Integrative Antiracism: South Asians in Canadian Academe 0802039448, 9780802039446, 0802037828

Citation preview

IN TE G RATI VE A NT IRA C ISM : SO UT H A SI ANS IN C AN AD I AN A C AD E M E

From both a theoretical and practical standpoint, racism is one of the most important topics that has engaged the attention of social scientists in North America in recent years. As societies become more ethnically diverse, people from different cultures are increasingly coming into contact with each other, resulting in ever greater opportunities for racism to manifest itself. In this work, Edith Samuel examines the educational experiences of South Asian students and faculty members from the perspective of ‘integrative antiracism’ – the study of how the dynamics of social difference are mediated in people’s daily lives. Specifically, she analyses perceptions of and responses to racism in four critical areas: faculty-student relationships, peer group interactions, curriculum, and the psychosocial dimension. Antiracism scholars maintain that racism is widespread on Canadian university campuses. Drawing on the available literature and extensive interviews with students and faculty, Samuel looks at both overt and covert forms of racism, as well as structural racism, that result in discrimination in admissions and employment. She also looks at race, class, gender, history, and culture and how these interlocking systems produce unique experiences of racism for South Asians in academe. Through the exploration of the intricate patterns of South Asians’ assimilation into university life, Integrative Antiracism identifies the numerous barriers racial minorities encounter and suggests a variety of approaches to fostering a more equitable education system. edith samuel is an assistant professor in the Department of Psychology at Atlantic Baptist University.

This page intentionally left blank

EDITH SAMUEL

Integrative Antiracism: South Asians in Canadian Academe FOREWORD BY GEORGE DEI

UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO PRESS Toronto Buffalo London

www.utppublishing.com © University of Toronto Press Incorporated 2005 Toronto Buffalo London Printed in Canada ISBN-13 978-0-8020-3944-6 (cloth) ISBN-10 0-8020-3944-8 (cloth) ISBN-13 978-0-8020-3782-4 (paper) ISBN-10 0-8020-3782-8 (paper)

Printed on acid-free paper Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Samuel, Edith, 1947– Integrative antiracism : South Asians in Canadian academe / Edith Samuel ; foreword by George Dei. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 0-8020-3944-8 (bound). ISBN 0-8020-3782-8 (pbk.) 1. Discrimination in higher education – Canada. college students – Canada. I. Title. LC3479.S24 2005

378.1’9829914071

2. South Asian

C2005-903608-7

University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial assistance to its publishing program of the Canada Council for the Arts and Ontario Arts Council. University of Toronto Press acknowledges the financial supports for its publishing activities of the Government of Canada through the Book Publishing Industry Development Program (BPIDP).

Contents

Foreword by George Dei vii Acknowledgments xiii 1 Introduction 3 2 Theory and Method: Antiracism, Racism, and Ethnographic Interviews 15 3 Adjusting to Canada 43 4 Faculty–Student Relationships 63 5 Peer Group Interaction 84 6 Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members 109 7 The Psychosocial Dimension 127 8 Challenges and Conclusion 143 Notes 163 Bibliography 177 Author Index 197 Subject Index 203

This page intentionally left blank

Foreword

Over the years, antiracism studies have offered some refreshing intellectual insights around the intersections of difference through critical analyses of race, class, gender, and sexuality as sites and relations of power. The imbrication of power in (social) difference has forced a rethinking of what it means to speak of race, identity, and representational politics. Social identities and representations are not mere performances but rather relations of power with real material consequences. Our individual and collective experiential realities are constructed and understood in terms coded strongly by race, class, gender, and sex. For this reason, the denial of difference constitutes both intellectual hypocrisy and a politically ineffective practice. Integrative antiracism argues forcefully that in order to understand the true effects of race, we must acknowledge the way in which race intersects with other forms of difference – gender, class, sexuality, ability, language, and religion – to produce material social existence. Antiracism practice challenges White power and its rationale for dominance by resisting racist and colonial privileges that thrive at the expense of Othered bodies. The academic and political project of critical integrative antiracism is to uncover how Western civilization ‘scripts’ local communities by fabricating Whiteness and by policing its corollary racial boundaries. Also, antiracism works with the notions of 'racialization' and ‘racialized subjects’ to identify the social processes that revolve around race issues. When a complex meaning is brought to race and difference, social identities are understood not as static, bounded, or fixed categories but rather as constantly evolving in different historical contexts. I caution that the shifting meaning of race and experiences of race as contextual apply more to dominant groups than to those who are racialized as 'non-Whites.' Race cannot be understood when it is decou-

viii

Foreword

pled from class, gender, sexuality, language, and religion. That said, critical antiracist practice highlights the important of race; in other words, in a racialized society, race trumps other forms of difference. Unfortunately, such theoretical inroads into understanding race and difference have not been matched with resounding success in the battle to eradicate systemic inequities and social injustices. This is not for lack of effort on the part of antiracism and anti-oppression activists and scholars. I believe it has more to do with Whites being determined to protect their power and privileges. It is also in part a seduction by the status quo – as in, ‘All is well, so let’s not disturb the peace.’ But if antiracism is to help transform society, we must not only speak openly of race and racism as a discursive engagement, but also, importantly, own up to our collective complicities and responsibilities and resist racism in concrete ways. We have much more work to do in bridging theory and practice. I see Edith Samuel’s book as part of the struggle to do that, using the experiences of South Asians in academe as an entry point. In articulating integrative antiracism, the author discusses how race, class, and gender are linked. Her descriptions of the complex realities of South Asian subjects as they confront racism in Canadian academe fills an important research gap. Her book is a unique contribution to antiracism theory and offers significant insights into how social oppression operates in educational and social practices. In exploring how racism manifests itself in ‘faculty-student relationships, peer group interactions, curriculum, and the psychosocial dimension in the lives of South Asians in academe,’ she astutely uncovers the complex ways in which race, ethnicity, class, gender, sexuality, ability, power, and difference influence and are influenced by educational processes. Her weaving together of class, gender, history, culture, politics, and immigration to generate a critical ethnography of ‘everyday racism’ makes this book outstanding. Today we are faced with the impossibility of talking about race and difference, yet race – specifically, the problem of racism – continues to stare us in the face. Before we can address a problem, we must acknowledge that the problem exists. Disappointingly, there is so much denial of racism in academe (just as there is elsewhere) that we fail to engage in honest discussions about race, antiracism, and difference. In a locale where racist practices are embedded in the processes of inflating intellectual egos, writing a book about racism and oppression is not without risks. In our academies, some forms of education are still mired in a missionary view of the world. Students are taught to believe that if they

Foreword ix

learn about other people’s cultures, they will know more about how to help the ‘Other.’ People will go to any lengths to avoid acknowledging their own prejudices. Yet only by acknowledging those and by studying them critically will we be able to address society’s power imbalances and issues of identity and social representation. White people’s arrogant sense of entitlement undermines any discussion of who is responsible for maintaining oppression. We need to understand that racism is a structural problem, and furthermore, that everyone is implicated in it but especially the dominant. When the dominant fail to understand how racism works in society and that they are complicit in maintaining the structures where it hides, they are only eroding their credibility when antiracism work is being done. Whiteness, like Blackness, has its complexities; despite this, we know that Whiteness has a certain degree of saliency inscribed within ‘recognizable universal meanings.’1 Attempting to deny the ‘collective’ in favour of the ‘individual’ is a political game of evading responsibility. For the racially oppressed, racism is a burden they have no choice but to carry, and the complexities of identities do not lighten its weight. For those who are racially oppressed, racism can and does limit life chances, whatever other identities are in play, whether they relate to class, gender, language, or religion. If we accept that racism affects everyone – that the perpetrators are just as dehumanized by their racist practices as the oppressed are by that oppression – we cannot but conclude that collective action is the only way forward. Through individual and collective struggles and resistance, we serve notice to the defenders of the status quo that we are a force to be reckoned with. I make this point because I believe it is important to understand how the discourse of ‘overcoming’ is false in its claims to success. If racism is systemic, how can an individual claim to have overcome its burdens? Despite any successes, racism continues to circulate in everyday life and social practice. Racism, as Giroux (2004, 75) notes, is ‘reproduced through multiple acts of exclusions, inferiorization, or marginalization [that are] sustained by an ideological system and by a set of attitudes that legitimate difference and dominance.’2 People’s culture, collective history, and experiences offer an interior space for reading about resis1 J.V. Pieterse. 1990. ‘Notes for the Exhibition of Africa and Blacks.’ Journal of Ethnic Studies 18(1):93–109. 2 H. Giroux. 2004. The Terror of Neoliberalism: Authoritarianism and the Eclipse of Democracy. Boulder, CO: Paradigm Press.

x

Foreword

tance and survival and the power of spiritual and embodied knowledge to bring about social transformation. Embodied knowledge informs what is resisted or embraced in outward social and political practices. Critical thinking starts when one interrogates one’s deeply held beliefs and convictions. We create a social community by appreciating and responding to the difference and diversity in our midst. We must reinvent the academe as a place to build community, as a space for promoting the leading edge of human thought. The role of critical education is to challenge and subvert the ideological basis of modern forms of schooling, which are instruments of the State. For concrete example, the rising unemployment rates among racialized groups are raising serious questions about how our educational institutions can prepare bodies for social participation and true citizenship. Others are quick to proclaim a frivolous connection between particular bodies and crime. In doing so, they are failing to recognize how structures and institutional forces foster social, spiritual, material, and psychological violence. What this calls for is power sharing in our communities. In academe it is also a matter of having diverse students and teaching staff. The absence of diverse physical representation to deal with institutional access for all peoples is a matter of grave importance for racialized communities. We must always connect identity and knowledge production with power. Collins (1998) not long ago wrote about how, for racial minorities – specifically Black women – absence in the academy becomes the norm to the point that their very presence creates a problem in search of a solution.3 And as Bhattacharyya (2002), borrowing from Fanon's Black Skin/White Masks, brilliantly argues, within academe there is also the contradictory space, a moment when Blackness is required and necessary as a gesture of tokenism. Consequently, Black skin is not covered by a White mask, but rather is staged more starkly against the background of the whiteboard.4 Contemporary antiracism work must challenge formalized, monocultural, homogenizing understandings of the world, understandings that can inscribe and reproduce alienation by negating and devaluing the embodied knowledges of difference that we all bring to our envi3 P.H. Collins. 1998. Fighting Words: Black Women and the Search for Justice. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. 4 Gargi Bhattacharyya. 2000. ‘Black Skin/White Boards.’ In Back and Solomos, eds., Theories of Race and Racism: A Reader. London and New York: Routledge.

Foreword xi

ronments. In academe, some of our formal practices run the risk of despiritualizing students by enforcing routines that compel them to amputate their differences. The ‘success’ that academe is enjoying in marketizing education, so that student bodies are constructed as mere commodities for the ‘globalized’ economy, is rooted the degree to which students are able – and willing – to physically, emotionally, and psychologically negate their differences in order to pass for what the culture declares to be ‘normal’ (see Doyle-Wood 2005a).5 What we thus end up with, given that all students represent a myriad of differences and are wounded by this ‘normalcy’ to varying degrees – is the imposition of systemic and institutionalized miseducation (see also Corrigan 1990).6 Integrative antiracism work must aim to subvert dominating social relations of power. We have a problem when difference is conceptualized in authentic, essentialized, exoticized, culturalist terms and is positioned as independent of other social experiences such as race, class, gender, disability, and sexuality (see Brah 1999:129).7 Similarly, there are real material consequences when difference is presented and understood as a form of signification that is removed from political, social, and historical/contemporary struggles and constraints (McLaren 1997:52).8 When difference is viewed as a site of conflict and contestation, the discourse of sameness ignores (and denies) the racialized asymmetrical power relations in which the politics of difference are inscribed; furthermore, it ignores the implications of social materiality that are embedded in such relations (see Doyle-Wood 2005b).9 Difference is more than simply a site of individual contestation. In our institutions, difference – its conceptualization, and the ways in which it is

5 S. Doyle-Wood. 2005a. Defining Difference in Canadian Schooling Contexts. In Dei, Amin, and Abdi, eds., Social Difference and Schooling in Canada – Pedagogical Challenges. [forthcoming]. 6 P. Corrigan. 1990. Social Forms/Human Capacities: Essays in Authority and Difference. London: Routledge. 7 A. Brah. 1999. ‘Difference, Diversity and Differentiation.’ In Donald and Rattansi, eds., Race, Culture & Difference. London: Sage. 8 P. McLaren. 1997. ‘White Terror and Oppositional Agency: Towards a Critical Multiculturalism. InGoldberg, ed., Multiculturalism: A Critical Reader. Oxford: Blackwell. 9 S. Doyle-Wood. 2005b. Passing for Black? The Epistemology of Passing: Re-Reckoning and old Trope. In Asgharzadeh et al., eds., Diasporic Ruptures: Transnationalism, Globalization and Identity Discourses. [forthcoming].

xii

Foreword

engaged in systemic, hierarchical, and binary-oppositional terms – mediates through knowledge production and hegemonic discursive/material practices the asymmetrical relations of power that greatly determine the (dis)engagement, alienation, well-being, spiritual health, and happiness of all our students, which includes the communities of difference from which they emerge (see Dei and Doyle-Wood 2005a).10 As Audre Lorde (1984, 114) observed long ago, Western European history has indoctrinated us to perceive ‘human differences in simplistic opposition to each other: dominant/subordinate, good/bad, up/down, superior/inferior [valid/invalid, legitimate/illegitimate, civilized/uncivilized] with always the psychic impregnation of the most desired and valued coming first, followed by the inferiorized.’11 Some of the critical pedagogical questions we must ask ourselves in our engagements with difference and diversity revolve around the need for a deeper conceptual clarity that is complex, multicentred, and liberating. We must ask ourselves, for example, ‘Who gets to define difference? Whose articulations are taken up and produced as legitimate and valid conceptualizations and enunciations? Whom do such articulations and knowledges serve?’ At the same time, even while asking such questions, we must be mindful of the need to work with critical knowledge so as to acknowledge, engage, and (re)position difference and diversity as sources of embodied resistance, agency, and transformative knowledge, thereby challenging the epistemic violence of Western cultural knowledge as it relates to the material exigencies of racialized and marginalized subjects and communities (see Dei and Doyle-Wood 2005b).12 George J. Sefa Dei Professor and Chair Department of Sociology and Equity Studies Ontario Institute for Studies in Education University of Toronto 10 G.J.S. Dei and S. Doyle-Wood. 2005a. ‘‘Is We Who Haffi Ride De Staam’: Critical Knowledge/Multiple Knowings: Possibilities, Challenges and Resistance.’ In Kanu, ed., Curriculum/Cultural Contexts in Curriculum as Cultural Practice: Post Colonial Imaginations. [forthcoming] 11 Lorde, A. 1984. Sister Outsider: Essays and Speeches. Berkeley, CA: The Crossing Press. 12 G.J.S. Dei and S. Doyle-Wood. 2005b. Knowledge or Indigenous Knowledge? Multiple Knowings, Challenges and Possibilities in the Academy. In Kincheloe and Horn, eds., Encyclopedia of Educational Psychology. Westport, CT: Greenwood Publishing. [forthcoming]

Acknowledgments

Many people have been instrumental in the completion of this work. For practical, perceptive, and intellectual guidance, I thank Judy IsekeBarnes, Njoki Wane, Paul Olson, and Shehla Burney. I also thank the publishing team at University of Toronto Press for believing in my work and for their professionalism and hard work. Finally, and most importantly, I thank the students and professors who candidly and courageously shared their experiences with me.

