ones? Or is there an effort to selectively choose and create a hybrid, bicultural (Korean American) identity?

1

Unless noted otherwise, the second-generation designation used throughout the book will include the 1.5 generations. I am well aware of the differences between the 1.5 generation and the second generation, but for ease I am using the latter term to designate both generations. 2 By “racial middle” or groups in intermediary positions in the racial order, I am referring to immigrant groups positioned between the traditional whiteBlack divide, particularly immigrants entering the United States with premigration educational training, job skills, and financial capital (See O’Brien 2008). Highly-educated Asian, Latino, Arab, and Middle-Eastern immigrants fit these criteria as they achieve economic success as well as racialization.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Introduction

3

These questions, pertinent to second-generation social mobility and identity, address critical theoretical and public policy concerns regarding the social and cultural impact of the post-1960s immigration as well as questions about ethnic and racial relations, income inequality, and ethnic mobility.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

IMMIGRANT MINORITIES IN INTERMEDIARY POSITIONS IN THE RACIAL ORDER By most empirical measures, the assimilation of descendants of European immigrants is more or less complete. European American groups are no longer differentiated by ethnic gaps in education, occupation, and income, or by language, residential or marital separation (Alba 2009; Alba and Nee 2003; Bean and Stevens 2003; Hirschman 2001). Although symbolic ethnicity is still alive for many, ethnicity is no longer comprehensive and compelling in the lives of fourth- or fifth-generation European Americans (Gans 1979). By contrast, racial minorities, particularly Black Americans, are still heavily burdened by the weight of racial boundaries, with race significantly determining their life chances (Feagin 1991; Massey and Denton1993; Omi and Winant 1994; Wilson 1987; Winant 2001). Hence, despite the progress and noteworthy gains achieved by Black Americans following their struggles during the civil rights movement, the intractability of racial boundaries continues to raise serious doubts about the prospects of full assimilation for Black Americans in the foreseeable future. For immigrant minorities positioned within the white-Black racial divide, namely 1.5 and second-generation immigrants that are for the most part raised and schooled in the United States, the prospects for assimilation and full inclusion, while optimistic, remain uncertain. In the growing literature on the new second generation, two perspectives, optimistic and pessimistic views, dominate the discussion of secondgeneration mobility. Based on empirical studies of the American Community Survey of the U.S. Census, the Current Population Survey, and large-scale survey studies, the immigrant optimism or assimilation thesis finds that children of post-1960s immigrants are doing better educationally and occupationally relative to their parents and are poised to achieve assimilation and integration into the mainstream or are moving positively in that direction (Alba 2009; Alba and Nee 2003;

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

4

Second-Generation Korean Americans

Kasinitz et al. 2008; Perlmann 2005). Reformulating the classic theory of assimilation to account for variations in mobility for new immigrant groups, Alba and Nee (2003) revise a uniform and prescriptive model of ‘straight-line’ assimilation that projected progressive declines in home country culture and language and rising residential and marital assimilation across generations (Gordon 1964; Warner and Srole 1945). In another major empirical study of the second generation that examined the group’s integration into the mainstream, Kasinitz et al. (2008) also find that children of immigrants in New York obtain, on average, better educational and occupational attainment relative to their immigrant parents and native-born minority groups of similar age, although the authors observe that some groups such as secondgeneration Dominicans face serious risks for downward mobility due to low family socioeconomic status and residential segregation. Thus, scholars examining these questions through a lens focused in the tradition of assimilation view Asian Americans and Latinos as following and replicating the classic European American model of assimilation (Alba 2009; Alba and Nee 2003; Gordon 1964). From this perspective, second-generation immigrants are expected to “whiten,” bringing each generation closer to mainstream life and culture. For immigrant groups arriving with education, job skills, and wealth, as well as ethnic resources, the prospects for their children’s integration into the mainstream are enhanced by a favorable context of reception. According to this perspective, class (and gender) intersects with race and ethnicity to shape the upward mobility of immigrants and in particular, those of the second generation (Alba and Nee 2003; Alba et al. 2011). For middle-class Asian Americans, class seems to increasingly trump race and ethnicity. On measures of educational and occupational attainment, residential integration, and intermarriage, they seem to be well on their way to rapid assimilation compared to middleclass Black Americans, who still face numerous barriers in residential and marital integration. As much research on residential segregation and intermarriage shows, the proportion of middle-class Black Americans in integrated neighborhoods or in white-Black marriages is substantially lower than those of Asian Americans (Qian and Lichter 2007; Telles and Sue 2009). While race and ethnicity constitute formidable barriers that weigh in on second-generation integration into the mainstream, social class and other markers of status are increasingly shaping the fortunes of middle-class Asian and Latino

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Introduction

5

Americans in post-civil rights America, enabling members of these groups to circumvent some of the more pernicious boundaries of race. Other scholars, those focused on race, pan-ethnicity, or segmented assimilation, however, hold reservations about the optimism of the assimilation framework and argue, instead, that second-generation immigrants are likely to follow a somewhat different course from the paths of the European American predecessors (Haller et al. 2011; Omi and Winant 1994; Portes and Rumbaut 2006; Portes and Zhou 1993; Telles and Ortiz 2008). They note that post-1960s immigrants are distinguished by a socioeconomic and ethnic diversity, which complicates a one-size-fits-all model of second-generation assimilation. As Telles and Ortiz (2008) observe, immigrant minorities will vary in their pace and degree of assimilation, and even if they undergo rapid acculturation, ethnic persistence is likely for some. Especially for second-generation immigrants from working-class backgrounds, class and racial disadvantage will have adverse effects on this group’s chances for landing well-paying jobs in a restructured post-industrial service economy that privileges education and skills (Gans 1992; Perlmann and Waldinger 1997; Portes and Rumbaut 2006; Portes and Zhou 1993). Since the 1970s, the progressive decline of manufacturing in the United States through the offshoring of factory jobs and industries to China, Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, and other Third World countries has precipitated the loss of well-paying, unionized, bluecollar jobs, reducing opportunities for upward mobility and accelerating income inequality for working-class Americans and second-generation immigrants alike (Bluestone and Harrison 1982; Levy 1987). Moreover, the legacy of racial and ethnic stratification and continued discrimination against racial minorities affects mobility for those who are viewed and treated as non-Whites (Gans 1992; Haller et al. 2011). It is along these lines that segmented assimilation theory outlines three prospects for the children of immigrants given the heterogeneity of human capital and the context of reception for new immigrant groups. In the first scenario, second-generation immigrants from middle-class backgrounds, supported by the class advantage of their immigrant parents, achieve educational and occupational success and assimilate into middle-class white America (the classic “straight-line” model of assimilation) (Gans 1992; Haller et al. 2011; Portes and Rumbaut 2006). In the second scenario, the children of working-class immigrants, undermined by family socioeconomic disadvantage that

