Robert T. Teranishi

Asian Pacific Americans and Critical Race Theory: An Examination of School Racial Climate

The educational research on Asian Pacific Americans (APAs2) has left many unanswered questions as to what factors, or relationships among factors, affect the educational achievement of Asian Americans (Hurtado, Inkelas, Briggs, & Rhee, 1997; Karen, 1988; McDonough & Antonio, 1996; Teranishi, Ceja, Allen, Suh, & McDonough, 2001). Part of the challenge is that studies have continually found that there is something about “being Asian’’ that predicts success for Asian American students (Hurtado et al., 1997). The most common perceptions of Asian Americans have been that they are educationally successful, overrepresented in higher education, or in general, a “successful or model minority’’ (Hacker, 1992; Nakanishi, 1988; Takagi, 1992). Because of the perceived educational success of APAs, they have often been excluded altogether from racial discourse on educational issues because it is believed that there is no need to address their educational needs or issues (Nakanishi, 1988; Ong, 1994, 2000). Asian Americans have also been misrepresented because they are categorized and treated as a single, homogeneous racial group. The 1996/97 Minorities in Higher Education Report (Hune & Chan, 1997) indicated that aggregated data on APAs homogenizes the experiences of APAs and depicts a distorted picture of the educational participation of subgroups within the APA population. But in fact, the APA population is quite diverse with ethnic, social class, and immigrant subgroups that encounter different social and institutional experiences. The premise for this study was centered upon the differences that are evident in postsecondary outcomes of different APA ethnic subpopulations (Gomez & Teranishi, 2001; Hurtado et al., 1997; McDonough & Antonio, 1996; Teranishi et al., 2001). For example, in

Yellow and Brown: Emerging Asian American Immigrant Populations and Residential Segregation

This study is an examination of how the ethnic enclaves of Hmong and Vietnamese Americans in California exist as social structures through which patterns of relationships shape postsecondary aspirations and outcomes. Results indicate that Hmong and Vietnamese students faced a number of challenges related to language, linguistic discrimination, poverty, and cultural clashes within and between family and school. Many of the students in this study were forced to use home and school as a dual frame of reference to negotiate expectations at home and at school. The results suggest that the impact of racial and ethnic segregation needs to be examined in the context of language, culture, immigration status, and socioeconomic situations that vary for different subpopulations among Asian Americans.

Asian American and Pacific Islander Students and the Institutions that Serve Them

Robert T. Teranishi (robert.teranishi@nyu.edu) is an associate professor of higher education at New York University, co-director of the Institute for Globalization and Education in Metropolitan Settings, and principal investigator for the National Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander Research in Education (CARE). Teranishi was also recently appointed by Secretary of Education Arne Duncan to the US Department of Education’s Commission on Equity and Excellence. By Robert T. Teranishi

Demography, Community, and the Education of Asian American and Pacific Islander Students

Unlike other minority populations in the United States, the Asian American and Pacific Islander (AAPI) student population is often considered an educational success story, and has led to the idea that they are a population that does not need attention in research and policy. This article demonstrates that an understanding of the AAPI educational experience requires a contextual examination of the population, including the demographic and social conditions through which AAPI students navigate the educational pipeline. Results indicate that the AAPI educational experience is actually a conglomeration of varied experiences, opportunities, and outcomes driven by a wide distribution of demographic characteristics with regard to national origin, ethnicity, immigration histories, social class, and cultural differences. In fact, there are more differences between groups than similarities, which needs to be recognized by researchers, practitioners, and policy makers.