This page intentionally left blank

IN TE G RATI VE A NT IRA C ISM

This page intentionally left blank

1 Introduction

Race is one of the most volatile, divisive issues in [North] American higher education … It is important to understand campus race relations not only because the potential of real turmoil exists, but also because we can learn a great deal about the nature of contemporary higher education through an examination of this central issue. Altbach 1991, 3

This book explores South Asians’1 perceptions of racism in Canadian academe and seeks to fill the research gap, contribute to antiracism scholarship, and shed light on how social structures work. Specifically, it examines racism in four critical areas: faculty–student relationships, peer group interactions, curriculum, and the psychosocial dimension in the lives of South Asians in academe. I contend that South Asian students cannot maximize their academic potential because of everyday racism in university settings. This critique postulates that there is racism in academe, considers the implications of this, and suggests strategies for improving the campus environment. Antiracism scholars assert that racism is persistent on Canadian university campuses. Henry and her colleagues maintain: ‘On university campuses across the country, minority students have complained that the campus is often a hostile learning environment’ (2000, 245). Overt or blatant acts of racism are few; more prevalent is the covert or hidden kind. Racism is widespread in Canada and is ‘characterized by explicit, systemic and institutional racism … Racism and discrimination were applied to … immigrants, in accordance with the prevailing beliefs and values of the times’ (Laquian et al. 1998, 7). This study examines overt

4

Integrative Antiracism

and covert forms of racism, as well as structural racism of the sort that results in discrimination in admissions and employment on Canadian campuses. All the South Asians I interviewed for this study had encountered racism in some form or other in Canadian academe. Some South Asian female students also reported blatant sexism. ‘Gendered racism’ (Essed 1991) identifies both race and gender as principal sources of oppression for women of colour. Class, history, and culture are also significant dimensions of oppression. In this book I examine class as it positions and locates South Asian students and faculty within a social hierarchy in universities and in society. (Most of the South Asians in this study belong to the upper middleclass.)2 Also, I juxtapose historical background and cultural location with the immigration experience in analysing the experiences of students and faculty. I explore how race, class, gender, culture, and history intersect and how these interlocking systems produce unique experiences of racism for South Asians in academe. All fifty participants in this study perceived racism as widespread and as sometimes overt but most often covert. Some respondents described racism in terms of ethnocentrism, cultural insensitivity, and ignorance.3 These interviewees saw racism as rampant in the university and as rooted in the arrogance of a majority group4 that lacked awareness and understanding of South Asian beliefs, customs, and traditions. The respondents told me how they constantly had to negotiate spaces that positioned them between ‘Brown’ and the dominant ‘White.’ Yet few of them truly wanted to make an issue of racial practices. I have done this study because racism is often subtle and hidden – sometimes barely discernible. The presence of migrant students and faculty5 needs to be acknowledged and recognized. South Asians have been silent and invisible for decades on Canadian campuses. Their issues need to be examined, analysed, and raised. This book identifies the barriers they encounter and suggests approaches to fostering an equitable education system. The rest of this chapter discusses the book’s background, subjects, method, findings, and organization. Background This study offers a distinctive, ‘inside-the-communities’ (Khare 1997, v) vision of the South Asian experience in Canadian universities. It explores the intricate patterns of South Asians’ assimilation into univer-

Introduction

5

sity life. An analysis of their experiences will help us develop successful patterns of university achievement. This inquiry offers a unique overview of the contradictory and paradoxical experiences of minority groups6 in university settings. Its findings may also be relevant to other visible minorities in similar educational contexts. In this book I define ‘visible minority’ as individuals who differ physiologically and phenotypically from the dominant group and who cannot easily merge or pass into mainstream society. Visible minorities consist of individuals ‘who are ‘non-Caucasian’ in race or non-White in colour.’7 Little research seems to have been done on South Asian students and faculty in Canada, and this book is an attempt to broaden Canadians’ understanding of their academic, cultural, and social nuances. These students and faculty are generally visible and do not necessarily have the choice to join the dominant group. This inquiry focuses on the tension between South Asian students and the dominant group (principally anglophones) in university settings. Racism on university campuses in North America has become more widespread since the 1960s as a result of the increase in immigration (Henry and Tator 2005). Between 1977 and 1986, immigration to Canada more than doubled, from 1 million a year to about 2.1 million (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 1997). In 1951, 15.0 per cent of the Canadian population was born outside the country; in 1991, 16 per cent; in 1996, 17.4 per cent (Statistics Canada 2001). In 2001, 5.4 million or 18.4 per cent of Canada’s population were foreign-born (Henry and Tator 2005). With the rapid growth in immigration, it is not surprising that immigrants, in negotiating spaces, have had to cope with racial tensions at the individual, family, and societal levels. Abu-Laban and Li (1998, 2) observe: Among the many changes brought about by recent immigrants are increased ethnic, linguistic and cultural diversity, contrasting religious and ethical understandings, varied family practices, differing gender and generational sensitivities and class heterogeneity. Newcomers from diverse backgrounds face complex issues in trying to negotiate life in an adoptive country that sometimes appears welcoming and at other times, obstructive. Issues of adaptation and integration become salient at several levels: societal, group, familial and individual. At the cusp of this new millennium, in an increasingly globalized world, immigration impacts on Canadian society no less than Canadian society impacts on immigrants.

6

Integrative Antiracism

Thus, as a consequence of rising immigration and new arrivals trying to negotiate space, there is more interaction between mainstream and migrant groups. Undeniably, this has sometimes resulted in greater friction and racial tensions. A large body of American literature has documented extensive racism in academia (Aguirre and Martinez 1993; Boice 1993a; Chavez and Padilla 1995; Escuerta and O’Brien 1995; Mindiola 1995; Nakanishi 1993; E. Smith 1992). This racism makes it difficult for minority students to adjust and impairs their cognitive development (Hurtado et al. 1996). Most Canadian universities deny that racism exists on campus; in the name of ‘academic freedom and preservation of meritocracy,’ they also oppose change (Henry and Tator 1994a). In fact, racism is strongly present and manifests itself through racist social interactions, discriminatory faculty–student relationships, a Eurocentric curriculum, and power differentials between majority and minority groups (ibid.). Earlier theorists (Lewis 1969; Moynihan 1965) emphasized family– school relations as the site of educational problems and crises. More recently, critical race theorists (Fine 1997; Dei et al. 2000) have considered educational institutions as sites of contest, power, and social inequality. The basis of critical race theories is that structural processes in educational institutions sustain unequal opportunities and generate differential outcomes for visible minority students. Most of the time, schools play down race and difference and marginalize minority students. Furthermore, they disregard interlocking systems of oppression such as gender, class, culture, and history, which are significant markers of power and difference. In addition, they overlook the importance and permanence of skin colour as a visible marker of difference. My central argument is framed from a newer perspective: integrative antiracism (Dei 1996). This innovative race-based theory emphasizes the power-based inferiorization of social differences such as gender, class, culture, and history. Ethnic differences based on cultural indicators such as religion, dress, accent, and mannerisms intersect in discourses of race, class, gender, culture, and history. Integrative antiracism is postmodern and activist; it investigates the struggles of oppressed groups and examines multiple and contradictory positions and identities. The entry point is race. Omi and Winant point out that ‘one simply is one’s race’ (1993a, 6). This study highlights race and difference, addresses ‘interlocking systems of oppression’ (Razack 1998), and demonstrates the salience and permanence of skin colour, culture, and history in the rhetoric of racism in Canadian academe.

Introduction

7

One of the main reasons I selected this area of study was the absence of literature on South Asians in academe. My research is an attempt to fill this gap and contribute to antiracist scholarship by providing an inimitable perspective on South Asians. It involves two main areas of study: antiracist scholarship, which explores power differences between racial groups and how racism works in existing power structures; and the current literature on interlocking systems of race, gender, class, history, and culture. Racism is widespread in educational institutions. It takes the form of slurs, name calling, teasing, rude behaviour, body language, graffiti, stereotyping, threats, and sometimes outright violence (Henry et al. 2000). It is present at the individual, institutional, and structural levels. University students interact with the faculty, staff, and students and while doing so are influenced by their family situations and cultural and ethnic backgrounds. This book examines these influences in the lives of fifty South Asian students and faculty. The most palpable form of racism is individual racism – that is, overt or covert prejudicial acts. Individual racism is sometimes based on skin colour and cultural background. There is also institutional racism, which arises when structural practices impede a group’s success. The dynamic between individual and institutional racism helps sustain prejudicial attitudes in society. Structural or systemic racism involves inequities and barriers embedded in how the society operates. It is exclusionary and prevents many members of racial minorities from participating extensively in the social order. Specifically, the majority group prevents minorities from acquiring the education and skills they need to contribute as fully as they can to society (Ramcharan 1991). This study focuses on individual, institutional, and structural/ systemic racism as experienced by South Asians in academe. The material on individual racism that follows deals mainly with the racism that South Asians perceive and react to in academic settings. Data on institutional and structural racism focuses on discriminatory practices in admissions and hiring and how these affect students and faculty. The study also examines South Asians’ perceptions of racism in faculty–student interactions, peer group interactions, and curricula. Then it investigates the assumption that racism in any form is a destructive force that harms minority students psychologically. Finally, it suggests ways that university personnel can challenge racism and create a more equitable environment.

8

Integrative Antiracism

Subjects: South Asian Students and Faculty Members The term ‘South Asian’ refers to those with roots in India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri-Lanka – all former British colonies. Indians, Pakistanis, and Bangladeshis are linked historically and geographically in that they are all from the Indian Subcontinent.8 Sri Lanka is an island southeast of the subcontinent.9 It has a large Tamil population that emigrated from the south Indian state of Tamil Nadu; so it, too, has historical connections to the subcontinent (Buchignani and Indra 1985).10 Linguistic and cultural groups (Gujarati, Hindi, Malayalam, Punjabi, Sinhalese, Tamil, Telegu, and Urdu) and religious affiliations (Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Sikh) add complexity to the South Asian group. Certain cultural norms and practices and immigration experiences are generic to the South Asian group. But as this study will show, those experiences also diverge. That said, all the South Asians I interviewed for this study experienced ongoing racism vis-à-vis mainstream values, beliefs, and practices in Canadian academe. This study looks at foreign-born and second-generation South Asian students11 and draws out similarities and differences in their educational experiences and in their experiences of racism. The two groups experience racism in similar and dissimilar ways. International students – that is, those who come to Canada to study for a short time – face different issues than students who were born in Canada or who came here when very young. For instance, international students have had less exposure to Canadian life and so tend to adhere more closely to their own customs, values, and beliefs than second-generation students. The two groups will therefore have different experiences of racism. Exploring their lived experiences on campus may reveal the systemic racism in everyday interactions. It is crucial to define the South Asian community since, as the interviews showed, that community has considerable influence over its members. The community includes extended family, friends, and acquaintances in this country. It is generally close-knit; its members typically share a common language, religion, and culture. Community members disseminate news and information among themselves without hesitation. Social sanctions against behaviour that is unacceptable to the community are generally severe. Most of the interviewees indicated that their community influenced their behaviour on the campus either directly or indirectly. For convenience, I chose a particular university as the centre of my

Introduction

9

study. This university is in a small town; most of its students are from the majority group.12 The study focuses on the racism experienced by South Asian students attending this institution. I chose university students as subjects because they were at a stage in life when their educational experiences were affecting their choices about careers and their concomitant integration into Canadian society. Furthermore, being a South Asian myself and having studied at a Canadian university, I could share and draw on experiences specific to my race, gender, class, history, and culture. Being South Asian let me talk to the participants with greater openness. Method This book examines South Asian students’ experiences and perceptions of racism on a White-dominated university campus. It investigates their experiences in relation to ‘power points’ such as faculty–student interaction, peer group interaction, curriculum, and the psychosocial dimensions of racism. I have chosen these four categories because the data I collected identified them as areas where students experienced significant oppression. The role of faculty in academe is crucial. Minority students of colour expect their instructors to know how to work with them. O’Donnell and Green-Merritt (1997, 13) explain: ‘More specifically applied to the area of minority recruitment and retention means that faculty, staff and students in the majority population must be expected to make some adaptations in the way they treat and work with people of colour.’ For faculty members to be well informed about the culture, beliefs, values, attitudes, and behaviour of minority students, they must be constantly exposed to diverse groups. Mainstream faculty who live in small, predominantly White communities have little opportunity to interact with diverse groups (ibid.). Consequently, misunderstandings and tensions sometimes characterize these relationships and may affect the academic performance and cognitive development of minority students. This study asks: How do South Asian students perceive interaction patterns with mainstream faculty members? How do they perceive mainstream faculty members’ teaching styles and evaluation criteria? How do these factors affect their academic performance? Regarding peer group interactions, there is evidence that minority students on predominantly White campuses experience maladjustment (Bean 1990; Tinto 1975). When members of the dominant group ex-

10

Integrative Antiracism

hibit racism towards them, they see it as intolerance. This creates a climate of racial discrimination that harms minority students’ interactions throughout the campus (Hurtado et al. 1996). Furthermore, such an atmosphere restricts minority students’ ability to interact with majority students, faculty, and staff. This in turn hampers intellectual and social development and may cause some students to leave university (Smith 1992). The students in the study represented both the international group13 and second-generation immigrants.14 Most participants belonged to the middle class;15 that said, their class experiences were rooted in racist and sexist subjugation. So a key question was: How did South Asian students and faculty perceive their myriad interactions with mainstream students in and outside the classroom? Regarding curriculum, a recurring theme in the interviews was the Eurocentric focus and inadequate information about diversity issues in course materials. Hall and Kulig and their colleagues looked into this and found that ‘once again, the repeated theme was that students felt very strongly that they were not receiving the required and necessary information about diversity within their professional training’ (1998, 119). Often, faculty in professional disciplines show ignorance about other cultures and are ill equipped to address diversity issues (Bernard et al. 1995). Furthermore, there is little institutional support for informing mainstream faculty about diversity. Pertinent questions include these: How do South Asian students and faculty perceive the curriculum? Are they content with how race, class, history, and cultural issues are reflected in curricula? Do mainstream instructors adequately address diversity issues in their lectures? This study also considers the psychological impact of racism on minority students. Prejudicial attitudes among the dominant group may result in culture conflicts and/or identity crises for many such students. Widely held beliefs, prejudices, and stereotypes may impede the cognitive and intellectual development of minority individuals. These negative attitudes do not have to be overtly expressed (for example, as hostility) in order to generate ‘discomfort, uneasiness, disgust, and sometimes fear, which tend to motivate avoidance rather than intentionally destructive behaviours’ (Gaertner and Dovidio 1986, 63). This raises fundamental questions: How does racism affect South Asian university students psychosocially? Do they experience culture conflict/identity crises on campus? How do foreign students cope with cultural stresses? I gathered my data mainly through one-on-one interviews using semistructured, open-ended questions. This approach enabled the students

Introduction

11

to recount their experiences in their own words. I organized the interview questions into the four categories identified above and encouraged the interviewees to discuss in depth their related concerns and experiences. Findings Analysing lived experiences rather than abstract theories offers new knowledge about South Asians and provides them with a forum to speak. If Canada is to develop an inclusive education system, it is vital to incorporate their diverse experiences. Their experiences challenge some existing assumptions in the social sciences. By recognizing racial diversity and the many complex ways that race, class, gender, age, culture, and history intersect, we will be transforming sociology and equity studies in education. The key finding of this study is that racism adversely affects the immigration experience, faculty and peer relationships, academic evaluations, curricula, and the psychosocial aspects of the lives of South Asian students. This study suggests how various aspects of social structures interact to produce different choices, opportunities, and aspirations for diverse groups of students. It also examines how power structures influence and/or impede the academic progress of minority students. I ‘unsettle’ (Bannerji 1991b, 6) the notion that all South Asian students are academically high achieving and fit the ‘model-minority stereotype’ (Chan and Wang 1991, 45).16 These students often find themselves defenceless; despite their academic achievements, they have to struggle every inch of the way for educational equity (ibid.). The gradual increases in immigration17 and in immigrant-student populations have made many Canadian campuses more diversified and culturally mixed. Growing diversity has sometimes caused tensions between dominant and minority student groups. To handle diversity, universities must become aware of the needs of students from various backgrounds. Such awareness is not apparent in Canadian universities, and my study examines this deficiency. Most student interviewees told me that certain faculty members greatly influenced their academic achievements for good or ill. Similarly, their mainstream peers affected the campus environment by either accepting them or simply tolerating them. Most respondents felt strong parental pressure to succeed in their studies. Chapters 3 and 7 respectively will discuss issues relating to parental pressure and sanctions relat-

12

Integrative Antiracism

ing to dating practices. Other significant findings: the curricula in most disciplines were essentially Eurocentric (chapter 6); most South Asians in academe had had their psyches indelibly and negatively marked by racism; and culture conflicts and identity crises skewed the academic achievements of many promising interviewees (chapter 7). Antiracism scholarship has ignored many experiences of South Asians, especially as they relate to the immigration process. Also, this scholarship has not focused hard enough on their experiences relating to race, age, gender, and class. The present study concludes that South Asians have diverse experiences and narratives, which should be incorporated by antiracism studies. Implications of This Study To incorporate South Asian students’ experiences, antiracism theories must examine race, age, and immigration experiences as well as gender and class and analyse how all of these interact. These theories must also acknowledge that race, class, gender, and age make sense only within specific social, political, and historical processes. Any analysis of difference and inequality must take into account all relevant magnitudes. Traditional discourses do a poor job of informing educators about the entirety of the human experience (Dei 1996). We must reject ‘essences/ totalizing discourses’ (King 1994) and strive for an all-embracing form of knowledge that demonstrates how multiple identities and subject positions influence the lives of, for example, South Asian students and faculty members. Since those experiences are diverse and dynamic, antiracism theories need to avoid universalizing descriptions and develop an epistemological position that leaves room for myriad understandings and positionings. Organization of the Book Chapters 2 and 3 consider the theoretical, methodological, and contextual frameworks of this study by examining integrative antiracism. Chapter 2 conceptualizes race and racism and discusses a number of critical antiracism perspectives. It also examines the method used in this study and discusses why it was chosen. Chapter 3 analyses the impact of immigration history on South Asians in academe. It considers especially family shifts, class membership, social and economic status, religious affiliations, and prior learning ex-

Introduction

13

periences. It then compares Canadian and the South Asian education systems and considers the role of migrant students and faculty in academe. Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7 provide and analyse the study’s data. Chapter 4 discusses faculty–student relationships in terms of derogatory remarks; differential teaching styles; racist, sexist, and classist stereotypes; evaluations; and the ‘tracking’ of South Asian students. From interview data I look at everyday aspects of faculty–student interactions. This chapter assesses students’ attitudes towards mainstream faculty members, be they supportive or unsupportive. Chapter 5 discusses racism is it relates to peer group interactions. I apply the integrative antiracism perspectives to highlight South Asian students’ interactions in various academic settings. My interview data suggest that hidden, subtle, and aversive racism exists and that so, sometimes, does blatant racism. This study shows how the subtle nuances of everyday racism create angst and stress for South Asians in academe. Chapter 6 examines the existing Eurocentric curriculum from the perspective of South Asian students and minority faculty. The comments of minority faculty underscore that dominant faculty lack appropriate pedagogical tools and are blind to the needs of students from diverse backgrounds. This chapter also considers how mainstream students resist the study of indigenous knowledge and minority issues. It reviews the dilemmas minority faculty face in terms of lack of administrative support. The experiences shared by minority students and minority faculty indicate that racism is pervasive in academe. Chapter 7 deals with the psychosocial impact of racism on South Asian students. The application of integrative antiracism’s multiple and shifting identities to the findings of this study makes possible an analysis of the stress these students experience. Drawing from interview data, I argue that even those who succeed academically encounter emotional and psychological traumas and that some experience severe depression. Also, some experience acute culture conflict, feeling torn between two different lifestyles. Some feel it not as ‘cultural shock’ but rather as ‘cultural electrocution.’ Interpersonal relationships with almost everyone around them generate culture conflict. Chapter 8 summarizes the study. It challenges overt and covert racism as it relates to the four areas of investigation (faculty–student relationships, peer interactions, curriculum, and the psychosocial dimension). It suggests that the suggestions of minority students, faculty, and staff be listened to and that changes be implemented in all four areas. It con-

14

Integrative Antiracism

cludes that if the recommendations drawn from the study are adopted through integrative antiracism strategies, universities will become more congenial and equitable places for minorities and South Asian students will be able to contribute to the host society to their maximum potential. In documenting narratives on racism as it affects educational experiences, we need to be alerted to ‘how much is at stake for the nation and higher education; to how complex are the factors at work, the attitudes, and the philosophical issues; and to how elusive are the solutions. May it be true, as William James once said, that “great emergencies and crises show us how much greater our vital resources are than we had supposed” ’ (Altbach 1991, x).