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

6

Second-Generation Korean Americans

relegates the second generation into segregated neighborhoods with high crime rates and subpar schooling, acculturate into a risky peer subculture and increasingly join the ranks of the racial underclass, namely downward assimilation in the form of school dropouts, juvenile delinquency, unemployment, incarceration, and poverty (Gans 1992; Haller et al. 2011; Portes and Zhou 1993; Portes and Rumbaut 2006). This descent into the ranks of the underclass and persistent poverty, however, can be averted in the third scenario of this thesis by actively resisting the identity influences of the peer subculture and by staying firmly attached to the immigrant parents’ culture and identity (Gibson 1989; Portes and Zhou 2003; Zhou and Bankston 1998). The strong social capital that is generated through immigrant social networks can, in this instance, help shield the second generation from the influences of negative acculturation, helping to transmit immigrant norms and values of academic and occupational achievement and improving second-generation chances for upward mobility. Of interest here is that despite the different foci of these two theoretical lenses, segmented and new assimilation theorists are equally optimistic about the prospects of assimilation of second-generation immigrants from middle-class backgrounds (Alba and Nee 2003; Gans 1992; Portes and Rumbaut 2006). What differentiates the two approaches is their assessment of the upward mobility of secondgeneration immigrants from working-class backgrounds, with segmented assimilation theory finding downward assimilation and underclass status in the second generation while the new assimilation theory finding second-generation progress and gradual upward mobility (Alba et al. 2011; Haller et al. 2011; Waters et al. 2010). In the aftermath of the biggest economic recession since the Great Depression, with income inequality reaching its most serious levels, current fears and concerns over the prospects of integration and upward mobility for millions of disadvantaged children of immigrants are understandable and of utmost importance as a public policy issue. Yet, beneath the shuffle of public policy debates and speculations over the prospects of second-generation integration, particularly those from working-class backgrounds, there is an automatic assumption of assimilation into the mainstream for 1.5 and second-generation immigrants from middleclass backgrounds. In the latest speculations about the emerging racial and ethnic order in the United States, scholars foresee the development of several

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Introduction

7

new racial structures (Marrow 2009: 1038-1040). One posits a new racial stratification comprised of hegemonic white middle/upper classes sharing power with more advantaged immigrant groups. A second vision predicts a new racial bottom comprised of poor Blacks and working-class immigrant groups (Alba 2009; Gans 1999). Another suggests a tri-racial system of stratification reminiscent of racial stratification systems in Latin America, with middle-class Asians and Latinos consolidating a position in the racial middle between the white and Black divide (Bonilla-Silva 2004; Massey 2007). Hence, whereas some see immigrant minorities in the racial middle getting stuck and the racial and ethnic stratification system hardening into a tripartite racial and ethnic order, others sustain a view of continued whitening and assimilation for middleclass immigrants and their children, setting in motion the consolidation of a Black/non-Black racial order (Gans 1999). Yet, the outlook for full inclusion for intermediary groups in the racial hierarchy is not as simple and straightforward as automatic assumptions of whitening expect. As Telles and Ortiz (2008) observe, there is an insistence on a narrative that draws its cues from a historically optimistic view of assimilation. A tripartite view of racial formation suggests groups in the racial middle such as middle-class Asian Americans and Latinos experience rapid acculturation and structural integration, but their conditional acceptance as immigrant minorities means that their assimilation is also accompanied by lasting racialization and exclusion in other areas of American society such as the polity, culture, and identity. Thus, ongoing racialization complicates the racial structure that is under construction, which can produce a racial and ethnic order that is enduring and entrenched rather than an optimistic projection of full assimilation for immigrant minorities straddling the Black-white divide. In short, elusive inclusion, namely the condition of being insider/outsider, a part/yet apart, may be emblematic of immigrant minorities in intermediary position in the racial hierarchy. POST-1960S IMMIGRANTS AND THEIR CHILDREN Since the 1960s, millions of new immigrants from the Third World have arrived on U.S. shores, adding unparalleled diversity to the social, economic, cultural and political fabric of the nation. The 2010 U.S. Census counted a total of 308 million people, out of which 38.6 million

