• Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Previous

Next

Understanding Asian American and Pacific Islander Students

October 14, 2011, 10:54 am

Note:  This post was co-authored with Thai-Huy Nguyen, Ph.D. student at the University of Pennsylvania.

Robert Teranishi and his research team at New York University just issued the third edition of the CARE (Commission on Asian American and Pacific Islander Research in Education ) report. Teranishi’s report, entitled “The Relevance of Asian American & Pacific Islanders in the College Completion Agenda,” includes rich information on a growing student population. According to the report, Asian Americans and Pacific Islander (AAPI) students are contributing substantially to the growth in racial and ethnic diversity on the nation’s campuses (along with Latinos). In fact, college enrollment of AAPI’s is projected to increase by 30 percent by 2019. This projected increase in AAPI’s is skewed, however. Chinese, Korean, and Japanese students account for the majority of the AAPI presence and potential growth in higher education. On the contrary, 51 percent of Vietnamese, 63 percent of Hmong, 65.5 percent of Loation, and nearly 70 percent of Cambodian adults (24+) have not enrolled or completed any postsecondary education. Access to college is a major issue for these groups.

The CARE report dispels many myths about AAPI’s. For example, most people believe that the majority of AAPI’s are enrolled in elite research institutions. While there are significant percentages of AAPI’s at this institutional type, in 2005, 47.3 percent of AAPI’s were enrolled at two-year institutions. Of these students, the average age is 25.3 years old, making these students non-traditional learners. According to the report’s authors, AAPI students who are enrolled at community colleges “carry many ‘risk factors’ that are correlated with lower rates of persistence and completion.” Southeast Asian and Pacific Islander students have very high attrition rates, in particular.

In addition to individual students, the CARE report tells us a great deal about Asian American, Native Alaskan, Pacific Islander Serving Institutions (AANAPISI’s), the newest type of Minority Serving Institutions (MSIs). As of 2011, 52 institutions have received the AANAPISI designation by the federal government, with only 15 of these institutions receiving funding. These 15 institutions educate 1 in 10 AAPI undergraduate students. Although AANAPISI’s are designated based on the percentage of AAPI’s in attendance, these institutions typically offer special services for AAPI’s, such as English-language learner programs and AAPI studies programs. Although only 52 institutions are designated as AANAPISI’s, there are 116 institutions that could potentially qualify to be AANAPISI’s.

A read of the CARE report is essential for college and university administrators and faculty. This research ensures that we are mindful of the differences that exist between AAPI’s and offers advice on how institutions of higher education can provide the best education possible to AAPI students.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

  • Print
  • Comment
  • 11191774

    It is interesting to look at the map in the US Atlas of the Census at Chapter 3, page 40.  It shows the predominant Asian ancestry by county.  And what it really shows is that the term “Asian” is obviously far too big a brush with which to paint.

    http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/censusatlas/pdf/3_Race-and-Hispanic-Origin.pdf

  • xhzhang

    “65.5 percent of Loation”
    did you meant Laotian?

  • dank48

    Just a thought, but might not the best way to understand Asian American and Pacific Islander students be to consider them as individuals, not as parts of some overly general category?

  • duppy_conqueror

    Alphabet soup, anyone??

  • 11144703

    “While there are significant percentages of AAPI’s at this [4-year] institutional type”

    What are the significant percentages?  You give specifics in the very next sentence but none here.  Why?

    The CARE report deals with various subgroups of Asians as if they are all roughly numerically equal, rather than noting that Chinese, Korean, and Japanese account for an overwhelmingly high % of all AAPIs in the U.S. (unless I missed something).

    “The CARE report dispels many myths about AAPI’s.”  Many = 20, 40, 60, etc.  Don’t you mean several?

    Does MaryB and Thai support affirmative action for AAPIs?  Or only for certain AAPI subgroups?  If Yes for the second question, what about mixed AAPI persons:  Does one with a Chinese father and Hmong mother deserve affirmative action?  How about one with all Chinese ancestors except for a Hmong grandmother or great-grandmother?  Or does the 1 drop policy count here?  (We can learn from the Louisiana law in Plessy for the clever ways race was used in the past in the U.S. to determine who is truly a person of color, and one who is part of the white people.) 

    What do you think of affirmative action policies in Malaysia that struggle to keep those darn Chinese from being so successful there?

    MaryB and Thai, I hope you can answer these questions.

  • 609zr

    The growing Asian population has its wonders:
    1)  Two LA policemen were murdered in Korea Town outside of Los Angeles last week.
    2) A California man who conned Chinese immigrants into joining his fake US Army unit was sentenced  to three years in prison.  Yupeng Deng  gave himself the title “Supreme Commander” when he was running his fictitious military unit.  He promised recruits their time in his squad was a path to US citizenship.

    What happened to the value of one’s culture?   The long run outcome of multiculturalism will be no culture anywhere for anybody.  Welcome to conformity at its worst.