2 Theory and Method: Antiracism, Racism, and Ethnographic Interviews

Civilization is to be judged by its treatment of its minorities. – Gandhi 1991

Race matters. – West 1994

This chapter deals with integrative antiracism theory, as George Dei presents it in his eight-part system; with antiracist perspectives on and definitions of racism, which suggest fourteen varieties of racism; and with the method of this study, which I have based on ethnographic interviews. Integrative Antiracism Theory The conceptual framework of integrative antiracism (Dei 1996, 55–74) is pivotal to my analysis in this book. Dei, an antiracist educator, proposes an integrative antiracism discursive framework that delineates minority students’ experiences in educational institutions. He defines integrative antiracism as ‘the study of how the dynamics of social differences (race, class, gender) are mediated in people’s daily experiences’ (ibid., 55). He explores the social impact of ‘race’ – despite the concept’s lack of scientific basis – on the lived experiences of minority groups. He argues that the narratives and discourses of minority groups are rooted in ‘powerful social meanings’ in mainstream societies. These meanings permeate concepts, constructs, and discourses, and are used to explain the social order (Ryan 1999, 57).

16

Integrative Antiracism

George Dei’s theory has eight main elements: • The process of articulation of social difference through race, gender, and class • Personal experiential knowledge • Differential power and privilege • The questioning of White privilege • Critiquing Eurocentric knowledge • Multiple/shifting identities of the minority group • Inclusivity • A holistic approach The Process of Articulation of Social Difference Dei (1996, 60) views race, class, and gender as complex sites and multiple-subject positions that social scientists must interrogate and rupture. Social, political, and historical interpretations produce and reproduce these aspects of social difference. Multiple-subject positions explain how individuals interact in society and the role of these interactions in bringing about social change (Belkhir and Ball 1993, 3–11). Subjects do not fit just one category – that is, they are not just oppressor or oppressed; rather, they can shift positions in different situations and contexts. For instance, a South Asian can be in oppressee in one situation and an oppressor in another. Integrative antiracism theory challenges the marginalization of the knowledge and lived experiences of minority groups in the educational system. Isolating one variable of oppression such as race and giving it prominence does not explain the totality of social life. Race is a governing principle, but so are class and gender. The ‘interlocking nature of relevant systems of domination’ (Morris 1992) deeply affects collective consciousness. Dorothy Smith (1987) has examined the relations among race, class, gender, and ethnicity in her feminist neo-Marxist analyses of women’s oppression. She critiques mainstream perspectives of class and ethnicity that have excluded race and gender issues (Smith, Bourne, and McCoy 1995; McIntyre 1995; Wylie 1995). Race and gender are not discrete systems; rather, they uphold and sustain one another (Duclos 1993). A woman of colour must decide whether her experiences resemble those of a White woman (produced by sexism) or those of a man of colour (produced by racism). An examination of the racialized aspects of and gender and class is therefore imperative (Gordon 1991).

Theory and Method 17

Integrative antiracism further contends that social oppressions reflect a politics of difference relating to class (Dei 1996, 57). This fundamental element of difference is encountered in material conditions such as property, privilege, and power. Material access and advantage are derived from privileged social relations. Integrative antiracism strives to combat material disadvantage and advocates an equitable redistribution of material resources. Here we should consider the material and ideological conditions that affect minority students’ employment and life chances after graduation. Racism has the strongest impact on minority graduates when they begin seeking employment. Many highly qualified minority students in this study could not obtain some of the most lucrative jobs; mainstream applicants with only half the level of educational qualifications had easy access. An integrative antiracism perspective presents the education system as a site for producing and reproducing ideological hegemony in terms of the state’s class, economic, and political interests (ibid., 34). It strives to link the labour demands of the global economy to the educational process, which discriminates against minority students. The resulting inequalities are visible in minority students’ academic results and in the centrality of meritocracy in the education system. The meritocracy doctrine fosters the perception that minority students fare poorly in academe because they are unintelligent. Many of the South Asian students I interviewed told me that class interests in academe strongly affected their success. Most of the people in this study came from the upper middle-classes in their home countries. They could afford the high fees – fees that perhaps made them desirable to the university even if their race did not. Notwithstanding the money they paid and perhaps the exotic flavour these students brought to the university, South Asians were (as immigrants generally are) grouped with the working class (Bolaria and Li 1988). Immigrants are exploited as cheap labour in a capitalist economy because of their colonial past (Henry et al. 2000). Consignment to the working-class may shape minority students’ interactions with university personnel. Personal Experiential Knowledge By examining the lived experiences of South Asian students through Dei’s ‘personal experiential knowledge’ (1996, 63) and by giving voice to their concerns, this analysis hopes to highlight their subjugated status. The students’ knowledge in this respect derives from lived and per-

18

Integrative Antiracism

sonal experience and from sociopolitical factors that permeate social oppressions. The lived experiences of individuals are foundations for intellectual inquiry (Sullivan 1995). Survival experiences that are verbalized and analysed generally become integral to knowledge. Experience includes specific events as well as general aspects of social reality (Essed 1991, 58). In this regard, experience that comprises knowledge points to agency being linked with social structure. Experiences consist of both ‘witnessed’ and ‘reported’ incidents that are recallable from memory. In discussing experiences of racism, I will distinguish between personal, mediated, and cognitive experiences. Personal experiences relate to the individual’s daily life; mediated experiences influence the behaviour of a group or subgroup; cognitive experiences shape an individual’s perceptions of social reality (ibid.). This study uses all three forms of experience (personal, mediated, and cognitive) in analysing racism. South Asian students have repeatedly experienced personal racism in peer-group interactions in various academic and social contexts (chapter 5). They have mediated experiences of racism in their faculty–student relationships and with the Eurocentric curriculum (chapters 4 and 6). Cognitive experiences of racism surface in the psychosocial aspects of the minority students’ lives (chapter 7). We must, however, guard against essentializing lived experiences and portraying participants as unquestioned voices of authority. Differential Power and Privilege Integrative antiracism also probes how differential power and privilege function in the social order (Dei 1996, 63). The critical point is that minority groups are treated differently in their interactions with the mainstream group. Majority–minority relationships involve subordinating and repressing one group relative to another. It follows that records of interactions between individuals or groups can be highly revealing (Duclos 1993). First-year university students are especially dependent on the education system for social, emotional, and academic support (Matsuda 1989). Given the antiracism mandate of universities,1 any form of racism – be it polite or hidden – can harm students’ self-confidence. Universities have extraordinary power over minority students and faculty members (ibid.). Minority students are often at jeopardy ‘academically, socially and psychologically’ (Martin and Warburton 1998, 16). Similarly, minority faculty are in a vulnerable position; typically, they lack tenure and are overloaded with work or simply invisible

Theory and Method 19

in the department (Dua and Lawrence 2000; Trueba 1998). Both minority students and minority faculty are at a sharp disadvantage; they usually lack the prospects and means to cope with problems that dominant group members find more manageable. Minority groups sometimes withdraw from painful situations; this can lead to further difficulties in their academic careers. From this we can glean that minority students and faculty are sometimes unable to cope with career setbacks (Martin and Warburton 1998). This leads us to two points. First, racism in White-dominated institutions in Canada is covert, subtle, and sometimes polite. Second, racism is intrinsic in the history of power relations between dominant and subjugated groups. Dominant groups have partly acknowledged this by accepting the concept of freedom of speech, which is a basic individual right under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Newman 2002). However, there are many restrictions imposed on free speech, such as laws against defamation (Leo 2004). Furthermore, powerful groups that can hire legal counsel have more ‘access’ to free speech. Many victims of racist practices either cannot afford to hire legal resources or are unwilling to take action, fearing the consequences. A democratic society that believes in promoting freedom and equality should try to discourage acts of degradation, humiliation, and cruelty, including words and actions that hurt. Racist provocation is incompatible with freedom of speech because it is undemocratic (Cotler 1991). Racial slurs, however inadvertent, can silence their targets and render them less able to participate in a university’s social and academic life. Too often, university students of colour experience incidents that discomfit, isolate, seclude, and even segregate them. For them, campuses can be all too chilly. Questioning White Privilege Integrative antiracism interrogates the social relations of White male power and privilege. The privilege of Whiteness is usually invisible to members of the dominant group (McIntosh 1989; Sleeter 1994). White privilege is an ‘invisible weightless knapsack’ of special, unearned privileges. Gail Dines (1994, 28) affirms: ‘[The] power of [W]hiteness as a social identity [can be] rendered invisible by privilege’ ascribed to skin colour, class, religion, ethnic status, and geographical location. There is a strong tendency not to perceive Whiteness as a racial identity and to degrade the humanity of subjugated groups. White privilege con-

20

Integrative Antiracism

fers unearned dominance and power on certain groups and places groups of colour in marginalized and alienated positions. McIntosh (1989, 19) points out that she ‘was taught to recognize racism only in individual acts of meanness by members of [her] group, never in invisible systems conferring unsought racial dominance on [her] group from birth.’ Racism is structurally and systemically located in massive, invisible systems. The antiracism strategy attempts to disentangle White privilege from hidden structures of dominance and to dislodge the dogma underlying the social identity of Whiteness. It also emphasizes that questioning the concept of Whiteness opens the gates for the privileged White group to enter the antiracism debate. Critiquing Eurocentric Knowledge Integrative antiracism critiques the production and spread of Eurocentric knowledge (Dei 1996, 75). This focus should give way to a multicentric conception of knowledge transmission. For knowledge to become multicentric, educators will first have to acknowledge that racism, sexism, and classism are embedded in existing curricula. A positive attitude towards diversity and difference should inform the ‘deep curriculum’ (ibid., 79) – that is, the institution’s curricula, culture, and power structures. A deep curriculum has both official and hidden aspects and encompasses the written and unwritten rules that regulate the behaviour of students; it is reflected in activities, attitudes, perceptions, expectations, and outcomes. This form of knowledge transmission highlights the institution’s character and reputation. Many of the South Asian students I interviewed perceived a Eurocentric deep curriculum at the university (chapter 5). As my analysis shows, students of colour are increasingly challenging educators to be inclusive in their pedagogies and instructional resources. They are trying to regain, retrieve, and recover lost voices and knowledge. Inclusivity Integrative antiracism emphasizes inclusivity in the education system as a response to diversity (ibid., 33). We need to be aware of the ‘paradox of diversity.’ Lip service to diversity can conceal the power of racism, sexism, and classism in mainstream society (Bannerji 2000). The state’s ideological apparatus can use diversity ‘to erase or empty out social

Theory and Method 21

relations and forms of power – “race,” gender and class’ (ibid., 34). The concept then becomes a framework to allow a discursive reading of difference, ‘obscuring any understanding of difference as a construction of power’ (ibid., 36). Cultural traits of immigrants can then serve ‘to both create and eclipse racism and we are discouraged from reading them in terms of relations and symbolic forms of power’ (ibid., 37). This approach looks down on various aspects of difference – such as country of origin, skin colour, language, religion, tradition, culture, food preferences, and dress – and marks them off as inferior to those of the dominant group. In this way, the ideologies of diversity and difference conceal the power of racism, sexism, and classism. This is what Himmani Bannerji calls the ‘paradox of diversity.’ She sees the cultural diversity of official multiculturalism2 as an ‘ideological gloss’ that camouflages racist, sexist, and classist mechanisms: ‘One can only conclude from all this that the discourse of diversity, as a complex, systemically interpretive language of governing, cannot be read as an innocent pluralism’ (ibid., 37). Positive-sounding terms such as ‘diversity’ and ‘difference’ obscure issues of racism, sexism, and classism, which thus remain hidden, subtle, and covert. Many of the students I interviewed discussed their experiences of racism in terms of ‘diversity’ and ‘difference.’ Multiple and Shifting Identities Integrative antiracism underscores the idea of racial identity and the multiple, overlapping, and shifting identities of – for example – minority students (Dei 1996, 31). The flexibility of students’ identities becomes apparent when we take a multidimensional view of their lived experiences – one that takes into account individual, institutional, and structural contexts (Rowley and Moore 2001). In this study, linking the identities of minority students to university education helps us understand the conflicts and contradictions inherent in their identity crises. Most of the people I interviewed experienced culture conflicts in academe; identity crises sometimes ensued (chapter 6). Holistic Approach A critical antiracism perspective has a holistic grasp of the social, cultural, ecological, political, and spiritual facets of individuals’ lives. It emphasizes the human being’s peaceful coexistence with the environment through spiritual transformation and directs the revolutionary

22

Integrative Antiracism

process to the political sphere (Dei 1996, 30). Many of my respondents used spiritual philosophies as a means to mitigate the effects of racism. In sum, then, the discursive framework of integrative antiracism can illuminate the racism South Asian students endure in academe. Integrative antiracism theory contends that ‘race’ matters, calls for the articulation of social difference, promotes personal experiential knowledge, and acknowledges differential power and privilege. It shows how differential power and privilege operate in society and how a politics of difference is at play in the material and ideological conditions of minority groups. It tries to rupture Eurocentric knowledge and to build in inclusivity into educational institutions. It investigates the multiple and shifting identities of subjects’ positions and supports the holistic and spiritual wellbeing of individuals. It interrogates the academic structures of academe and acknowledges the role these play in producing and reproducing inequalities in society. As more students and faculty members become alert to the prevalence of racism, sensitivity to racist practices will engender a revolutionary change in classrooms. Dei asserts: ‘The politics (or revolution) of integrative anti-racism can start in the classroom; [it] questions privilege, attempts to create a critical and powerful voice for students and develops their sense of critical judgement, while at the same time attempting to provide an openness to teaching that is non-universalizing’ (ibid., 74; emphasis added). Definitions of Racism Skin Colour Racism I am talking of millions of men who have been skillfully injected with fear, inferiority complexes, trepidation, servility, despair, and abasement. – Fanon 1967, 9

The most widespread form of racism that interviewees perceived related to skin colour. Race relations in North America closely reflect the colour line, which ‘sustains the fears, mistrust and anger born centuries ago’ (Jones 1997, 51). According to DuBois (1975), the colour line was a problem of the twentieth century. It remains a problem in the twentyfirst. Conflicts over colour and culture were a part of Canadian nation

Theory and Method 23

building and permeated the development of political institutions. The Canadian immigration process captures the contradiction between the freedom enjoyed by European settlers and the freedom denied the ‘Other’: Sikh, Chinese, and Japanese migrants (Buchignani and Indra 1985). This contradiction persists today. Basically, as Fanon (1967, 12) puts it, ‘[W]hite men consider themselves superior to [B]lack men.’ Black inferiority derives from economic realities and also from the ‘internalization or – better, the epidermalization – of this inferiority’ (ibid., 13). In other words, feelings of inferiority embed themselves in the Black psyche. Interactions between the Black and White races produce an enormous ‘psychoexistential complex’ (ibid., 14). The meaningless existence of the Black man – an existence created by White civilization and European culture – generates feelings among Blacks that range from aggressiveness to passivity. Racism is entrenched ‘on the basis of physical characteristics such as skin colour. The colour of the skin is a conspicuous, perhaps the most prominent referent of the signifier “race” ’ (Adams 1996, 10). As a category, ‘people of colour’ excludes Whites, since Whiteness is an absence of colour whereas Blackness, Redness, Brownness, and Yellowness are colourful. Moreover, the ‘coloured’ races have historically been excluded and considered deficient relative to Whites (Zack 1997, 1–10). Some commentators have argued that ‘skin colour has an important relationship to status and position in Canadian society’ (Henry et al. 2000, 4). Similarly, in most classroom settings ‘White … is the colour of domination’ (Razack 1998, 11). Recounting her experience as a person of colour, St Lewis (1996, 28) maintains: ‘In conversations about race, all of my being is telescoped to my skin. The colour of my skin drives the engine of my public life. It defines relationships and sets out possibilities. Attitudes and beliefs make it real.’ Cultural Racism Cultural racism is another powerful and pervasive form of racism in academe (Cohen 1998, 60). It views cultures as organisms that differ from one another, with ‘different mixes of qualities, strengths and weaknesses in different situations’ (ibid., 60). Inequalities between cultures are a function of the ethnocentric perceptions of the dominant group. Thus cultural differences often derive from the ‘intolerance, misunderstanding and racism that groups of people often display toward one another’ (ibid., 61). In other words, cultural differences act as barriers to com-