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

8

Second-Generation Korean Americans

were foreign-born, comprising 12.5 percent of the U.S. population. Through immigration, minority groups such as Latinos and Asian Americans that prior to the 1960s constituted a smaller segment of the U.S. population now compose the bulk of the minority population. For example, Latinos have recently surpassed Black Americans to become the largest minority group in the United States, with much of their population growth fueled through immigration (Bean and Stevens 2003; de la Garza 2004). Asian American (Asian alone) populations have also soared, with their numbers reaching 14.1 million in 2010, constituting 4.7 percent of the U.S. population (ACS 2006-2010). With racial minorities now comprising a third of the population, this demographic transformation through immigration is reconstituting the racial and ethnic landscape of the United States.3 Within the immigrant and minority population, second-generation immigrants number 30.3 million according to estimates from the 2005 Current Population Survey (Portes and Rumbaut 2006: 247). Those who immigrated with their parents, namely the 1.5-generation, make up roughly a third (30 percent) of this population (10.1 million); those who were born in the United States with at least one-foreign born parent number 21.1 million (Portes and Rumbaut 2006). 4 Together, they constitute 9.9 percent of the U.S. population, making them a sizable group raised in the United States. KOREAN IMMIGRANTS AND THEIR OFFSPRING The American Community Survey (ACS) 2010 estimates that the population of Korean immigrants (Korean alone) in the United States is roughly 1.4 million, making them the fifth largest Asian American community in the nation. Three-fourths (76.3 percent) of them are foreign-born while a quarter (23.7 percent) are U.S.-born. When the proportion of the 1.5 generation, namely those who immigrated as 3

By racial minorities, I am including American Indians and Alaska natives (2.5 million), Asian Americans (14.7 million), Black Americans (38.8 million), and Latinos (50.7 million) (ACS 2010). 4 Since the 1980 U.S. Census, questions about the birthplace of parents have been omitted. Consequently, the U.S.-born can be of any generation, i.e. second, third, or fourth. In immigrant groups that had not existed prior to the 1960s, however, the U.S.-born are mostly likely to be second generation.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Introduction

9

children and were raised in the United States, is combined with the U.S.-born, the U.S.-raised Korean American population jumps to 44.0 percent, comprising an important segment of the Korean American population.5 Korean immigrants are highly conspicuous for their striking rates of entrepreneurship, as exemplified by the ubiquitous small businesses, including green groceries, nail salons, liquor stores, and drycleaners, in many urban areas of the country (Abelmann and Lie 1995; Kim 1981; Light and Bonacich 1988; Light and Gold 2000; Min 1996, 2011; Park 1997; Yoon 1997). Their concentration and success in small business have earned them admiration for their entrepreneurialism but also criticism for their relations with minority customers, employees, and residents. Successful second-generation inroads into elite colleges and universities and subsequently into professional occupations in primary sectors in the mainstream economy legitimate and even celebrate the

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

5

I define first-generation Koreans as those who were born in Korea and came to the United States at the age of 18 or older; the 1.5 generation as those born in Korea who came to the United States at the age of 12 or younger; and U.S.-born Koreans as those who were born in the United States with at least one Korean-born parent. In using age of entry into the United States as a principal criterion for defining generation, the proportion of either the first or 1.5 generation can expand or shrink depending on which age range we use to delineate a generation because those who arrived to the United States from the age of 13 through 17 can be collapsed with the first generation, placed into a category of their own, or removed entirely from the analysis. If the 1.25-generation is not to be excluded from the analysis, one option is to define the 1.5-generation as those who arrived at 15 and younger, and the 1.0-generation as those who entered at 16 and older. In this book, I have decided to create a separate 1.25-generation category as these young adults are not quite 1.5-generation or 1.0-generation, given that they have immigrated as teens during junior high school and high school. The latest estimate from the ACS 2010 indicates that U.S.-born Koreans constitute a quarter of the Korean American population (Korean alone). In the 1998 New York survey, the second generation proportion was 30 percent while 70 percent were 1.5 generation. Similarly, in the 2004 IIMMLA, 36.4 percent of the respondents were second generation while 63.6 percent were 1.5 generation.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

10

Second-Generation Korean Americans

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

hardships and sacrifices of Korean small business owners, further perpetuating the "model minority" image of Korean Americans. Such representations of Korean American success, however, obscure the critical factors that have played in the upward mobility of 1.5 and second-generation Korean Americans. As a segment of this important second-generation population, the adult children of Korean immigrants represent an interesting case study because their educational and occupational success in the mainstream has not brought about full assimilation; instead, structural integration has also been accompanied by racialization and exclusion. This elusive inclusion has meant that economic assimilation for second-generation Koreans has yet to translate into full inclusion in other aspects of U.S. society such as the polity and culture. This is precisely the ambivalent and contingent status of groups in the racial middle, whose prospects for whitening or assimilation are encouraging but uncertain, raising doubts that full assimilation will be possible for Korean and Asian Americans in the foreseeable future. Rather, racialization is likely to keep ethnic and pan-ethnic identities salient, solidifying a tripartite racial structure in the future. ASIAN AMERICANS AS MODEL MINORITIES AND NATIVISM Asian Americans have certainly been gaining structural integration and are treated more favorably today, but they have not always been received in that way. When Chinese sojourners first migrated to Hawaii and the West Coast in search of work and opportunities, they were seen as fierce competitors against the white working-class. The threat of low-wage competition prompted intense political agitation that resulted in the first exclusionary legislation against Asian Americans–the 1882 Chinese Exclusion Act (Fong 2002; Saxton 1971; Takaki 1989). Other discriminatory actions followed, including the Immigration Act of 1917 and the National Origins Act of 1924, both of which drastically ended the flow of immigrants from most parts of Asia, and the forced relocation and internment of 120,000 Japanese Americans during the Second World War which profoundly shattered the lives and dreams of thousands of Japanese Americans (Daniels 1975, 1988). Since WWII, several wars in Asia and economic competition with Asian countries

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Introduction

11

have also left a deeply negative view of Asia and Asians in the psyche of the American public. Beginning in the 1960s, however, a new image of Asian Americans emerged and took hold in the general public, even as the old image of Asian Americans as "forever foreigners" persisted (Fong 2002; Tuan 1998; Wu 2002). The new image of Asian Americans as "model minorities" or "honorary whites” seems in many ways a vast improvement over their previous depiction as “clannish, unassimilable aliens,” giving the impression that Asian Americans are whitening and attaining greater opportunities to assert their ethnic identities. Understandably, this in-between position of Asian Americans as neither white nor Black complicates our understanding of race relations from the traditional Black-white racial divide. On one hand, Asian Americans have seen vast improvements in their economic position, including advances in educational and occupational standing vis-à-vis whites, followed by residential and marital integration, particularly for Asian American women (Alba and Nee 2003; Fong 2002; Pew Research Center 2012; Wu 2002). Asian Americans, however, are still plagued by frequent spells of racialization and social exclusion, which put them in a tenuous spot within the white and Black racial divide. Whereas a positive view as "honorary whites" suggests their increased social acceptance, the flip side of that image is of "forever foreigners," an image that marks Asian Americans as un-American and foreign (Fong 2002; O’Brien 2008; Tuan 1998; Wu 2002). In other words, Asian Americans are susceptible to both images at any given moment and regardless of their length in the United States, they continue to be viewed through the lens of the “forever foreigner” because the general public equates Asian Americans with recent immigrants from Asia. Previous negative images of Asian Americans have been essentially transformed into a more positive view largely because of their economic success, but the new view of them as "honorary whites” is elusive and contingent and can turn negative when their success poses a threat to established elites (Tuan 1998; Wu 2002). Because Asian Americans have no real control

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

12

Second-Generation Korean Americans

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

or say over the label, racialization continues to hold back their full inclusion in American society.6 It is in this light that this book seeks to examine the status and identity of immigrant minorities occupying an intermediary position in the racial and ethnic order. Immigrant groups arriving with skills and resources, namely human capital immigrants, have class and ethnic resources available to them that facilitate their adjustment into the host society. Because of the class advantage of the first generation, coupled with a receptive host environment, second-generation immigrants from middle-class backgrounds experience rapid acculturation and mobility into the mainstream (Gans 1992; Portes and Rumbaut 2006; Telles and Ortiz 2008). Such rapid educational and occupational advances by middle-class second-generation immigrants are viewed in an optimistic light, downplaying or dismissing the significance of race for immigrant minorities from middle-class backgrounds. What is often missing and assumed away, are the challenges faced by middle-class secondgeneration immigrants and their strategies for inclusion. This is, in short, a major purpose of this book, which seeks to address this gap and contribute to debates about the whitening/browning of groups in the racial middle by investigating the status and identity of secondgeneration Korean immigrants. DATA SOURCES This book draws upon multiple data sources to present a portrait of second-generation Korean life. They include publically released data sets, a survey coordinated by the author, and follow-up in-depth interviews. The 2010 American Community Survey from the U.S. Census, although limited on questions of second-generation upward mobility, provides timely data on the status of the U.S. population, including Korean Americans. The 2004 Immigration and Intergenerational Mobility in Metropolitan Los Angeles (hereafter the 2004 IIMMLA) survey is a publically released data set that contains 6

Despite the progress that racial minorities and new immigrants have achieved in the mainstream, racial backlash and nativism is also on the rise (Fong 2002; Wu 2002). Racial setbacks continue to undermine the advancement of minorities and immigrants, calling attention to the enduring power of racial and ethnic boundaries (Omi and Winant 1994).

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Introduction

13

detailed information on many facets of 1.5 and second-generation Korean American life in the Los Angeles metropolitan area. The data set is comprised of 6 second-generation immigrant (Mexicans, Vietnamese, Filipinos, Koreans, Chinese, and Central Americans from Guatemala and El Salvador) and 3 native-born (non-Hispanic whites, Blacks, and third- or later-generation Mexican Americans) groups in the metropolitan Los Angeles area (See 2004 IIMMLA codebook). For the purposes of this book, four hundred 1.5 and second-generation Korean Americans aged 20 to 39 have been selected for analysis. Given the dearth of survey data on second-generation Koreans (and Korean immigrants in general), the 2004 IIMMLA is arguably one of the most comprehensive publically-available data sets with a sizable number of second-generation Korean Americans. The third data source is the 1998 New York Second-Generation Korean American survey (hereafter the 1998 New York survey), a data set which was collected by the author from the New York-New Jersey metropolitan area. The 30 minute telephone survey was conducted from June 1998 through November 1998 with two hundred 1.5 and secondgeneration Korean Americans from the ages of 23 to 35. To generate the final sample of 200 respondents, approximately 24,500 households with Korean surnames were first identified from published telephone directories, followed by a telephone screening of 2631 randomly selected households to locate eligible second-generation Korean Americans. Although this data set is dated and has issues of comparability with the 2004 IIMMLA, the 1998 New York survey is almost identical in sampling procedure as the 2004 IIMMLA and employs the same survey instrument used in that survey. The 1998 New York and 2004 IIMMLA surveys are based on a previous survey instrument, the New York Second-Generation Survey, 1998-2000 (See Kasinitz et al. 2008). Finally, to understand why respondents think the way they do, 39 follow up, face-to-face interviews were conducted with a subsample of the 1998 New York survey participants, asking interviewees to expand on the responses they gave during the telephone survey. These semistructured, open-ended interviews lasted from one to three hours, were tape recorded, and later transcribed. Because the interview guide expands on the questions from the survey instrument, it covers a range of topics such as family, immigration, neighborhood, schooling, work, religion, politics, and identity. Although the data from these in-depth

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

14

Second-Generation Korean Americans

interviews are again dated and are only available for the New York region, they offer important insights into second-generation views of education, work, and identity. The combination of these different data sources makes up for some of the deficiencies of each data source and offers a much wider and more in-depth view and analysis of the second-generation Korean American experience as they strive to achieve full integration into the mainstream.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