24

Integrative Antiracism

munication and understanding; in this way they engender a disturbing type of racism. Cultural racism involves ‘collective and mass beliefs about race that are woven into the fabric of the dominant culture’ (Henry et al. 2000, 52). These beliefs form part of early learning and socialization. A good example is that the word ‘black’ is often a stand-in for ‘evil’ or ‘malevolent.’ Cultural racism surfaces in everyday language (Essed 1991), in how words such as ‘Whiteness’ and ‘Blackness’ have taken on positive and negative connotations respectively. Orientalism, a specific form of cultural racism, reflects a racialized discourse of the exotic ‘Other’ (Said 1993) based on cultural differences. Orientalism was both an outgrowth and a justification for colonialism and has falsely represented ‘Other’ cultures as cruel, sensual, backward, and deviant. Orientalism helped create European imperialism (Windshuttle 1999). Critiques of these derogatory stereotypes show them to be essentialist clichés about the Oriental psyche (Said 1993). Aversive Racism Social scientists have analysed covert forms of racism in many ways. North American culture has discarded racism as decadent and debauched (Lawrence 1986–7). What this means is that racism has assumed a repressed and unconscious form, which Joel Kovel (1970) called ‘aversive racism’ – a belief in the superiority of Whites, who then react politely but coolly to racialized minorities. The ‘false consciousness’ that results enables aversive racists to deny that they are prejudiced, even though they practise discrimination in both their thoughts and their actions. Elton Crim’s study of aversive racism in a Midwestern university in the United States found that negative racial attitudes, in conjunction with egalitarian ideals, gave rise to discomfort and fear among students of colour on campus. In contrast to the overt racism that existed in the past, aversive behaviour worked as an alienating mechanism for university students of colour. Aversive behaviour may manifest itself non-verbally in intergroup relationships. Crim points out that in many instances, students are unable to fathom the reason for avoidance: ‘It seems unlikely however that both aversive behaviour and cross-cultural miscommunication occur often and interchangeably such that students are at times unable to clearly determine the cause of avoidance’ (1998, 11). Even though White students, staff, and faculty may not show averse

Theory and Method 25

racism in a university environment, there is evidence in Elton Crim’s study to suggest that this form of abhorrent behaviour has crept onto university campuses. Gaertner (1976, 208) points out: ‘Aversive racists consider themselves prejudice free but attempt to avoid contact with the minority group to which they are averse. Aversive racists think of themselves as politically liberal and not discriminatory. Aversive racists’ positive actions towards minority groups relate less to a genuine effort to help minorities or to implement egalitarian values than to reaffirm their lack of prejudice’ (1976, 208). Silent Racism Similar findings that Whites perceive themselves as unprejudiced emerged in Barbara Trepagnier’s (1996) study of silent racism. In this form of racism, the dominant group holds negative beliefs and attitudes about the minority group but are only semi-aware of them. Trepagnier found evidence of silent racism among educators who claimed they were ‘not racist’ and that they embraced liberal, egalitarian, and progressive ideals. The main ingredients of silent racism are ‘stereotypical misconceptions, confusion and misinformation, apprehensions about race differences and fear of Black men’ (Martin and Warburton 1998, 13). An example of silent racism is the stereotype held by the dominant group that Black families are prone to illiteracy and violence. Another is that race explains differences in behaviour, character, ability, and culture. Many eminent educators and university faculty subscribe to this biological perspective, although they discuss its implications only in safe places. Democratic Racism Four leading Canadian social scientists – Frances Henry, Carol Tator, Winston Mattis, and Tim Rees (2000) – have examined ‘democratic racism’ and its influence on Canadian institutions. They define democratic racism as arguments that ‘demonstrate continuing faith in the principles of an egalitarian society while at the same time undermining and sabotaging those ideals’ (ibid., 19). An example of democratic racism: most Canadians champion democratic ideals such as equality, justice, and fairness but continue to hold racist views, knowing full well they are unacceptable. Democratic racism is deeply rooted in popular culture. One result is a lack of support for state policies and structural changes

26

Integrative Antiracism

that would improve the social, political, and economic lot of people of colour. Only state policies and practices with political support and legitimacy can combat social, cultural, and economic racism (ibid., 23). Everyday Racism Like democratic racism, everyday racism can include structural inequalities and historical processes. Philomena Essed (1991, 39) defines it as a ‘system of structural inequalities and a historical process both created and recreated through routine practices.’ Contextualizing racism in White/Black power relations, she sees the concept as ‘defined in terms of cognitions, actions, and procedures that contribute to the development and perpetuation of a system in which Whites dominate Blacks’ (ibid.). She emphasizes that racism involves power and domination and that individuals occupying strategic positions in the structural milieu of society exert power. Racism is articulated through structures and processes. As such, it is produced and reproduced ‘through the formulation and application of rules, laws and regulations and through access to the allocation of resources’ (ibid., 44). Thus racism is a process within structures that surfaces as everyday occurrences and practices (ibid.). Symbolic Racism Symbolic racism combines traditional American values with anti-Black ones (Sears 1988). This form of racism suggests that Blacks are at the bottom of the social ladder not because of ‘biological determinism’ or innate abilities but because they do not subscribe to values such as ‘individualism … self-reliance, the Protestant work ethic, obedience, and discipline’ (Sears and Kinder 1971, 416). Sears explains symbolic racism as a replacement for old-fashioned racism or open bigotry. Old-fashioned racism, based on the biological inferiority of Blacks and resulting in stereotypes, segregation, and inequality of access, has fast disappeared. Abstract and symbolic, this earlier form of racism was unrelated to individuals’ personal lives or their views about how society should function (Sears 1988, 66). The content of symbolic racism has three basic aspects: antagonism towards racial minorities, reverse discrimination or hatred of preferential treatment, and the denial that discrimination still exists (ibid., 56).

Theory and Method 27

Polite Racism Polite racism is widespread in Canada. It is covert racism and extremely difficult to detect, whether by a detached researcher or by minority students in a small-town, predominantly White university (Hughes and Kallen 1974). When immigration rates began to rise after 1967, it brought out the suppressed and unconscious racism in Canadian society (ibid.). In a survey conducted in Toronto, the interviewees discussed the subtlety of this form of racism (‘Minority Community Survey’ 1992). Canadians are considered the personification of ‘polite racism’: ‘They [Canadians] politely move slightly away from a Black co-passenger on the subway; they politely refuse to rent to or hire a Black; they politely refer to Blacks as Negroes rather than niggers and in general, they politely continue to discriminate against and segregate themselves from all but the most impersonal, formal contacts with their Black fellow (or potential fellow) Canadian citizens’ (Hughes and Kallen 1974, 214). Polite racism is deeply rooted in Canadian society, just as it is in American society. The difference is that American society has accepted its reality and moved a step ahead in combating it (ibid.). Canadian society seldom acknowledges the presence of racism; typically, it camouflages it in polite behaviour. This makes it difficult for minorities to see it. Ethnocentrism Ethnocentrism – a key concept in this study – is the feeling of superiority that majority groups demonstrate towards minority groups. Ethnocentrism ‘analyzes social reality from the vantage point of the more privileged social positions’ (McKelvey 1991, 24). As a consequence, it promotes the vested interests of advantaged groups in society, maintains current economic and social relations, and perpetuates the resulting inequalities. Ethnocentrism is analogous to cultural racism. Cultural racism constructs a ‘we and they’ attitude (Henry et al. 2000, 57). Such an attitude deems one’s own group to be better than other groups. ‘This ubiquitous tendency to view all peoples and cultures in terms of one’s own cultural standards and values is known as ethnocentrism’ (ibid.). Ethnocentric attitudes can be part of learned behaviour and perpetuate themselves through socialization. Children learn cultural values and beliefs early in life. Beliefs and attitudes about races and racism are usu-

28

Integrative Antiracism

ally a part of early learning (Milner 1983). Cultural racism generates cultural insensitivity or thoughtlessness, coldness, inattentiveness, and tactlessness. Another form of cultural insensitivity derives from ignorance, which is lack of knowledge or not knowing any better. Some majority group members may simulate ignorance in order to justify, validate, or rationalize racist remarks or gestures made to minority group members. Individual Racism Individual racism consists of negative attitudes held by an individual; such attitudes sometimes result in overt behaviour. In Canada, where overt racism is politically incorrect, people may express negative attitudes by ‘practising discrimination’ (Henry et al. 2000, 57). Hughes and Kallen (1974, 106) note that ‘the most blatant form of racist behaviour and one which most Canadians today would vehemently disclaim is individual racism.’ Individual racism is ‘the attitude, belief or opinion that one’s own racial group has superior values, customs, and norms and conversely that other racial groups possess inferior traits and attributes’ (Henry et al. 2000, 53). Individual racist views provide a prejudicial standpoint, one ‘that systematically misinterprets the facts’ (Wellman 1993, 24). Individual racism is learned behaviour – one is socialized into it. It consists of ethnocentric attitudes, cultural insensitivity, and intolerance. Certain deviant personalities, such as the authoritarian personality, exude extreme forms of racist thinking. Individual racism is more characteristic of low socio-economic status; middle-class Whites are socialized to hold liberal views of equality. However, some middle-class Whites express tolerance even while holding ambivalent and contradictory attitudes (ibid.). Individual racism becomes part of group behaviour and manifests itself in interracial and interpersonal antagonisms. Racism at the individual level becomes ‘the collective culture as much as individual citizens’ (Hutchinson and Carpenter 1992). In this way, racial discrimination becomes the dominant ideology in the personal relations among individuals who are a part of the powerful, dominant group. Thus ‘personal prejudice is really a disguised way to defend privilege’ (Wellman 1993, 39). We can thus place individual racism on a continuum between ‘weak’ and ‘strong’ (Reeves 1983). ‘Weak racism’ holds simply that human

Theory and Method 29

races exist and have deep-rooted differences which should shape social policy. ‘Medium or moderate racism’ grants a more favourable status to the dominant group while withholding certain goods and services from allegedly lesser groups. ‘Strong racism’ would grant the ‘superior’ race more privileges and power than the inferior races. Institutionalized Racism When racism – weak, medium, or strong – becomes ‘normal,’ it becomes institutionalized. Critical antiracism considers the disadvantaged position of minority students. It shifts the focus away from blaming minority students as victims, towards critiquing those institutional structures which reify social reality (Dei 1996). Institutionalized racism shapes ‘policies, practices and procedures of various institutions’ (Henry et al. 2000, 56). Institutionalized racism as an ideology served to justify colonialism.3 It is clear that ‘the Western version of racism emerged as an ideology to justify the conquering and colonization of native peoples in the Americas, Africa, Australia and Asia after these practices were institutionalized’ (Banks 1994–5, 17). Colonialism as a process has come to signify the political and economic hierarchies characteristic of cultural discourses related to the ‘Third World’ (Mohanty 1991b, 52). In institutional racism, individual attitudes and values count for nothing; the paramount element is power. The colonization of South Asian countries is a prime example of how power can control and affect the individual lives and voices of conquered people. The Third World is associated with colonization involving governmental control and subjugation. Mohanty maintains that ‘colonization has been used to characterize everything from the most evident economic and political hierarchies to the production of a particular cultural discourse about what is called the ‘Third World.’ However sophisticated or problematical its uses as an explanatory construct, colonization almost invariably implies a relation of structural domination and a suppression – often violent – of the heterogeneity of the subject(s) in question’ (ibid., 52). Attitudes, positive or negative, are irrelevant to struggles against the power structures of institutionalized racism (Sivanandan 1990). Institutional racism is embedded in the power structures of society: People’s attitudes don’t mean a damn to me, but it matters to me if I can’t send my child to the school I want to send my child to, if I can’t get the job

30

Integrative Antiracism for which I am qualified and so on. It is the acting out of racial prejudice and racial prejudice itself that matters. The acting out of prejudice is discrimination and it becomes institutionalized in the power structure of this society; then we are dealing not with attitudes but with power. Racism is about power not about prejudice. (ibid., 65)

In institutionalized racism, the element of power supersedes the influence of individual prejudice and discrimination. Power differentials shape how institutionalized racism hurts racial minorities. Jones (1997, 131) defines institutionalized racism as ‘those established laws, customs and practices, which systematically reflect and produce racial inequalities in American society. If racist consequences accrue to institutional laws, customs and practices, the institution is racist whether or not the individuals maintaining those practices have racist intentions’ (cited in Williams 1985, 323–48). Likewise, ‘practices may be racist in terms of their effects’ (Anthias and Yuval-Davis 1992, 13). Racist institutionalized practices can result in the exclusion or subordination of various racial groups, be it in housing, the labour market, or higher education. In these areas, institutional racism is visible in policies, practices, and procedures that advantage certain groups. In housing, segregation may exclude minority groups from settling in certain districts. In the Canadian labour market there is the common practice of ‘word of mouth’ hiring, which excludes minorities (Henry et al. 2000, 56). In education, institutional racism takes the form of not recognizing foreign credentials and delaying or even obstructing certain immigrant groups from quickly assimilating into mainstream society. Thus, individual and institutional racism can have the same impact as overt or covert prejudice. Even if these forms were somehow to disappear, systemic (e.g., legal) racism would persist and prevent minorities from fully participating in Canadian society (Hughes and Kallen 1974, 107). Porter (1965) in The Vertical Mosaic validates Hughes and Kallen’s argument by affirming that Canada’s native peoples and Metis have been ranked very low in Canadian society and consistently excluded by institutions controlled by dominant groups. Recent scholarship supports Porter’s Weberian analysis of class, despite a great deal of evidence that the importance of class is declining in postindustrial societies. However, current research reports the opposite trend – that inequality is growing (Helmes-Hayes and Curtis 1998).

Theory and Method 31

Systemic or Structural Racism Systemic or structural racism (Henry et al. 2000, 56) refers more generally to racism that informs a society’s norms, rules, and laws. It results in unequal distribution of social, political, and economic assets to various minority groups. It is noticeable in the media, which may portray minorities negatively through images and content. Structural racism is synonymous with systemic racism (Hughes and Kallen 1974, 106). Hughes and Kallen argue that structural racism, although unintentional and impersonal, is far more damaging to minority groups than individual racism. It can grow deep roots in a society and become more difficult to eliminate. To do so in Canada will require the equal distribution of opportunities and rewards to majority and minority groups and the granting of equal social status to all groups (ibid., 108). Despite human rights legislation, systemic or structural forms of racism persist (ibid., 214). Organized Racism This form of racism is exhibited by far-right groups such as the Ku Klux Klan, neo-Nazis, racist skinheads, and Christian Patriots (Blee 2002). Though these groups have some ideological connections, the differences between them are great. All groups, however, provide sites for racist activities to flourish. Members consist of those not raised in racist homes and those who are economically advantaged and educated. This goes against the premise that economic well-being and education are means to prevent racism. Most members are recruited on the basis of social ties and develop strong racist feelings only after they join such groups. In Kathleen Blee’s words: ‘Intense racism can be the result, not the cause, of involvement in organized racism’ (ibid., 27–8). These newly resurgent hate groups take on Whiteness as an identity and participate in practices such as cross-burning, thus displaying an ‘extraordinary’ form of racism. They belong to White supremacist groups because they consider themselves oppressed minorities. They see themselves as oppressed by Jewish conspiracies and by plots to create a ‘one world’ government. They operate on incomplete or flawed information through ‘structured ignorance … the worldview constructed within racist organizations [that] seem plausible to a critical mass of individuals’ (McVeigh 2004, 895), and who, at the same time, conduct themselves in a completely ‘rational’ manner. Today’s hate groups are

32

Integrative Antiracism

recruiting more women to create a façade that is ordinary and less scary (Blee 2002). Total Racism Social scientists have distinguished a wide range of constructions of racism, from overt and blatant to more subtle and covert. Michel Wieviorka (1995, 38) distinguishes four levels of racism: infra, fragmented, political, and total. Infraracism comprises doctrines, prejudices, and opinions about marginalized groups. In educational institutions it takes the form of individual discriminatory acts towards minority groups. Fragmented racism is more dominant. Here the doctrine spreads through publications and through the forums of activist groups. As it does, violence becomes a more common part of the racist agenda. Political racism involves using or urging violence as a strategy for gaining power. In total racism, the state imposes policies on all aspects of political and social life such as science, technology, institutions, moral and religious values, and history and foreign affairs. Total racism in a state develops and structures institutional policies and programs based on exclusion and discrimination. When rooted in institutional policies, total racism is complex and intricate and difficult to challenge. Infraracism at the individual and micro levels can develop into total racism that permeates the macro structures of the state. For example, when individuals are against affirmative action, they can make a representation to the state and convert it into policy. Hitler’s Nazi Germany adopted total racism in carrying out the Holocaust. Method: Ethnographic Interviews The empirical data for this research have been drawn from fifty ethnographic interviews with South Asians in a small-town university in Canada.4 I also analysed relevant information from the university’s Equity Office5 and Human Rights Office.6 In this section I look at the ethnographic approach, the interview process, the context of the interviews, the method of analysis, the limitations of the method, myself as researcher, and the significance of the ethnographic method. Why the Ethnographic Approach? The ethnographic interviews offered insight into the backgrounds, motives, beliefs, and struggles of students on campus. The respondents