SCOPE OF BOOK The educational success of Korean and Asian American students is often singled out as major evidence that Asian Americans are on their way to successful assimilation. In light of the educational accolades that are often associated with Korean and Asian American students, Chapter 2 scrutinizes the educational achievement and attainment of 1.5 and second-generation Koreans and the factors behind their educational success. The chapter calls into question the prevailing cultural explanation of Asian American academic success prominent in mainstream media and political circles. Chapter 3 examines Korean immigrant entrepreneurship and the swift occupational transformation from the small business entrepreneurialism of the first generation to rapid professionalization in the second generation. The chapter also considers the implications of the exit of the latter generation from the ethnic economy for the Korean community. Given the close connection between education and the rapid occupational upgrading of the second generation, Chapter 4 turns to the occupational attainment and job experiences of this group as well as their prospects for promotions and career advancement in the mainstream economy. Chapter 5 addresses the processes of second-generation identity formation amid acculturation and racialization and the contours of racial othering common to groups in the racial middle. Chapter 6 examines secondgeneration Koreans’ responses to racialization, including efforts to cope with racial ascription. Chapter 7 considers the prospects of political integration for second-generation Koreans by examining this group’s engagement in formal politics. Chapter 8 concludes with a discussion of the future of ethnicity and assimilation for immigrant minorities straddling intermediary positions in the racial order.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

CHAPTER TWO

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

“Harvard, Harvard, Harvard!”: The Pursuit of Elite High Schools and Colleges

The academic success of Asian Americans, including their higher than average GPA and standardized math test scores, as well as their overrepresentation in prestigious college campuses across the nation (Fejgin 1995; Fuligni 1997; Goyette and Xie 1999; Hirschman and Wong 1986; Kao and Thompson 2003; Portes and Rumbaut 2001; Sakamoto and Xie 2006; Steinberg 1996; Xie and Goyette 2003, 2004), usually reinforces the view that second-generation Korean and Asian Americans are achieving structural integration and are on their path to full assimilation.7 While the soaring rates of high school and college completion among children of Korean and Asian immigrants may lead one to make hasty conclusions about their strong prospects for assimilation, I argue that this success, in fact, should not come as a surprise given the middle-class background of Korean immigrants and their efforts to provide an educational environment that is conducive to success. Coming from the middle class, coupled with considerable entrepreneurial success, intact families, and a strong emphasis on education, the chances for educational and occupational achievement in the second generation are significantly improved (Kasinitz et al. 2008; Wu 2002).

7

A version of this paper has appeared in Development and Society, 40(2), December 2011: 225-259, and is reprinted with permission.

15 Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

16

Second-Generation Korean Americans

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

In her recent best seller, Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother, Amy Chua’s book has stirred a fierce controversy over the merits of strict upbringing in children’s educational success. This chapter, however, cautions against a celebratory view of second-generation educational success and the view that Asian Americans are model minorities. The factors behind the academic success of children of Korean immigrants call into question cultural explanations of Korean American (and Asian American) educational accomplishment prevalent in mainstream media circles. Although parental pressure for elite high school and college admissions boost the prospects of second-generation academic success, I argue that their educational performance springs from Korean immigrants’ middle-class status and their efforts to establish an academic environment for their children. In short, social class is the primary factor in academic success. In addition, the chapter scrutinizes the role that school-related factors, including time spent on homework, teachers’ expectations, and peer groups, play in second-generation’s educational achievements and attainments. I end the chapter with a discussion of how the pressures, including mental health problems, suicide, and low self-esteem, for academic achievement weigh on these young adults. CULTURAL AND STRUCTURAL EXPLANATIONS OF ASIAN AMERICAN EDUCATIONAL SUCCESS The most prominent explanation of Asian American educational achievement in popular discourse is the cultural explanation. This perspective claims that Asian American students excel academically because Asian culture, influenced by Confucianism, stresses hard work, respects authority, and values education. Asian culture is conducive to educational achievement because these values, attitudes, beliefs, and practices resonate with middle-class American culture (Caplan, Choy, and Whitmore 1991; Kitano 1995; Sue and Okasaki 1995; Xie and Goyette 2004). Other variants of the cultural explanation contend that Asian American children succeed in school because poor academic performance would prompt a loss of parental face in the community and reflect badly on parenting skills (Caplan, Choy, and Whitmore 1991; Pang 1990; Sung 1987). Without doubt, cultural explanations offer one account for the arguably impressive educational achievements of Asian American

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Harvard, Harvard, Harvard

17

students, but they are weak in explaining variation, including low achievement among Asian American students (Fong 2002; Lee 1996:53). First and foremost, there is much inter-ethnic and intraethnic variation in academic performance among Asian American students, including considerable variation even in the same Asian countries where, presumably, Asian culture should exert the most influence (Steinberg 1981). Notwithstanding these limitations, however, cultural explanations strike a chord with popular notions of the explanatory power of cultural difference, including its role in blaming racial minorities for their educational failures. Stratification theorists, by contrast, argue that parents’ socioeconomic status, not culture, is behind children’s educational attainment. Numerous studies have documented a strong association between parents’ socioeconomic status, namely parents’ education, occupation, and income, and children’s educational achievements and attainments (Blau and Duncan 1967; Jencks 1977; Kao and Thompson 2003; Mare 1981; Sewell and Hauser 1975; Sewell, Hauser, and Featherman 1976). The Coleman report (2000: 162) found that family socioeconomic status was more influential than school-related factors in children’s educational achievements.8 A number of studies have also found that children from low-income families perform less well academically than children from affluent ones (Persell 1977: 1). Examining the educational achievements of children of immigrants, Portes and Rumbaut (2001: 239) observe that there is a positive relationship between parents’ socioeconomic status and secondgeneration’s educational attainment. They found that children with high-status parents perform better in all measures of academic performance, and argue that immigrants with high levels of human capital are better able to capitalize on their class resources to support education in their children (Zhou and Bankston 1998: 142). While the association between parents’ socioeconomic status and children’s educational attainment is found among native-born nonHispanic whites, the predictive role of parents’ socioeconomic status does not always bear out for Asian American students (Goyette and Xie

8

Coleman (1960) qualified this observation by stating that the quality of teachers did matter and students’ academic performance was affected by other students’ educational backgrounds and aspirations.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

18

Second-Generation Korean Americans

1999; Kao 1995; Kao and Thompson 2003; Portes and Rumbaut 2001; Zhou and Bankston 1998). Research on Asian American students indicates that many, even those from low socioeconomic status, attain high levels of education. As a result, researchers have considered other factors that might better account for their academic achievement, including blocked mobility, peer group effects, social capital, and student expectations and aspirations (Caplan et al. 1991; Goyette and Xie 1999; Kao 1995; Kao and Thompson 2003; Xie and Goyette 2003). Thus, a “simple” causal model between social class and educational success is questionable. Still, the role of parents’ socioeconomic status should not be entirely overlooked. Its impact must be taken into account to tease out the effects of class, race, ethnicity, and gender on patterns of Asian American educational achievement.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Peer Groups, Socializing, and Academic Engagement Among the factors associated with academic performance and educational attainment, school-related factors, such as peer groups and student engagement with schoolwork, have been found to play critical roles. First, peer groups serve as primary agents of socialization for youth, exerting pressures that significantly influence student engagement and participation in schoolwork (Johnson et al. 2001; Steinberg 1996) as well as student achievement beliefs and behavior (Ryan 2001: 1135). In a large study of high school students, Steinberg (1996), found that Asian American students excelled because they were generally excluded from peer groups that were disengaged from academics. Ironically, exclusion from such peer groups worked in the favor of Asian American students because having been rejected from peer groups that prioritized being popular, they socialized instead with fellow Asian American peers who believed in education and hard work (Gibson 1988; Steinberg 1996). Although this may be a plausible explanation for why Asian American students seem more engaged with school work, Steinberg assumes that all Asian American peer groups equally stress education and doing well in school. Lee (1996) has found varied levels of engagement and academic performance among Asian American students, in part dependent on the ethnic identities of these Asian American students. In addition, which peer groups are accorded status may vary from school to school so that in schools where the most

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Harvard, Harvard, Harvard

19

academically competent dominate status groups, exclusion from such status peer groups may undermine rather than support academic achievement. As Lee (1996) underscored, Asian American students are not a monolithic group and belonging to Asian American peer groups does not guarantee placement into an academically oriented track. The “new wavers,” the working-class Chinese and Southeast Asian students in her study, for example, emphasized merely getting by in schools, and belonging to this peer group led to poor academic performance.

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Voluntary Immigrants and Blocked Mobility Much research has shown that Asian American parents and students put a lot of investment and trust in education as a means of securing upward mobility (Fong 2002). Among other things, Asian immigrants may bring greater motivation to the table, including a positive view of schools and education which is transmitted to children, because they are self-selected and migrate voluntarily to the United States unlike involuntary minorities (Ogbu 1978; Xie and Goyette 2004). Although self-selection and voluntary migration may be important, it should be pointed out that Asian immigrants’ marginal status in society, particularly immigrant parents’ experience with and perceptions of blocked mobility or discrimination, may also signal to Asian American parents that education is one of the few viable options for upward mobility (Lee 1996; Sue and Okazaki 1990; Xie and Goyette 2003). Xie and Goyette (2003) synthesize this as strategic adaptation, namely that academic achievement is the outcome of Asian cultural values and, more important, the social position of Asian Americans in American society. Because Asian Americans have been historically excluded from countless social institutions, they have sought out alternative strategies for labor market success, particularly skill development through education. Sue and Okazaki (1995) observe that if Asian Americans have greater success in obtaining education-based careers, non-educational areas are less likely to be emphasized by parents, especially when those groups have a cultural orientation toward education and have attained academic success. Therefore, what we commonly associate with “good” behavior from Asian American students (“compliance, perseverance, and docility”), Suzuki (1980: 173) argues, may be less a cultural orientation than a response to blocked pathways.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

20

Second-Generation Korean Americans

Although the theory of blocked mobility helps to explain why Asian immigrant parents stress education to their children, it is still weak in explaining low achievement among Asian Americans as well as the academic obstacles of Black Americans and other racial minorities who consistently face discrimination and blocked mobility (Lee 1996; Zhou and Bankston 1998:148) [See Ferguson 2001, Fordham 1996, Ogbu 1990 for other views that explain Black American disadvantage in education]. Despite these limitations, this view helps explain the zealous pursuit of education from immigrant parents. SECOND-GENERATION EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Levels of Education Like their Asian American student counterparts who attain high levels of education (Fejgin 1995; Fuligni 1997; Goyette and Xie 1999; Hirschman and Wong 1986; Kao and Thompson 2003; Sakamoto and Xie 2006; Xie and Goyette 2003, 2004), second-generation Koreans conform to this pattern and fare remarkably well educationally on measures of high school and college completion. According to the ACS 2010, 98.9 percent of 1.5-generation and U.S.-born Korean Americans between the ages of 23 and 35 graduated from high school compared to 92.5 percent of native-born, non-Hispanic white counterparts. The high school completion rate for 1.5-generation and U.S.-born Koreans was also the same (98.9 percent) for those between 20 and 39, which is the age range for the 2004 IIMMLA respondents (ACS 2010).9 Among respondents to the 1998 New York and the 2004 IIMMLA surveys, all but one New York and two Angeleno 1.5 and second-generation Koreans graduated from high school.10

9

The high school completion rate for whites aged between 20 and 39 in the ACS 2010 was 92.2 percent. 10 The median age was 27, and most parents of second-generation Koreans arrived in the United States during the 1960s and 1970s.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Harvard, Harvard, Harvard