Theory and Method 33

described their personal experiences in their own words. Essed (1991, 63) explains: ‘The richness of personal accounts invites an impressive degree of attention to detail. It allows insights into the details of processes of understanding and into the coherence of subjective interpretations and their relation to other experiences.’ In the ethnographic analysis I rely on ‘accounts’ of racism, which are more than just personal stories. In Essed’s words: ‘Racism is a social problem, and, therefore, such accounts represent social experiences. Accounts of racism should be seen not only as descriptions, opinions, images, or attitudes about race relations but also as “systems of knowledge” and “systems of values” in their own right, used for the discovery and organization of reality’ (ibid., 54). Racism as a social problem is amenable to ethnographic analysis. This is because accounts of the phenomenon are more than just personal stories: they are value-laden and knowledge-based. The qualitative method allowed me to assess reactions and responses – emotional or otherwise – to racism. Interviewees encountered it among faculty and peers and within the curriculum. This method informed me about the sociopsychological impact of racism, students’ coping mechanisms, and the changes that they wished to see. They spoke to me with openness and candour. I used interviews in order to draw out students’ voices and bring them to the centre of my research. An interview is ‘an information-providing speech exchange in which some of the knowledge of the consultant is given to the interviewer’ (Werner and Schoepfle 1987, 302). Speech exchange takes place through a series of questions that precipitate responses from the participant. Most ethnographic questions are epistemic – they seek information. The interviewer usually has a clear sequence of questions and prior knowledge of the topic to be discussed. Some questions are exploratory. Werner and Schoepfle point out: ‘Detours following grand tour questions often unexpectedly lead to valuable information’ (ibid., 311). An ethnographic interview can draw out the thoughts, ideas, feelings, and emotions of interviewees regarding the topic under study – in this case, racism. Marshall and Rossman (1999, 57) explain: ‘One cannot understand human actions without understanding the meaning that participants attribute to those actions – their thoughts, feelings, beliefs, values and assumptive worlds; the researcher, therefore, needs to understand the deeper perspectives captured through face-to-face interaction.’ My face-to-face interviews vividly captured the complex reactions of

34

Integrative Antiracism

subjects. The ethnographic method ensures ‘openness and allows the researcher to approach the inherent complexity of social interaction and to do justice to that complexity, to respect it in its own right’ (Glesne and Peshkin 1992, 7). It acknowledges that reality is socially constructed and that contradictions and complexities emerge from data; the subject, not the method, becomes the main focus. Ethnographic studies value context, setting, and the participants’ frames of reference (Marshall and Rossman 1999, 58). Werner and Schoepfle (1987, 343) affirm: ‘In an ethnography, we always cover the context of the situation.’ For this study, I have evaluated ethnographically the intersections of race, class, and gender as systemic and complex means of oppression. The South Asian students I interviewed had experienced racism; they understood it; and they narrated real-life incidents. Essed (1991, 55) points out: ‘Real life experiences are a rich source of information and provide insights into everyday racism that cannot be obtained in other ways.’ The ethnographic method is capable of demonstrating the complexity of racism in university settings. Qualitative research ‘delves in-depth into complexities and processes’ (Marshall and Rossman 1999, 56). We must consider the social, economic, political, and historical processes underlying the structures of dominance in academe. We must look at students’ coping mechanisms in interactions and relationships with the dominant group. Qualitative research takes into account ‘informal and unstructured linkages and processes in organizations’ (ibid., 57). By linking students’ accounts, oral narratives, and real-life stories with the more complex issues of racism, classism, and sexism, we can grasp the intricacies of the South Asian students’ understanding and experience. The Interview Process This study relies on standardized, semidirected, open-ended, in-depth interviews. This approach allows free interaction between the researcher and interviewee (Reinharz 1992). My questions were openended so that the interviewees could answer in their own words. Openended questions are more appropriate when participants are exploring social realities; they generate unconventional knowledge by examining similarities and differences to invent new theories (ibid.). In the interviews, I encouraged the respondents to ‘reflect on recent behaviour’ (Marshall and Rossman 1999, 59). The interviews enabled

Theory and Method 35

me to discuss racism as the subjects perceived it; to gather information relating to specific events; to evaluate responses to and interpretations of those events; and to examine how subjects responded subtly and profoundly to those events. Essed (1991, 62) explains: ‘In particular, when a delicate and serious problem is involved such as experiences with racism, it is important to give interviewees enough space to qualify their statements and be elaborate in their explanations.’ The main strategy is to ‘capture the deep meaning of experience in their own words’ (Marshall and Rossman 1999, 61). Ethnographic in-depth interviews are ‘a conversation with a purpose’ (Kahn and Cannell 1957, 149). ‘In-depth interviews with multiple informants, will also allow us to triangulate findings across sources and test issues of reliability and validity’ (Marshall and Rossman 1999, 60). I used snowballing to collect the names of South Asian students from the ethnic associations on campus. This technique identifies ‘cases of interest from people who know people who know what cases are information rich’ (ibid., 78). Snowballing was appropriate here because the South Asian student community on campus was close-knit and its members knew one another. Most often, I contacted the student presidents of ethnic associations, who in turn put me in touch with their members. The presidents explained the research project to them, including the range of interview questions. Having received permission to telephone those who were interested, I provided the contacts with more details. Through the presidents, the other students were aware of the study’s nature. Most of them felt comfortable about participating, and I was able to establish a rapport. Participants completed consent forms before the interviews. During the interviews, most students were open and outspoken on many of the issues. Many divulged information they would never have mentioned to family or friends. Their forthright and candid answers suggested they felt a need to speak to someone who was willing to listen. The Context of the Interviews Most of the interviews took place in public or university libraries or in my home. In the libraries, I conducted the taped interviews in soundproof conference rooms. The interviews in my home were focused and continuous, with no interruptions. I could concentrate on what the participants said and punctuate the dialogue with appropriate comments and observations.

36

Integrative Antiracism

The first section of each interview focused on biographical data; the second, on specific questions about racism in various university contexts. I structured the interviews around the areas of investigation. I worded the questions as simply as possible. As the need arose, I elaborated and explained certain words and concepts. I tested the questionnaire on two interviewees, refined it, and then used the result with participants. For each interview, I asked the student to define key terms to make sure he or she understood the field being investigated; I then proceeded with the interview. For example, I asked all respondents to define ‘race’ and ‘racism’ to make sure that they were aware of what the words meant and to determine whether they were able to comprehend the topic being studied. Many times, I asked metaquestions around the main question to draw out the necessary information. The areas I was investigating included the background of the subject, faculty–student relationships, peer relationships, curriculum, and the social-psychological dimensions of racism. Questions revolved around the following topics: • Racism in faculty–student relationships: (a) Problematic relations, (b) teaching styles, (c) grading, (d) tracking, (e) class/gender discrimination. • Racism in peer interactions: (a) skin colour racism, (b) cultural racism, (c) doubts about status and abilities, (d) minimization, silencing, exclusion, and segregation, (e) being the ‘only one’ and speaking up for one’s group, (f) intangible and vicarious experiences and feelings of visibility/invisibility, (g) extracurricular and residence experiences, (h) racism experienced by instructors and teaching assistants, (i) class/gender bias. • Racism in curriculum: (a) course content on antiracist issues, (b) minority professors’ views, (c) resistance by mainstream students to curriculum on minority issues. • The psychosocial dimension: (a) acculturative stress, (b) identity crisis, (c) cultural electrocution, (d) best of both worlds, (e) coping strategies. Generally, this study found that covert racism was prevalent in the university setting. ‘Race is often expressed in covert ways and is denied and mitigated by the dominant group’ (Essed 1991, 58). Students were often despairing at their inability to do anything about the situation.

Theory and Method 37

The South Asian students were constantly negotiating positions between resistance (changing courses or transferring out of the university) and compliance (a passive acceptance of the status quo). They often denied that racism existed in order to safeguard parental, peer, and faculty acceptance. Throughout this study I will argue that South Asian students must negotiate spaces that require parental approval on the one hand and acceptance by mainstream university personnel on the other. In this study, specific patterns in relations with faculty and peers, curriculum, academic success, and social-psychological processes emerged that were specific to South Asian students. These related to racism as interpreted by antiracist literature and to racism, sexism, and classism and the immigration experience. This analysis is vital in terms of the level of awareness of issues relating to race, class, gender, and the immigration experience and the relevance of these issues to current antiracism writings. The data analysis also breaks down subjective and intragroup experiences. Comparative interpretations of the students’ experiences brought out significant trends, patterns, themes, similarities, and differences that influenced my findings. My interpretations of student experiences further involved applying, testing, and adding new dimensions to existing antiracism theories. Method of Analysis I analysed data at two levels. First, I examined the personal accounts of the students – what the students said, how they said it, and why they said it. Second, I applied sociological and psychological constructs to the accounts or order to analyse why students endured those experiences, in the light of relevant theories, assumptions, and premises. Specifically, I analysed the data in relation to systemic factors that shape South Asian experiences, such as race, class, gender, culture, and immigration. Data analysis involved transcribing the taped interviews and analysing the content of each interview. I made personal notes on each interviewee regarding mannerisms, body language, and the general tone of the interview. I numbered each transcribed interview for easy identification and classification. I classified student files on the basis of gender, age, department, and academic standing. I highlighted remarks that were forceful, persuasive, and convincing. In this way I drew out certain themes. For example, certain responses – such as the need to hire more minority faculty at the univer-

38

Integrative Antiracism

sity, the enrolment of more visible minority students, the implementation of a non-Eurocentric curriculum, and the organizing of ongoing antiracism training for all members of faculty and staff – emerged as consistent themes. I cross-referenced the in-depth interviews with questions and themes and found that they gave me a clearer understanding of two or more issues. For example, questions about religion related to issues of identity and identity conflict. Strong religious beliefs and the construction of identity were inextricably linked and profoundly affected students’ emotional lives. My analysis has tried to grasp the emotions, fears, and hopes of South Asian students as they interacted with the predominantly White university milieu. The interviewees’ reactions varied greatly; many were quite emotional and hoped for positive change. Most students were cooperative and positive throughout and eager to talk to someone who was interested in listening to their views about racism. Many were keen to hear about the outcome of the study. Confidentiality was vital to the subjects, and I promised and maintained it throughout the interview process. ‘Conventional practice and ethical codes espouse the view that various safeguards should protect the privacy and identity of research [subjects]’ (Denzin and Lincoln 1998, 175). To maintain their anonymity, I do not identify subjects in this study by name or location. I either mask or do not use names of departments to ensure that no one can identify them. To protect students and faculty, I have not named the university. Confidentiality was a concern for many respondents: their comments about peers or faculty could have placed them in a vulnerable position. Most students understood the nature of my research and answered nearly all the questions I asked. Some thought the topic was highly appropriate and hoped that the findings would be published and that changes to improve the climate for minority students would result. Sample My sample may not be statistically representative; that said, the fifty interviews reflect the views and experiences of a decisive and eloquent minority. The lived experiences that constitute the data emerged from the participants’ perspectives. The findings indicate that South Asian students and instructors have experienced racism in covert, hidden, subtle, and sometimes polite ways at the university.

Theory and Method 39

The sample consisted mainly of students and instructors from Bangladesh, India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka. I have excluded South Asians from diaspora countries such as Africa, Burma, Fiji, Guyana, Jamaica, Nepal, the Maldives, Malaysia, and Trinidad. I have done so mainly because the educational experiences of diaspora students vary considerably from those from the Indian Subcontinent. The 50 South Asians included 28 males and 22 females; this permitted a gender analysis. There were 40 students and 10 faculty. The 20 male students were from arts (3), computer science (2), engineering (6), law (3), medicine (3), and pure sciences (3). The 20 female students were from arts (4), computer science (3), engineering (4), law (4), medicine (3), and pure sciences (2). Of the 40 students, 15 (10 males and 5 females) were international or visa students and 25 (10 male and 15 female) were second-generation students. Most international or visa students told me they intended to return to their home countries after completing their studies. Most of the second-generation students were born in Canada. Some, like their parents, had had part of their schooling in their countries of birth. Their experiences differed from those of people born here. Although the international students had arrived recently, most second-generation students had parents who had immigrated to Canada between 1970 and 1990. Of the 10 South Asian faculty members, 8 were male, 2 were female. The 8 males were from engineering (2), law (2), medicine (2), and science (2). The 2 females were from English and medicine. All 50 interviewees belonged to the upper-middle class. Thus this study draws out the experiences of these various groups of South Asians ‘as complex, diverse and communicating subjects’ (Maclear 1994a, 71). I interviewed the participants for about ninety minutes each during the winter and summer of 2001. The interviewees’ ages ranged from 22 to 65. Their religious affiliations were Christian (5), Hindu (27), Muslim (12), and Sikh (6). Most students received financial support from scholarships, grants, bursaries, loans, and/or work/study programs7 or from their parents. Quantitative samples ‘aim for larger numbers of context-stripped cases and seek statistical significance ... [in contrast,] qualitative samples tend to be purposive, rather than random’ (Miles and Huberman 1994, 27). So that the group would be as representative as possible, I sought people from various faculties. Nevertheless, like all qualitative research, the study is discursive and is ‘not designed to meet the requirements of statistical representativeness’ (Essed 1991, 55).

40

Integrative Antiracism

Limitations It is realistic to assume that personal accounts, oral histories, life stories, and in-depth interviews have limitations for the researcher. A few students felt apprehensive about the interviews and were not open with their information. It is understandable that ‘interviewees may be unwilling or uncomfortable sharing all that the interviewer hopes to explore, or they may be unaware of recurring patterns in their lives’ (Marshall and Rossman 1999, 110). I could hear the apprehension in their voices and see it in their hesitations with regard to certain questions. For example, international students were afraid to talk about their supervisors – what would happen if the information leaked out? They could lose their graduate funding or their status as international students, or both. It is possible that these interviewees were untruthful. Qualitative researchers may read their own subjective biases into the findings. This means that despite my use of reflexivity as a resource to guide data collection and interpret student behaviour, subjective bias may have affected my selection of topics when I was gathering the information, as well as my data analysis. Nancy Scheper-Hughes (1992, 28) comments: ‘We cannot rid ourselves of the cultural self we bring with us into the field any more than we can disown the eyes, ears and skin through which we take in our intuitive perceptions about the new and strange world we have entered.’ Situating Myself as a Researcher During the interview process, I felt that the students were answering my questions candidly and explicitly because they seldom had the opportunity to speak about educational matters. Many identified with me as a fellow South Asian. As a non-directive interviewer, I served mainly as a ‘catalyst for comprehensive expression and of the frame of reference in which the subject’s experience takes on personal significance’ (Selltiz et al. 1976, 321, in Essed 1991, 63). Thus I was able to interpret the implications of their comments precisely and correctly. Many gave me more information than I required. I believe that being South Asian helped me reach members of that community in the university. I felt a kindred spirit with them and established positive rapport with most of them. I also believe that the interviews were an emotional support for everyone involved. Having been a graduate student myself and having experienced racism, I was able to

Theory and Method 41

connect with most of the interviewees immediately. Many a time, during the interview, the student would remark, ‘You know how it is,’ or ‘As a South Asian you know how I felt in that situation.’ If they gave monosyllabic answers I could, with candour, ask them to elaborate. Ethnographic interviewing elucidates ‘a particular kind of speech event’ (Marshall and Rossman 1999, 112), one that helps the researcher gather cultural data. It ‘is especially useful for eliciting participants’ meanings for events and behaviours and for generating a typology of cultural classification schemes’ (ibid., 112). Essed (1991, 67–8) has remarked that the emic experience ‘provided a rich base for tentative probing, which is valuable in exploratory research. Therefore, I do not agree with the traditional point of view that detachment is always a better condition for doing research than close involvement.’ The interviewing process, complex as it is, involves power dynamics between the researcher and subject. Because this research related to students, I felt the power relationship between the subjects and me. During some interviews I grew aware that the student might need some kind of counselling. In these cases I was able to refer them to professional crosscultural counsellors on campus. However, I found an atmosphere of camaraderie and friendship during almost all of the interview sessions. Most subjects felt they were talking to someone who was interested in listening to them, willing to identify with their concerns, and able to see their perspective.8 The recurring themes of racism that I encountered during the interviews were similar to the ones that I myself encountered as a graduate student. But in recent years, because of increasing diversity on Canadian campuses, the problems faced by these students have been quite different from the ones I faced. Most subjects were proud of their cultural heritage and celebrated diversity with enthusiasm and fervour. Many perceived being ‘brown’ as a positive signifier. Many identified with their ethnic group and were active in campus organizations. For example, the Sikh students were so proud of their cultural heritage that they had formed a separate association, the Sikh Student Association. Significance of the Ethnographic Study The interviews did not cover the whole range of students’ experiences. The sample did, however, represent a cross-section of South Asian students at the university. Traditional positivist approaches would consider the sample ideal and the findings generalizable. Nonetheless, generaliz-

42

Integrative Antiracism

ability lends itself to a professional discourse of objectivity and an ahistorical universality (Abu-Lughod 1991, 151). ‘When one generalizes from experiences and conversations with a number of specific people in a community, one tends to flatten out differences among them to homogenize them. The appearance of an absence of internal differentiation makes it easier to conceive of a group of people as a discrete bounded entity, like “the Nuer,” “the Balinese” – who do this or that and believe such and such’ (ibid., 152–3). Referring to this method of research as ‘ethnographies of the particular,’ Abu-Lughod shifts the focus from generalizations to the lived experiences of the subjects. Nevertheless, as scholars such as Hall (1996) agree, this does not ignore the larger social structures of which the individuals are part. Also, it interprets the lived experiences of subjects in terms of multidimensional ‘experiences.’ Essed (1991, 58) clarifies the matter: ‘Although the concept of “experience” is often used to refer only to “personal” experiences, experience has a broader meaning in this study. Experiences include specific (micro) events, but experience can also be seen as the impact of knowledge of general (structural) phenomena on one’s definition of reality.’ Thus, experience encompasses both micro and macro events of social life – events that connect the individual to the broader social structures of society. Essed (ibid., 59) also expects minority subjects to provide information about dominant group members that they themselves would not provide. ‘Only by taking subjective experiences of racism seriously can we study how [South Asian students] in their daily lives strategically use beliefs, opinions, acquired knowledge about racism and other heuristics of interpretation to account for their experiences. Insight into these interpretation processes is imperative for understanding experiences of racism as an intrinsic part of everyday life.’ This investigation focuses on the subjective experiences of South Asian students for the purpose of interpreting and analysing racism as a fundamental part of their everyday lives.