21

Table 2.1: Unweighted Percentage Distributions of Levels of Education (Children and Fathers), Type of High School, and Grades Earned in High School Korean Korean New Yorkers Angelenos N Pct N Pct Levels of Education - Children Did not complete high school 1 .5 2 .5 High school 2 1.0 27 6.7 Vocational or trade school 5 1.2 Some college 21 10.2 124 30.9 College graduate 113 55.1 171 42.6 Graduate school 68 33.2 72 18.0 Total 205 100.0 401 100.0 Type of High School Public 164 80.8 366 91.3 Private/parochial 39 19.2 35 8.7 Total 203 100.0 401 100.0 Levels of Education - Fathers Did not complete high school 7 3.5 13 3.4 High school 24 11.9 77 20.3 Vocational or trade school 9 2.4 Some college 8 4.0 36 9.5 College graduate 77 38.3 162 42.7 Graduate school 85 42.3 82 21.6 Total 201 100.0 379 100.0 Grades Earned in High School Mostly As (incl. A-/B+ for NY) 144 73.8 200 49.9 Mostly Bs 35 17.9 161 40.1 Mostly Cs (incl. B-/C+ for NY) 16 8.2 40 10.0 Total 195 100.0 401 100.0 Source: The 1998 New York and 2004 IIMMLA surveys The rates of college completion were equally high for this group. The ACS 2010 indicates that 63.6 percent of 1.5-generation and 72.3 percent of U.S.-born Koreans between 23 and 35, compared to 35.5 percent of whites, graduated from college. In the 20 to 39 age range, 61.6 percent of 1.5-generation and 70.0 percent of U.S.-born Korean

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

22

Second-Generation Korean Americans

Americans graduated from college compared to 33.3 percent of whites (ACS 2010).11 Similarly, second-generation college completion in the 1998 New York survey was 88.2 percent whereas 60.6 percent of Korean Angelenos completed college. A breakdown of postsecondary educational attainment by gender reveals that Korean American women in the 1998 New York survey were slightly ahead of the men, confirming a pattern of increasing educational attainment for women of all ethnicities (Lopez 1999). In the 2004 IIMMLA, women showed slightly higher rates of college graduation (46.3 percent) than men (39.0 percent).

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

The Pursuit of Elite High Schools and Colleges A unique feature of the 1998 New York survey is that the data set not only provides information about educational attainments, but also specifies the institutional prestige of the high schools and colleges attended by second-generation Koreans. What is most remarkable about high school choice for this group is an overrepresentation of high school completion from suburban high schools. In the 1998 New York survey, about one-half (51 percent) of these young adults graduated from suburban public high schools while 14 percent attended New York City highly selective public high schools (Stuyvesant, Bronx Science, and Brooklyn Tech), 19 percent graduated from a private (including parochial) high school, 16 percent attended other New York City public high schools, and 3 percent graduated from high schools abroad. 12 In the 2004 IIMMLA, high school choice information is limited and disaggregated only between public and private/parochial 11

The same breakdown of educational attainment by race for 25 to 65 year olds shows that 55.2 percent of Koreans (Korean alone) held a Bachelor’s degree or higher compared to 33.4 percent of whites, 17.9 percent of Blacks, 51.9 percent of Asians, 12.7 percent of Latinos, and 12.8 percent of Native Americans (ACS 2010). 12 Due to rounding error, the percentages do not add up to 100 percent. Regarding highly selective public high schools in New York City, there are nine specialized high schools aimed at academically and artistically gifted students. These high schools, except La Guardia High School of Music and Art and Performing Arts, all require the Specialized High Schools Admissions Test (SHSAT) examination.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Harvard, Harvard, Harvard

23

schools. Nine of ten (91.3 percent) Korean Angelenos attended public high schools, and 8.7 percent matriculated at private/parochial schools. These distributions in high school choice suggest that Korean immigrant parents are strategic about school choice, namely selecting schools based on their reputation. Korean immigrant parents seek elite high schools, including suburban public, selective urban public, or private high schools rather than regular urban public schools. The pursuit of elite schools was not limited to high schools but also extended to colleges and graduate schools. For example, secondgeneration attendance at National Universities Tier 1 (NU Tier 1) –the top 50 colleges in the United States – was a whopping 40 percent in the 1998 New York study.13 This figure is almost twice the proportion of the Asian students attending NU Tier 1 as reported by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) of the U.S. Department of Education report entitled, “Who goes to America’s Highly Ranked ‘National’ Universities?”14 In that study 27 percent of Asian American high school graduates, 12 percent of Hispanics, 7 percent of Blacks, and 10 percent of whites attended National Universities Tier 1 (Owings et al. 1998). Combining National Universities Tier 1 and National Liberal Arts Tier 1 together – the top 50 colleges and top 40 Liberal Arts colleges – second-generation Korean attendance at National Tier 1 colleges jumps to about one-half (51 percent). This propensity of Korean American students to seek Tier 1 colleges has been also noted in recent research (Karen 2002; Kasinitz et al. 2008; Teranishi et al. 2004). Xie and Goyette (2004) have found that 42 percent of Korean American students attended NU Tier 1 institutions compared to 9 percent of whites, 18 percent of Japanese, 22 percent of South Asians, and 44 percent of the Chinese. In an analysis of college students in California, Teranishi et al (2004) found that being Korean and Chinese, especially from a high-income family, significantly raised the odds of attending a highly selective institution relative to other Asian Americans.