3 Adjusting to Canada

Racism is an extension of Canada as an immigrant nation. – Siddiqui 2001, 16

The history of South Asian immigration to Canada provides a context for understanding a range of personal problems that migrant students experience in university. This section examines Canadian immigration trends and policies that have affected South Asians. It looks at immigration in terms of relocation and statistics in three eras: 1850–1920; 1920– 60; and after 1960. It explores conditions and migratory trends in countries of origin – India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka – and appraises my interviewees’ perceptions about adjustment in terms of employment, status and class, income and housing, expectations, language, culture, family life, and identity. It also compares education in countries of origin and the host society. This analysis is useful for two reasons. First, Canadian historians have not dealt extensively with the background of minority groups, leaving ‘established knowledge’ (Razack 1992; Burney 1995) unchallenged. This neglect of ethnic minorities’ contributions to nation building is not surprising, considering Canada’s Eurocentrism. Second, theoretical discourses on immigration can help explain the position of international and second-generation South Asian students in Canadian universities. Canadian Immigration Trends Immigration trends – especially the shift from White European peoples to Asian and other visible minorities – have been changing Canada, par-

44

Integrative Antiracism

ticularly its larger urban centres. Some immigration experts contend that ‘public opinion polls indicate that many Canadians are against current levels of immigrant intake’ (Laquian et al. 1998, 4).1 This ‘disquieting’ trend may be one reason why Canada has replaced the ‘melting pot’ (that is, assimilation) with the ‘mosaic’ (that is, integration) under multiculturalism’s official guidelines (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 1994, 41). Some observers see this change as reflecting a clash between democratic liberalism, with its ideals of equity and pluralism, and a racist ideology evident in past Canadian immigration policies (Henry and Tator 1994b, 1–14). Immigration trends from mid-nineteenth century to the present seem to have fluctuated in response to changing economic and political conditions (Laquian et al. 1998, 5). The First Phase (1850–1920) Small-scale Asian migration from 1850 to 1920 was ‘shaped by the contradictory demands of capitalist expansion and nation-building’ (Dua 2000, 57). During those crucial decades, Canada began to evolve from a colony into a nation-state. Capitalist expansion in agriculture and industry led to greater production of goods and services and a concomitant growth in labour demand. A political economy approach may explain the link between colonialism and capitalism (Bolaria and Li 1988). Immigration – which included South Asians – was a means to supply more workers (Tinker 1975; Saha 1970). Canada turned to povertystricken South Asia and other deprived regions for people to help its British settlers; even for indentured labourers, this country held out the promise of a better life.2 Canadian immigration policy in this era involved ‘prejudicial and racist treatment of minority groups’ (Laquian et al. 1998). The first South Asians to arrive, in 1899, were Sikhs.3 Five thousand more came between 1902 and 1908 (Tracy 1999, 34). Most of them worked in sawmills and lumberyards or in mining, fishing, and railway construction (Buchignani and Indra 1985, 34). This was the first wave of South Asian migration to Canada. J.S. Woodsworth (1909, 188–9), in his anthology, describes the prevailing Hindu (Sikh) stereotype: The Hindu is rather a picturesque figure. When he arrives his dress consists of an undergarment, a pair of scanty pantaloons and probably an old military coat; but he gradually adopts the Canadian costume, retaining his turban. The effect is decidedly grotesque. So far the Hindus have been

Adjusting to Canada

45

employed only in the lowest kinds of manual labour. They are very slow, and do not seem capable of hard, continuous exertion. Their diet is light, and physically, they are not adapted to the rigorous climate of Canada. Owing to the peculiarities the Hindu cannot work with men of other nations; indeed, only with Hindus of his own caste. Their standards of living and manner of life and thought are far different than ours. However estimable they may be in India, they are sadly out of place in Canada. (in Buchignani and Indra 1985, 46)

The prevailing stereotypes suggested moral degeneracy and deviance. South Asian men could not become Canadians, could not sponsor their families, had no legal and political rights, and fell under the ‘continuous journey’ stipulation of 1908, which excluded anyone who stopped anywhere on their journey from India.4 In 1908, Ottawa forbade the Canadian Pacific Railway from selling sea-voyage tickets to prospective Sikh immigrants (Law Union of Ontario 1981, 26). The Komagata Maru incident is highly revealing (Buchignani and Indra 1985, 53–70). In 1914 an enterprising Sikh, Gurdit Singh, in an attempt to circumvent the immigration ban, chartered a ship in Calcutta and set sail to Vancouver with 376 passengers. Canada refused these people entry and placed them under a deportation order. The government declared that the immigrants had trachoma, an infectious disease, and refused to allow them ashore. The ship anchored in Vancouver for more than sixty days with dwindling supplies of food and water. One passenger died, and ‘the immigration officers did nothing’ (ibid., 56). Finally, the ship had to sail back to Calcutta, where police shot dead twenty-six passengers and seriously wounded many more. The police arrested the other passengers and interned them (ibid., 105). Someone termed South Asians in British Columbia a ‘Hindu invasion’ (Raj 1980, in Henry et al. 2000, 76–7). Ironically, the word ‘Hindu’ was used to signify a Sikh group, even though Hindus and Sikhs belong to different religious groups. Between 1908 and 1920, Ottawa forbade Sikh men and their wives from entering Canada. The Victoria Daily Columnist commented: ‘To prepare us for the irrepressible conflict, Canada must remain a White Man’s country. On this western frontier of the Empire will be the forefront of the coming struggle … Therefore we ought to maintain this country for the Anglo-Saxon and those races, which are able to assimilate themselves to them. If this is done, we believe that history will repeat itself and the supremacy of our race will continue’ (Ward 1978, 259–60). Dua (2000, 56) discusses the debate over the exclusion of Hindu

46

Integrative Antiracism

women from 1915 to 1920: ‘Both sides formed a racialized and gendered understanding of the category of “South Asian-Canadian woman.”’ Canadian nation building seems to have valued ‘racial purity,’ with the ‘social construction of Anglo-Saxon women as “mothers of the race”’ (ibid., 55). Dua asserts that Canadian nation building presupposed an ‘imagined community’ (Balibar, in Balibar and Wallerstein 1991, 17–28) – a White person’s land, with marginalized migrant waged labour. Canada saw South Asian migrant labourers as incapable of assimilating and as in fact a threat to nation building; it defined them as temporary workers and grouped them with other ‘Asian undesirables’ (Raj 1980). South Asian men were required to pay head taxes and could not vote, own certain types of property, or sponsor family members. During the early 1900s they contested the restrictions on the entry of their spouses (Dua 2000).5 The prohibition on South Asian families impeded the growth of ethnic communities in Canada. In 1920, after much debate, the Canadian government lifted the ban on spouses. Between 1907 and 1920, South Asians could not vote in British Columbia (Henry et al. 2000), sign provincial or municipal contracts, enter professions, or hold political office. South Asians ‘experienced overt prejudice in the form of racial stereotyping and physical abuse. They were called “ragheads.” They could not go to a movie in their native dress. People refused to sit next to them on trains. They could not own property in some sections of Vancouver. Discrimination in housing resulted in many South Asians living in very poor conditions’ (ibid., 77). Overt racism and discrimination forced poverty on them in a land of plenty. Henry and Tator (1994b, 2) observe: ‘The racist heritage of Canada has bequeathed to both earlier and present generations of Canadians a powerful set of perceptions and behavioural patterns regarding people of colour. A deeply entrenched hegemonic system of White group dominance exists and perpetuates inequity and oppression by those who use power, privilege and resources against those who are powerless and socially and economically disadvantaged.’ Thus early Canadian immigration policy assumed racist principles, with the dominant, advantaged group suppressing and restraining the subordinate, disadvantaged group. The Second Phase (1920–1960) The second, still fairly restricted, phase of immigration was from about 1920 to about 1960. After the Second World War, labour market trends,

Adjusting to Canada

47

productivity, and selection favoured European immigrants (Buchignani 1979, 325–37). In 1951 the government established quotas for South Asian immigrants – for example, 150 Indians, 100 Pakistanis, and 50 Ceylonese (Sri Lankans). It opened offices in New Delhi in 1952 and in Islamabad in 1967, and also in three non-Commonwealth Asian centres (Krauter and Davis 1978, 89). J.W. Pickersgill, the immigration minister, stated in 1954: As a matter of fact, you know as well as I do, that we do not have an office in India for the purpose of getting immigrants, for the sake of increasing the population of Canada. We agreed upon this quota as a gesture for the improvement of Commonwealth relations. And, having done so, we have to treat these applicants decently and have enough employees there to answer the letters and deal with the correspondence and the applications which are received. (Hawkins 1972, 101, in Krauter and Davis 1978, 89)

The quota system took in mainly Indian citizens from 1951 to 1956, accepting about nine hundred people and their dependents (Buchignani and Indra 1985, 106). In 1957, following the Canada–India Immigration Agreement, the quota from India rose to three hundred and expanded to include sponsorship of dependent children (under twentyone) and elderly parents (ibid., 105). In 1961, Canada issued 2,338 immigrant visas in Delhi, and 2,000 South Asians entered Canada as dependents (ibid., 106; Das-Gupta 1994; Krauter and Davis 1978). The Third Phase (after 1960) In the early 1960s, immigration policies loosened. Canada adopted a ‘neutral’ status, ‘with a general appeal to the principles of human rights in a changing world structure’ (Khan, in Laquian et al. 1998, 98). However, this neutral status involved a ‘point system,’ introduced about 1967 (ibid.). Khan notes: ‘To be eligible for immigration to Canada, one needs a minimum of 70 out of 100 points. The skill factor accounts for 15 points’ (ibid., 111). New policies opened the door to people from Asia, the Caribbean, Latin America, and Africa. The point system applied nine criteria: age, occupational demand, vocational preparation, arranged employment, location, education, relatives in Canada, official-language competence, and personal suitability (Henry et al. 2000, 81). Applicants were slotted as either independent immigrants, family-class immigrants, or refugees.

48

Integrative Antiracism

The point system expanded the immigration base in South Asia from the state of Punjab to other ethnic regions, and the immigrant South Asian population in Canada gradually became ethnically diverse. Many newcomers settled in Ontario and Quebec; the largest concentrations are now in Toronto and Vancouver (Khan 1998, 98–9). The 1960s and 1970s were the ‘heyday of migration from South Asian countries, mainly from India and less from Pakistan’ (ibid., 99). Immigrants flowed in from Bangladesh and Sri Lanka as well. Many independent immigrants from all four countries, with a broad spectrum of occupational skills, flooded into the country. The independents immigrated to take up paid employment. Canada selected them through its point system, adjusting the skills category to domestic economic requirements, emphasizing education levels and English proficiency. These exclusionary measures favoured the middle and upper classes. Clearly, these stipulations were denying access to immigrant women of colour and working people. Das-Gupta (1994, 62) remarks: ‘The Point System is an example of systemic racism and sexism since it adversely affects women of colour who apply for immigration.’ Henry and her colleagues (2000, 82) further declare: ‘Under the guise of a universal selection process, a myriad of seemingly neutral administrative procedures had an adverse impact on racial-minority immigrants and constituted differential treatment and racial discrimination.’ Under the point system there was a shift in the occupational status of migrants from India (Khan 1998, 99), from blue-collar Sikh workers to highly skilled professionals. In evaluating candidates’ ‘personal suitability,’ government officials consider ‘adaptability, motivation, initiative, resourcefulness and other similar qualities’ (Henry et al. 2000, 83). They may also assess cultural background and personal style. However, they have no objective method for assessing prospective immigrants, especially those from developing countries. This shift from quotas to the point system has exacerbated the ‘brain drain’6 from several developing countries (Khan 1998, 99). When international students choose Canada for higher studies and eventual settlement, this increases the brain drain. With the onset of an economic recession in the mid-1970s, independent migration began to fall. The point system became more rigorous and stayed that way till the late 1980s. Some observers thought the government was blaming immigrants of colour for taking away jobs. A ‘Canadians First’ program introduced in 1982 (Das-Gupta 1994, 62) allowed in only people with ‘essential skills’ or with capital to invest.

Adjusting to Canada

49

In 1983, independent immigrants accounted for 30 per cent of total immigration; the figure has risen to 51 per cent by 1988 (Khan 1998, 99; Immigration Canada 1990), but even this was less than the 1960s figures. The independent category had grown substantially, yet most immigrants were arriving for family reunification – a category now open to visa and international students. Thus ‘this distinctive pattern of South Asian immigration is as much culturally, as it is historically determined and is reflective of the social structures which have mediated migration from the region’ (Khan 1998, 100). Das-Gupta (1994, 62) maintains that an ‘essential skills policy’ is currently in force: ‘By reflecting on the immigration history of South Asians in Canada, we see the state interfering in a very direct way with the capitalist production process. This was done by regulating the labour supply, specifically one that could be super-exploited and kept passive by the denial of political and legal rights rationalized by racist arguments.’ In the immigration history of South Asians in Canada, racist laws have long regulated the supply of and demand for labour from developing countries. These same laws have also deprived immigrant workers of basic political and legal rights and reinforced racism and sexism. In the 1990s, immigration and settlement policies further disadvantaged some immigrants and their sponsors (Arat-Koc 1999, 224–30). In 1994, in response to a ‘public consultation’7 on immigration policy, Ottawa made two changes: it reduced the number of family-class immigrants in favour of independents, and it set up a ‘sponsorship bond’ for sponsors of family-class immigrants to sign. The proportion of family-class immigrants had fallen to 30 per cent by 1996 (‘Immigration Goals Exceeded’ 1997, in Arat-Koc 1999, 225). In March 1995 a ‘right of landing fee’ known as the ‘head tax’ ($975) came into effect for family-class and refugee immigrants from Third World countries (Arat-Koc 1999, 225). In November 1995, Ottawa decreed that independent, skilled-class immigrants would have to know either English or French (ibid., 223). Women, who generally have less access to language training, would usually qualify only as dependants (ibid., 224). Then, in January 1998, the government report Not Just Numbers: A Canadian Framework for the Future of Immigration set off a public debate on immigration. The document called for a neoliberal approach to ‘successful integration.’ It emphasized knowledge of English or French and would have required sponsors to pay for the settlement and training of the sponsored. Independent, ‘self-supporting’ immigrants would have to meet new criteria and would also have to speak English or French (ibid., 226).

50

Integrative Antiracism

This new approach placed responsibility for integration entirely on the immigrants themselves. Most commentators considered the report neutral with regard to race and gender, yet its implication was that successful integration was most possible for White males from European countries. This report’s perceptions of who could ‘contribute’ or ‘not contribute’ to the nation were sexist and racist at their core (ibid., 227). The amended immigration laws that were a consequence of that report have placed unfair requirements on South Asians as a category of migrants; indeed, these prerequisites have deeply affected students and faculty at Canadian universities. Reaction to Immigration Trends The trend in immigration has been shifting away from Europeans towards Asian and other visible minorities. This has generated an alarming reaction from mainstream Canadians. Opinion polls indicate that most native-born Canadians do not favour a large influx of immigrants from less developed countries (Laquian et al. 1998, 4). Multiculturalism policies have not fully ‘incorporate[ed] newcomers into a democratic process of participation’ (Li 2003, 12). The emphasis of multiculturalism policies has been on getting immigrants to conform to the prevailing values and beliefs of the dominant group. Since the mid-nineteenth century and into the present day, levels of racism have risen and fallen in response to economic and political changes.8 For example, during periods of economic recession the number of racist incidents rises. South Asian migrants have a unique position in Canadian society. Their homelands achieved independence more than fifty years ago, yet in most institutions the influence of colonialism is still strikingly evident. Vestiges of colonial rule continue to haunt the minds of postcolonized peoples in the form of a ‘subaltern mentality.’9 I apply Gramsci’s term ‘subaltern’ – economically dispossessed – to those formerly colonized South Asians whose countries Europeans dominated for centuries (Spivak 1988). The subaltern mentality is servile, passive, docile, and willing to please the dominant group in order to survive – sometimes even to the point of compromising with fellow South Asians. I am not suggesting that all South Asians have a servile mentality; indeed, many are selfconfident and assertive. That said, many South Asians continue to exhibit the subaltern mentality, which they couple with the debatable Gandhian approach of ‘non-violence’ as a response to racism.10 In my assessment of the influence of immigration trends on minority

Adjusting to Canada

51

people in Canada, I view immigration and nationality as contemporary sites of migrants’ struggles against colonialism (Mohanty 1991b, 51–80). Canada’s immigration and nationality laws are racialized, classed, and gendered. For example, the point system is rooted in systemic racism, classism, and sexism and adversely affects immigrants from developing countries.11 Henry and her colleagues declare: ‘Under the guise of a universal selection process, a myriad of seemingly neutral administrative procedures had an adverse impact on racial-minority immigrants and constituted differential treatment and racial discrimination’ (2000, 82). Furthermore, according to Bannerji (2000, 5), capitalist state rule ‘not only has to mediate and express the usual inequalities of a class and patriarchal society, but also the ones created through colonialism and racism which inflect class and patriarchy’ (Bannerji 2000, 5). Antiracism scholars challenge and interrogate immigration, nationality, and culture through the concept of postcoloniality. Gupta and Ferguson (1992, 9) contend that the ‘hybrid’ culture of postcoloniality ‘creates a “new culture” in both the colonized and the colonizing country’ (see also Bhabha 1994). The postcolonial ‘new culture,’ with its concomitant ethnic, linguistic, and cultural diversity, shapes the educational experiences of migrant students. Immigration and South Asians in Canadian Academe The 2001 census of Canada reports that of 963,190 South Asians, 176,475 have a university education (Statistics Canada 2003). This figure includes those with completed bachelor’s degrees, university certificates higher than a bachelor’s degree, master’s degrees, and doctorates. Given the increasing numbers of South Asians attending universities in Canada, I am anxious to consider their educational experiences in the context of their beliefs, customs, traditions, family shifts, class membership, socio-economic status, and religious affiliation. The immigration experience impacts South Asians as they pursue higher education in Canadian universities (Rajagopal 1990, 96–100). Prior schooling in the country of origin affects both international students and second-generation students in Canada. Most of these students have been strongly affected by their parents’ immigration experiences. Many South Asians share common experiences relating to immigration, especially in terms of religious beliefs, customs, values, and practices. The immigration experience also shapes South Asian students’ sense of identity and space.

52

Integrative Antiracism

The immigration experience influences both international and second-generation students, but in different ways. International students go through a ‘honeymoon stage’ during which they see the host country as a land ‘flowing with milk and honey’12 and full of opportunities. These newcomers are captivated at first by the host country’s economic prosperity. Yet at the same time, most of them focus intensely on their academic endeavours; they also maintain a firm grounding in their own culture and religion and are oblivious to the forms of individualism and/or cynicism around them. During this initial stage their vision is ‘blurred’ owing to the strong allure of the host country, and they often fail to discern subtle racism in interpersonal relationships and in the situations that confront them. In due course, the initial fascination wears off and they begin to notice the harsher realities, especially if they experience racism in social relationships, access to resources, academic success, and job opportunities on campus. Most South Asian students who were born in Canada or who came to Canada at an early age have had at least some schooling in the host country. As a result, they may experience culture conflict and heightened identity crises (Desai and Subramanian 2000); either of these, if profound, can foster suicidal tendencies (Wadhwani 1999). But at the same time, their experience in Canada makes it easier for them to find work and discern subtle racism. They also tend to be more outspoken and to take action when they see or experience racism in everyday situations. I use Wsevolod W. Isajiw’s model (1999, 94) as a guideline for analysing the difficulties immigrants face in adjusting to Canadian society. His immigration issues resemble the ones I myself encountered. I look at nine areas: employment, status and class, income and housing, expectations, language, culture, family life, identity, and perceptions of education at home and in Canada. Isajiw contends that the immigration process is an experience of uprooting that upsets established relationships. As a consequence, ‘the process of becoming part of a new society [becomes] a lengthy one’ (ibid.). Adjustment can take an entire lifetime. Sometimes it does not happen at all. Employment Younger immigrants – especially those between twenty-four and thirtyfour – find work more quickly than older immigrants (ibid.). A 1974 survey by Manpower and Immigration Canada reported that the average

Adjusting to Canada

53

South Asian immigrant found work after five-and-a-half weeks. In contrast, British immigrants took two-and-a-half weeks; German and Portuguese immigrants, three weeks; and Italian, Filipino, and West Indian immigrants, four-and-a-half weeks. This same longitudinal survey found that for new immigrants during their first year, unemployment was two to three times greater than for the control group of Canadians (ibid.). According to Isajiw’s study, some South Asian international students claimed that at first they found it difficult to obtain university work (ibid.). The reasons they gave included lack of networks, weak language skills, lack of knowledge of on-campus resources, and campus racism. One student remarked: The needs of international students are not understood. University personnel and other students do not realize that we have to pay exorbitant amount of tuition fees and that we are in dire need of jobs on campus to reimburse us financially. Due to visa stipulations we can only work on campus and this stipulation makes it even more difficult for us to acquire jobs. Our skin colour, non-Canadian accent and cultural background are some of the factors that hinder us from getting jobs quickly.

Some immigrant students have no difficulty obtaining part-time work quickly. However, most new immigrants when seeking work tend to rely on ethnic contacts rather than on employment agencies (ibid., 96). This sort of networking lengthens the process and limits contacts and opportunities. Isajiw observes that ‘a new immigrant using only these channels to find a job may become locked into a low-status job with no chance of advancement and few contacts that will lead to a better paying higher status job’ (ibid., 96). As the above student noted, poverty and racism restrict employment opportunities. Lack of English skills cuts newcomers off from job contacts and keeps them out of many positions. Racism based on ethnicity, skin colour, and difference can affect job opportunities for South Asian students on campus. It is easier for students from the dominant group – who know the language and cultural practices – to find and keep jobs. Even second-generation South Asian students may face discrimination and find themselves cut off from bursaries or excluded from work-study programs. One remarked: ‘I was excluded from getting a bursary and a work-study program for the term. I feel it was because of my skin colour and because I belonged to a minority group. I was proficient in English but that did not make a difference. I had to look for a job outside the university to earn some

54

Integrative Antiracism

money to pay my tuition fees. This is really a very distressing position to be in.’ Both international and second-generation students find it difficult to find work to cover tuition and living expenses. Furthermore, recent immigrants must possess ‘Canadian experience,’ which is almost impossible for them to acquire. That requirement confronts graduating students as well. A South Asian doctoral candidate who was looking for work asked: ‘How is it that I am not able to get even a single job interview? The White guy in the next room got the first job he applied for. I have sent in so many applications and have been continuously turned down – for some reason or other. The other reason they [prospective employers] give me is that I lack “Canadian experience.”’ Many interviewees felt strongly that ‘Canadian experience’ was a racist concept and was being applied to exclude some immigrants. The term also suggested to them ‘White privilege’ (McIntosh 1989). Highly qualified participants hoping for gainful employment to pay off their student loans found ‘Canadian experience’ a disheartening phrase. Some suspected that South Asian names and past learning experience could result in exclusion. Status and Class Isajiw (1999, 96) claims that ‘immigrants experience a drop in social status/class when they begin their first job in Canada.’ Many White immigrants acquired jobs fairly quickly; in contrast, non-Whites ‘were far less likely to make a full recovery’ (ibid., 97). Isajiw’s observation is consistent with Dei’s integrative antiracism theory, which maintains that material and ideological conditions typically affect minority students’ employment during and after graduation. The decline in occupational status and class position can be quite dramatic – from professional or white-collar work to menial, blue-collar work. The change from doctor, lawyer, engineer, or professor to draughtsman, maintenance worker, tool maker, clerk, dishwasher or cab driver can generate intense status shock. Most of the second-generation students I interviewed told me their parents experienced this sort of drop. Some told me their parents started their own businesses so that they would not be subject to White authority. Status shock can disrupt family dynamics and relations with other members of the community. The interviewees found that their parents’ reduced socio-economic status inspired them to excel academically. A

Adjusting to Canada

55

second-generation undergraduate in science observed: ‘When they [my parents] came here as immigrants, they were not able to get the same level of jobs they had back home. So my parents motivate and encourage me to study because they know the value of education here in Canada. They know that only with education, we as second-generation immigrants can make it in this country. That is why they insist that I do well and get good grades in university.’ Class dislocation can drive the children of first-generation parents to succeed in their studies and their careers. Such dislocation can especially affect well-educated immigrants and their children. Bitterness and despair can permeate family relationships and hurt children. Secondgeneration offspring who are students bear the brunt of these negative feelings and as a result may set high academic goals for themselves. One student told me: ‘There is tension in the family in regard to money and marital adjustment. Sometimes I wish my parents could be more accommodating of each other and be more compatible. Due to the differential status we are now experiencing, my parents pressure me to study and do well because they know that education is important and necessary in this country. They say that only with education can we make it here. This pressure gets into me and causes undue stress.’ The status/class dislocation of family members can place undue stress on South Asian students to excel academically. This stress can have harmful emotional spin-offs. Status/class dislocation is closely linked to poverty and inadequate housing. Income and Housing New immigrants often encounter poverty and unsuitable housing (ibid., 100). Not all immigrants are poor, and not all poor immigrants stay poor. Most, however, start out with meagre incomes and live in apartments rather than in the bungalows of the sort they had back home. Isajiw observes that although cultural differences may be a factor, ‘discrimination in the housing market’ can do much to discourage home ownership (ibid.). Poverty and housing can both raise barriers to minority students. South Asian students have to live in small apartments and manage with less. One of them elaborates: ‘When we first came, we lived in a small apartment with little space to move around. We had to manage and study there. The cramped space sometimes made me feel claustrophobic and quite sick. I wanted some open space and free air to breathe like the houses we lived in India. I couldn’t study well then.’

56

Integrative Antiracism

Relocation can have a harmful impact on migrant students’ academic achievements. Also, immigrants tend to hold untenable beliefs that the host country is ‘rich and free’ (ibid.). Expectations False expectations about the new country can lead to emotional problems for immigrant families. The greatest disillusionments often relate to employment, income, and race relations (ibid.). The ‘Three Years in Canada’ study (1974) found that 23 per cent of immigrants were ‘very satisfied’ with their job opportunities, 39 per cent ‘satisfied,’ 25 per cent ‘dissatisfied,’ and 13 per cent ‘very dissatisfied.’ Sponsored immigrants felt more dissatisfied than independent immigrants. Also, professionals and people with a university education felt more disheartened than blue-collar workers. Immigrants of colour reported more difficulty finding suitable employment. An arts student explained: ‘My father who was a qualified engineer from Pakistan was unemployed for four or five years when we first came to Canada. That was a humiliating experience for him and emotionally upsetting for us. He had to support a family of four. Those were very difficult days indeed.’ This points to the economic setbacks that new immigrants and their children experience in the host country. For new immigrants, these difficulties and the resulting distress can lead to ‘culture shock’ or ‘cultural electrocution’ (chapter 6) (Isajiw 1999, 101) – that is, to confusion and disorientation with regard to the new customs and way of life they face. Most of the international students I interviewed had gone through this phase. Notwithstanding ‘orientation week,’ many of them felt isolated and alienated when they started at the university. They felt like ‘foreigners’ or ‘aliens’ and were uncertain how to behave; this sometimes led to embarrassment, guilt, and shame. Language Lack of proficiency in the English language and a ‘foreign’ accent13 were contributing factors. An international student from India observed: ‘When I first came as an international student, I felt that fellow students did not accept me. This feeling was most prevalent in residence where I happened to be the only student of colour. I felt alone and stupid at times – not being able to join with the others and have fun. Even though I could speak English, it was my accent that may have

Adjusting to Canada

57

contributed to this. The feeling of seclusion can be very disturbing and inhibiting.’ Culture A student from Pakistan commented: ‘When I first arrived on campus with two heavy suitcases, nobody bothered to help me with them. I thought – if this is the way I am going to be welcomed – with nobody caring – I thought – fine.’ Clearly, she didn’t know that North Americans carry their own suitcases; that knowledge might well have increased her sense of culture shock. A student from India talked about her early days: ‘My floor mates [White students] sat us down [her friend also from South Asia] and asked us all sorts of questions about where we were from, our customs, beliefs, and way of life. Like we were from outer space or aliens or something. They said they had never met people from India and Pakistan. We really felt embarrassed about the way they asked us those questions. They sounded very interested, even if their manner was odd.’ Differences in language, accent, and cultural practices can lead to culture shock. Insensitivity and ‘structured ignorance’ (McVeigh 2004, 895) are insidious forms of racism (Martin and Warburton 1998). Structured ignorance ‘acknowledges that the world can look quite different to individuals depending upon their position in the social structure’ (McVeigh 2004, 896). This type of ‘ignorance,’ because it is so plausible, solidifies mainstream students’ positions in the social order. Family Life Besides culture shock, immigrants experience problems with spousal and parent–child relationships and with changes in family structure (Isajiw 1999, 103). Tensions in a marriage can generate arguments over finances, job status, and household roles. Some respondents remarked that their parents constantly quarrelled over finances, loss of job status, and role reversals. One student recalled: ‘My parents do not get along – they are always fighting over money, about my mother not having a proper job and also the fact that my father has to do some of the household chores when my mother is out of the house.’ This comment fits with Isajiw’s findings. Constant tension between spouses ‘undermines the traditional status difference between husbands and wives and may have the effect of undermining self-image and self-

58

Integrative Antiracism

confidence’ (ibid., 105). Such tensions can disrupt family life and even lead to spousal abuse. South Asian women are subject to patriarchal inhibitions both at home and at work (Naidoo and Schaus 1988). Immigrant women in particular are subject to exploitation, isolation, and alienation from the extended family and community. Domestic work is demeaning not in itself but in relation to social spheres (D. Smith 1987, 19). Ratna Ghosh (1981, 417) points out: ‘The housewife’s role is central but the housework performed is not recognized as being sufficiently useful in social terms … The position of the employed housewife is not particularly liberating when it becomes a double workload because for the women the role of the employee is not separated from that of the housewife.’ The social world looks down on women’s production of labour at home and at work. Women often acquiesce to exploitative conditions in the workplace. They find themselves in stressful work situations, which may affect home life. The resulting tensions between husband and wife can lead to low self-esteem, emotional vulnerability, and sometimes spousal abuse and/or divorce. Children usually learn the language of the host country much faster than their parents (Isajiw 1999, 103). In some homes, immigrant parents tend to rely on their children for the everyday use of the dominant language – for example, they send them to stores or use them as translators. At first this may draw immigrant children and parents together. Gradually, however, the children begin to distance themselves from these sometimes embarrassing situations and develop feelings of inferiority when they are with their parents. Some children become ashamed that their parents are not fluent in English and do not want to be seen in public with them. They want to identify more with their White peers. Also, overprotective parents may interfere more than necessary in children’s problems at school or with peers. Scenarios like these can lead to intergenerational clashes in the home. The school experience distances parents from their children even more. The curriculum is derived from the dominant culture and is taught in the language of the host country. A Eurocentric pattern of education may create feelings of inferiority about other ethnic cultures and languages. ‘As a consequence, ethnic language and the child’s ethnicity become symbolic of backwardness, and the child comes to define his or her parents, and everything they stand for, as in some way inferior’ (ibid.). During the teenage years, the issue of dating can become explosive

Adjusting to Canada

59

(chapter 7). Dating is rare in South Asian cultures, and some traditional families still arrange marriages. Adolescents tend to clash with their parents over socializing practices. The cultural lag in values, beliefs, attitudes, and norms between generations widens during the teenage years. Most South Asian families are unaccustomed to seeking the help of professional counsellors and usually try to solve problems themselves or by consulting relatives and friends in their own community. Sometimes these approaches make the problem worse. The South Asian students I interviewed spoke of tensions with their parents over unfamiliar cultural practices and norms. Most chose a university away from home, simply to ‘get away’ from their parents. A firstyear student remarked: ‘I chose this university because it was away from home and because I was fed up with the way my parents were constantly watching me and chaperoning me wherever I went. I wanted to enjoy my independence and freedom away from home. My parents are very conservative and refuse to allow me to date. Here I have the freedom to go out with friends, go to a movie or a bar whenever I feel like it. I don’t have to constantly lie to my parents about where I go and what I do.’ Similarly, an undergraduate science student was keen to escape the constant supervision and create a space for himself: ‘I came to this university because I wanted to be independent and enjoy the freedom of being a university student. Of course my parents trust me and know that I will do my very best in my studies and I do keep in touch with them on a regular basis. At the same time, there are fewer tensions now between my parents and me now than there were when I lived with them. I can date who I want and have my own circle of friends without their constant supervision.’ Identity Second-generation young people may become psychologically confused and distraught in terms of their identity. The resulting confusion14 is evident among those second-generation South Asian young people who do not want to identify with their culture of birth or ethnic group and who feel they belong to the dominant group, which even so does not fully accept them. They epitomize the cliché: ‘Brown on the outside, White on the inside.’ Ishwaran (1987, 16) sums up the immigrant experience: There is the parallel story of South Asian immigrants – discriminated against in jobs, as in other spheres of life. We do not know the statistics of

60

Integrative Antiracism such people. No one demands them; no one collects them. But such people are there – lonely in an alien world, miserable under a mass of indignities, ignorant of possible ways of redemption. Pushed by the forces of the new world and pulled by those of the old, they live a life of perpetual panic, bewilderment, disillusionment and, at times, disintegration.