13

Colleges were coded according to the rankings established by the 1998 U.S. News and World Report. 14 Asians comprised only 6 percent of the total number of students enrolled in higher education institutions in 1995. Because the samples are different, however, they may not be generalizable.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

24

Second-Generation Korean Americans

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Selectivity of Korean Immigration and Second-Generation Educational Achievements and Attainments In line with numerous studies that find a strong association between parents’ socioeconomic status and children’s educational attainment (Hauser and Sewell 1986; Portes and Rumbaut 2001, 2006), the selective migration of Korean immigrants is a major determinant of second-generation educational success. For example, 80.6 percent of the fathers of second-generation Korean New Yorkers were college graduates, and the proportion of professionals among these fathers was 43.4 percent. Even among the entrepreneurs, 72.8 percent were college graduates. 15 Fathers of second generation Korean Angelenos were equally well educated. Approximately two-thirds (64.3 percent) of Korean Angeleno fathers were college graduates, second to Filipinos (66.2 percent) in rates of college completion among fathers, followed by Chinese (61.3 percent), whites (44.2 percent), Vietnamese (32 percent), Blacks (27 percent), Salvadorans and Guatemalans (15.3 percent), and Mexicans (9.9 percent).16 Following the status attainment of their parents, middle-class groups in the 2004 IIMMLA, such as second-generation Koreans and Chinese graduate from college in higher proportions, receive mostly As in high school, and are more likely to take honors classes than working-class groups such as Mexicans, Salvadorans and Guatemalans, and Black Americans (See Tables 2.2 and 2.3).

15 16

X2= 18.197, df=2, p > 0.001 There were two groups in the 2004 IIMMLA, second-generation Vietnamese and Filipinos, that did not particularly fit the status attainment model. For example, two-thirds (66.2 percent) of Filipino fathers were college graduates, a proportion that is slightly higher than figures for Korean fathers, but second-generation Filipinos (43.4 percent) trailed behind Vietnamese (48.1 percent) in college completion. Likewise, while only a third (32.0 percent) of Vietnamese fathers were college graduates, a figure that is only half that of Koreans and Chinese, second-generation Vietnamese managed to graduate from college in higher proportions and receive higher GPAs and were more likely to take honors classes in high school than secondgeneration Filipinos.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

59

Graduate school

1244

1057

Mostly B’s or less

Total

187

Mostly A’s

High School Grades

1242

164

College graduate

Total

401

Some college

67

397

High school

Vocational or trade school

154

Did not complete high school

100.0

85.0

15.0

100.0

4.8

13.2

32.3

5.4

32.0

12.4

376

321

55

376

16

64

157

18

92

29

100.0

85.4

14.6

100.0

4.3

17.0

41.8

4.8

24.5

7.7

400

198

202

398

86

165

126

3

18

0

100.0

49.5

50.5

100.0

21.6

41.5

31.7

0.8

4.5

0.0

401

201

200

401

72

171

124

5

27

2

100.0

50.1

49.9

100.0

18.0

42.6

30.9

1.2

6.7

0.5

Table 2.2: Unweighted Percentage Distributions of Levels of Education, High School Grades, Type of High School, Honors, and Non-English Language After-School Program by Mexicans, Salvadorans/Guatemalans, Chinese, and Koreans (The 2004 IIMMLA) Salvadorans/ Koreans Mexicans Chinese Guatemalans N Pct N Pct N Pct N Pct Levels of Education

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

731 1194

No

Total 67 1177 1244

Yes

No

Total

After-School Program

463

Yes

Honors in High School

1210

108

Private

Total

1102

Public

100.0

94.6

5.4

100.0

61.2

38.8

100.0

8.9

91.1

376

344

32

368

208

160

369

24

345

100.0

91.5

8.5

100.0

56.5

43.5

100.0

6.5

93.5

400

296

104

393

80

313

398

31

367

100.0

74.0

26.0

100.0

20.4

79.6

100.0

7.8

92.2

401

307

94

398

87

311

401

35

366

100.0

76.6

23.4

100.0

21.9

78.1

100.0

8.7

91.3

Table 2.2: Unweighted Percentage Distributions of Levels of Education, High School Grades, Type of High School, Honors, and Non-English Language After-School Program by Mexicans, Salvadorans/Guatemalans, Chinese, and Koreans (The 2004 IIMMLA) (continued) Salvadorans/ Koreans Mexicans Chinese Guatemalans N Pct N Pct N Pct N Pct Type of High School

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

42

Graduate school

401

219

Mostly B’s or less

Total

182

Mostly A’s

High School Grades

401

151

College graduate

Total

170

7

27

4

Some college

Vocational or trade school

High school

Did not complete high school

Levels of Education

N

100.0

54.6

45.4

100.0

10.5

37.7

42.4

1.7

6.7

1.0

Pct

11

31

5

401

259

142

401

40

134

180

N

100.0

64.6

35.4

100.0

10.0

33.4

44.9

2.7

7.7

1.2

Pct 20

704

482

222

704

108

203

232

15

126

N

100.0

68.5

31.5

100.0

15.3

28.8

33.0

2.1

17.9

2.8

Pct

28

445

387

58

445

24

83

185

21

104

N

100.0

87.0

13.0

100.0

5.4

18.7

41.6

4.7

23.4

6.3

Pct

Table 2.3: Unweighted Percentage Distributions of Levels of Education, High School Grades, Type of High School, Honors, and Non-English Language After-School Program by Vietnamese, Filipinos, Whites, and Blacks (The 2004 IIMMLA) Vietnamese Filipinos Whites Blacks

Copyright © 2013. LFB Scholarly Publishing LLC. All rights reserved.

Kim, Dae Young. Second-Generation Korean Americans : The Struggle for Full Inclusion, LFB Scholarly Publishing

Pct

N

Pct

N

Pct

N

Pct

Type of High School Public 388 96.8 302 75.3 607 86.8 399 90.1 Private 13 3.2 99 24.7 92 13.2 44 9.9 Total 401 100.0 401 100.0 699 100.0 443 100.0 Honors in High School Yes 279 69.9 251 63.1 364 52.4 193 43.9 No 120 30.1 147 36.9 330 47.6 247 56.1 Total 399 100.0 398 100.0 694 100.0 440 100.0 After-School Program Yes 72 18.0 37 9.2 68 9.7 27 6.1 No 328 82.0 364 90.8 636 90.3 418 93.9 Total 400 100.0 401 100.0 704 100.0 445 100.0 Notes: Levels of Education X2=878.245, df 35, p