Comparing Educational Systems Students from India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka have a different perspective on education than South Asian students born and schooled in Canada. In this study, all fifteen international students fit into this category, including five second-generation students schooled partly in their origin countries. In their cultural–ecological theory, Ogbu and Simons (1998, 155–88) differentiate between voluntary and involuntary groups. Voluntary groups generally comprise recent immigrants who have willingly moved to North America in search of a better life and/or religious/political freedom. Involuntary or non-immigrant groups have been ‘conquered, colonized and enslaved’ (ibid., 165). Historical forces have made them part of society against their will. Even some schooling in the origin country shapes migrant students (Samuel et al. 2001, 65). Within a ‘frame of minority school comparison,’ adolescents compare their present school to the institution back home (Ogbu and Simons 1998). Migrant students in Canada fit into the voluntary group, and their experiences in the home country influence their sociocultural adaptation. As a consequence, most such students, when they compare schools, appreciate ‘back home’ but are quick to point out the negative features as well. Many respondents discussed the positive and negative aspects of both Canadian and South Asian schools. One graduate student in the sciences told me that course content in Canada focused more on practice than on theory: ‘It is more practice-oriented here and we have more assignments. In India, exams are tougher in engineering especially in the bachelor’s program. We learn by rote and it is a more intense educational program back home. It is easier to score higher marks here.’ An international student from Pakistan found classroom culture very different in Canada: ‘I did my bachelor’s degree in Pakistan. [The Canadian university education is] different in terms of course work. Classroom culture is very different. It is very informal here. Students bring food

Adjusting to Canada

61

and drink into class. They call professors by their first name and place their feet on the desks.’ A science graduate observed that in the master’s program in Canada he felt a great deal of pressure and had to work harder. If he decided to stay on in Canada, he would have to go through the immigration process, get a job, and try to succeed. High tuition fees were a source of stress: ‘Here in my master’s degree I do fewer courses than back home in Sri Lanka. But even then the pressure is high because you try to concentrate more on your courses. It is not fun anymore. You need to make a career and you have to take it seriously here and you tend to do everything in a careful manner. Being an international student I have to pay double the amount of fees than other students. This places a lot of financial stress on my family and me.’ Another student found mainstream students disrespectful to professors: ‘I did my bachelor’s degree in Bangladesh. Canadian students are very disrespectful towards professors and treat them in an indifferent manner. They do not even acknowledge them when they see them in the hallways or anywhere else. In my country teachers are respected and highly thought of. There are more facilities here than back home. The technology in regard to computers, data, and other expensive equipment are not affordable in India. There is limited access to library books in India. Photocopying is expensive. Courses are shorter and more intensive whereas in Bangladesh they are longer and last about a year.’ Most of the immigrant students I interviewed had compared the two educational systems they knew and had learned to appreciate the opportunities in Canada. Some liked the flexibility of academic programs and the informality in Canada; others disliked what they saw as the laxity, lack of discipline, and disrespect to professors shown by mainstream students in Canada. For some, studying in a foreign country and the high tuition fees created stress. The South Asian immigrants in this study had had unique experiences with regard to faculty–student relationships, peer relationships, curriculum, and social-psychological adjustment. Isajiw remarks astutely: ‘After a period of stay in the country, immigrants achieve a level of adjustment … It should be remembered that not all reach the same degree of adjustment. Some may be frustrated and return to their home country, others may remain practically, but not psychologically adjusted for the rest of their lives and some may have difficulties in practical adjustment for their entire stay in the country’ (Isajiw 1999, 107).

62

Integrative Antiracism

Conclusion South Asian immigrants, living in an ‘alien’ society, experience everyday racism and discrimination and often feel confusion in such crucial spheres as employment, status and class, income and housing, expectations, language, culture, familial life, identity, and comparative perceptions of educational systems. Immigration transforms South Asian students’ lives and makes them very uncertain. It affects their daily interactions and relationships in the university setting.

4 Faculty–Student Relationships

Students learn as a result of all types of faculty activity, both inside and outside classes. Because faculty influence students so strongly, it makes sense to hold them accountable for the results of that influence (Bock 1997, 13). This chapter explores relationships in academe between faculty and South Asian students. It also considers educational processes: teaching styles, grading, and tracking; and race, class, and gender discrimination. It shows that positive relations with faculty are important to minority students. In contrast, poor relations with faculty members can cause distress among minority students and leave them vulnerable and exposed. Prejudicial attitudes among the faculty can hurt academic performance and emotional well-being and restrict personal choices. Most students are interested in a productive learning experience (Hall, Kulig et al. 1998, 118). Besides acquiring basic knowledge, they explore new avenues of learning through various techniques, methods, and pedagogies. Faculty can enliven their classes and create environments where students learn effectively. A South Asian professor in this study remarked: ‘It is imperative that faculty and students maintain a healthy relationship – one of warmth, friendship, accessibility, and approachability. Such a relationship fosters a healthy environment for learning.’ Positive interactions between students and instructors increase academic commitment and encourage students to persist in their studies (Tinto 1975, 89–125). They also promote feelings of assertiveness and belonging and stimulate vibrant relationships. ‘Faculty play an important role in influencing the overall campus climate and in creating a culture conducive to learning’ (Bock 1997, 7). Learning involves acquiring critical thinking skills, and ‘success’ de-

64

Integrative Antiracism

pends on good academic grades. Learning includes acquiring the ability to interact positively with individuals in diverse social and cultural situations. Critical thinking skills involve ‘attributing, comparing/contrasting, classifying, analyzing for bias, solving for analogies and evaluating’ (Pushkin and Colon-Gonsalez 1998, 17). In critical pedagogy, instructors usually engage in an epistemology that acknowledges a postmodern view to help students develop analytic skills. To develop a critical pedagogy from a postmodernist perspective, both faculty and students must participate actively in the learning process, by analysing debates and deconstructing and reconstructing shared knowledge and information.1 Class, culture, and language are all part of the framework of learning (Bruner 1971, 18–21). I found in this study that all three play a critical role in shaping South Asian students’ learning experiences. Stereotyping, language biases, and a discriminatory classroom environment can differentially affect students of diverse backgrounds (Jenkins 1983). Cultural and personal backgrounds influence how professors nurture critical thinking skills and how male and female students interact in class. It follows that for students of colour, stresses such as racism in classrooms can impede the learning process. Racism can hinder personal growth and the cognitive maturation of students of colour (Pushkin and Colon-Gonsalez 1998, 16). Individuals acquire social cognition through perception and through personal experiential knowledge. This is a basic premise of integrative antiracism theory. Students’ perceptions reveal their innermost thoughts and are integral to their evaluations and assessments. Perceptions (images/words) are semiotic codes by which we make meaning out of ideas and discourses (Sperber and Wilson 1986). A sign is a cultural artefact whose meaning is mediated by culture and context (Burney 2002). Perceptions are signifiers that reveal symbolic meaning for those who share the meaning of the sign. They are a form of tacit knowledge that brings out the hidden curriculum. Perceptions are emotive signs that spring up intuitively. Perceptions are mediated through shared meaning. As Foucault (1973) says, a sign operates only through ‘shared knowledge’ and the possibility of substitution between two elements: ‘It can be constituted only by an act of knowing’ (ibid., 46–77). There is no mute sign. Some of the perceptions of my interviewees were indicative of discrimination, which they interpreted as ‘racism.’ People perceive and experience racism viscerally, at the intuitive, emotional, and subtle levels. Gestures,

Faculty–Student Relationships

65

tone, attitude, and language that might seem ‘neutral’ to the mainstream may not be so to others; instead they take on shared meanings that stem from shared understandings and interpretations. Dei and colleagues (1997, 78) have observed: ‘For many of the students, negative experiences of school were related to differential and unjust treatment at school. This treatment was most strongly and most frequently related to issues of race. Examples of such treatment involved teacher-student relationships.’ In sum, unpleasant experiences between faculty and minority students may relate to earlier experiences of racism. Interactions Less than half the South Asian students I interviewed (18) reported that mainstream faculty members understood and helped them and tried to establish a rapport. The rest (22) cited experiences of racism with some faculty, whom they described as unsympathetic and as unwilling to extend them necessary support and encouragement. This may well be just as true for other groups such as Black, Chinese, and Latino students. Negative interactions, such as stereotyping and unsupportive attitudes, can lower students’ general academic performance and ‘can result in limited aspirations and restricted choices for women and men from different cultural backgrounds’ (Jenkins 1983, 4). Below I discuss a number of patterns that emerged from the interview data: stereotyping; unsupportive attitudes; poor verbal communication; insensitivity; ‘exclusionism’; ‘old, White, conservative’ departments; insufficient guidance; aloofness; and lack of informal contact. Stereotyping Two South Asian students – one from the sciences, the other from the arts – recounted positive and negative aspects of stereotyping in academe. (#1) ‘I also have the intellectual self-confidence that I know that I am better than my White counterparts in studies. As for academic achievement, the professor expects a high standard from me.’ (#2) ‘Professors tend to stereotype you as belonging to one particular cultural background, that is, a person of colour, and expect a certain level of academic work from you. Even if you have done well, they [faculty members] still feel that the work does not come up to the class standard.’ Student #1 seemed to be conforming to the stereotype that minority students perform well in mathematics and science (Razack 1995, 68).

66

Integrative Antiracism

Perhaps the professor believed that the student, being South Asian, was highly motivated and doing well academically. Sometimes these high expectations are unrealistic and place undue pressure on the student. Student #2 believed that because of his minority status and differences in cultural background and skin colour, professors ‘expected’ poor academic work (Mukherjee 1998; Maclear 1994). This exemplified the stereotype that Asian students excel only in mathematics and the sciences. Cindy Lam (1996), a teacher of Chinese origin, depicted her experience with the Toronto school system. She initially taught core French but had to switch to teaching English as a second language (ESL) because of ‘negative experiences related to stereotyping and racism in her core-French assignments.’ Apparently it was ‘inappropriate’ for her to teach ‘pure’ language courses such as core French; ESL classes were more suitable for her. These stereotypes, both positive and negative, are misleading and inaccurate; they are socially constructed in the media and replicated in course content and textbooks. Educators rely on social theorists who use questionable methods to measure groups’ achievement levels and attitudes (Margolis and Romero 1998, 15). Stereotypes can pertain to the group or the individual. First, people apply stereotypes to social constructs such as race, class, gender, and ethnicity; having done so, they use their gross generalizations to make simplistic and often inaccurate assessments of group behaviour. These stereotypes can be ‘positive’ – for example, when they present Asians as belonging to the ‘model minority stereotype’; or they can be ‘negative’ – for example, when they present Black students as dull and dense. Both positive and negative stereotypes can hamper academic success. The ‘model minority stereotype’ can generate too much pressure. Negative stereotypes can be self-fulfilling when minority students are assumed to be stupid and perform poorly as a consequence. Canadians have challenged the American concept of ‘model minority’ (Razack 1995, 76). Some Canadian scholars have applied the term to mean that Asians excel academically ‘due to certain cultural traits’ (Razack 1995, 76). Others (Marcias 1993, 409–32) have questioned the stereotype of the model minority, contending that it has emerged from ‘histories of colonialism’ and that not all Asian groups excel academically. Second, people are resorting to stereotypes when they apply gross generalizations about group behaviour to individuals. This sort of stereotyping, which is based on biology, is viewed as ‘signifying racial dif-

Faculty–Student Relationships

67

ference’ (Hall 1997b, 244). Drawing from the colonial experience of slavery, Hall notes that the ‘innate laziness’ of Blacks was seen by others as ‘natural’ and characteristic of ‘innate primitivism, simplicity and lack of culture’ (ibid.). In explaining this aspect of racialized representation, he contends that cultures of Black people have been ‘reduced [to] nature or naturalizing difference’ (ibid., 245). The reasoning that underlies naturalization processes goes that if differences are ‘cultural’ they are changeable, but if they are ‘natural’ they are fixed or permanent. ‘Naturalization is therefore a representational strategy designed to fix “difference,” and thus secure it forever’ (ibid.). Stereotyping involves ‘reducing’ group behaviour to signifiers of a few essential characteristics, that are ‘fixed by nature’ (ibid.). People misjudge others when they apply elements or signifiers of group characteristics to their abilities and actions. Some students narrated experiences of this kind. One female graduate student related: ‘I am evaluated inaccurately in my academic work. Even though my essays are analytical, professors say that there is a lack of analytical thinking and that there needs to be more coherence in the correlation of ideas. I feel that they unduly try to find fault with my work. They seem to conform to the group stereotype that South Asian students cannot think and write on their own.’ This student thought that stereotyping was causing the instructor to misjudge her abilities. Stereotyping is a form of racist labelling, a ‘strong form of the hidden curriculum’ (Margolis and Romero 1998, 12). When minority students become typecast, they experience ‘stereotype threat,’ whereby the label hangs ‘like a threat in the air’ (Steele 1997, 613–29). Situations like this, which are based on ethnocentric attitudes, can hinder a student’s intellectual and academic performance. Unsupportive Attitudes Because of past educational experiences, some of the minority students I interviewed lacked confidence and anticipated racism, and discrimination, and differential treatment at the university. ‘I have experienced overt racism in school,’ one told me, ‘and expected it here in this place. Just because I don’t see it [racism] doesn’t mean that it’s not there. I find it difficult to know because things are not overt. I cannot make a definitive statement about it. I could have experienced it. Certain profs have been supportive – here I don’t find most of them that supportive in guiding you in your academic work. This really affects my confidence

68

Integrative Antiracism

level.’ This student was unable to easily detect and discern racism in the attitudes of certain professors; as a consequence, he perceived hidden and subtle discrimination. This experience was quite common, since covert racist attitudes are hard to pinpoint. He was confused about the mixed messages he was receiving from the faculty and told me that most mainstream faculty had not been supportive. From this student’s perspective, if racism was not obvious, it was invisible. Racism is structural and systemic; it is embedded in a historical ideology (Marcias 1993) that socially constructs students of colour as possible underachievers. Some faculty members tended to downplay South Asian students’ ‘potential.’ Two students recalled constant discouragement. (#1) ‘I am an economics student, but I am not allowed to take a business course. You have to constantly argue with them. Sometimes low expectations are set for people of colour and somehow they [the faculty] feel that you may not come up to the standard.’ (#2) ‘One professor told me that I had to work harder to be in this class. I don’t think I should be made to feel that way. I feel I am judged on the basis of my colour by the way I am looked at and spoken to. That distresses me and makes me feel miserable.’ These students felt that their instructors were underrating minority students and making them feel that they were not up to the class standard. They had to ‘constantly argue’ with their professors. They felt a need to assert themselves relentlessly – an indication of deep discontent, which may stem from perceived racist attitudes and stereotyping. Some professors seemed overtly racist towards South Asian students. Huffman (1991, 25–34) has reported that ‘subjective feelings of racism among [minority] students stemmed from derogatory oral remarks about [minorities] in general and verbal attacks directed at specific individuals’ (in Brown and Kurpius 1997, 4). One of my interviewees thought that a professor of medicine was making derogatory and cynical remarks about her: ‘This professor always made racist remarks about the way I dressed and my looks and said when we were doing medical clinical skills development that “it is hard to see the spots on my skin because I was dark.” Even though I spoke to the professor about it, she continues to make these remarks.’ She perceived this mainstream professor as callous and inconsiderate towards students of colour and told me she continued to maintain negative attitudes. These negative attitudes can seriously affect interest in learning, clinical and academic performance, and self-esteem, and damage future aspirations and goals. South Asian students saw minority interests as peripheral to main-

Faculty–Student Relationships

69

stream discourse. Some professors did not like minority students to write essays about unconventional topics or those related to other cultures. The interviewees reported a disdainful attitude that was seldom helpful. One student reported: ‘This professor was not happy with my selection of topic [a Third World issue]. A housemate and I faced the same problem – the same condescending attitude. You go for help and you really never get it.’ Some instructors did not value research relating to the Third World. Margolis and Romero (1998, 15) reiterate: ‘Whenever [the topic] had to do with race or ethnicity … it wasn’t seen as valuable or as important.’ A medical student felt picked on: ‘I had a big problem with two of the preceptors in the second year. In clinical skills, held twice a week, where they make you practice taking history and physical examination skills in the hospitals on actors, I had a big problem with two of them, a man and a woman, of Caucasian background. They were awful, grilling you with questions till you can’t answer any more. I felt that I got picked on, possibly because I belonged to a minority group – always asked to answer horrible questions, do extra things, and present in front of the group. That irritated me. They had a horrible approach to teaching and were torturing students year after year.’ Power relations are evident in interactions like these. A handful of minority students can be very vulnerable when there are so many dominant-group faculty members. Minority students cannot do much about the situation if it becomes problematic. Problems in Verbal Communication Some mainstream professors display biases relating to language. They tend to speak slowly and deliberately to minority students so as to help them understand more clearly. This may be acceptable to students whose English skills are weak but may be insulting to others. One student remarked: ‘These professors assume that you don’t understand certain things that are explained in class and tend to explain more to you or speak slowly to you. This makes you feel stupid and idiotic. I only speak English and I don’t know why she does that. To me it seems offensive.’ Aversive racists consider themselves liberal and ‘prejudice free’ and react with cool politeness towards marginalized groups. They sincerely believe they are trying to help minorities through small acts of kindness. In doing so, they are simply reiterating their own superior and dominant position.

70

Integrative Antiracism

Insensitivity This student found some professors unduly inconsiderate about conflicts over class times: ‘Another instance of inconsideration on the part of the professor was about a time clash with another class. I approached him politely but he was rude and brusque and said he didn’t care if I was in con-ed or con-god – he just didn’t care. He said I shouldn’t take the course and just drop it. He didn’t hear me out at all. He should have listened to me. He just exploded. It was not appreciated.’ According to this interviewee, insensitive and uncaring professors were displaying overtly racist attitudes. This freshman student felt the brusque and curt comment sear into her very being. Even if the professor was terribly busy, he could at least have spoken to her politely. ‘Exclusionism’ One student expressed frustration with the monocultural focus of education – an artefact of the majority group’s ‘invisible knapsack of privilege’ – and commented on how one professor’s lecture on White privilege excluded students of colour (McIntosh 1989). In his lecture on the subject, this instructor did not decentre and deconstruct (Derrida 1976). As Dei’s integrative antiracism theory argues, dominant-group privilege has placed minority students at a disadvantage. Indeed, this professor did not acknowledge the presence and views of minority students in the class. According to the student: ‘This prof was at one time talking about critical Whiteness theory and how Whites gained Whiteness easily. He didn’t include the fact that not everybody in the class was White. Not everybody in the class would be able to do it. Not that I have had special privileges – but I have never had a problem not being White. That irritated me a bit and I felt let down.’ A class discussion of the antiracist perspectives of critical Whiteness theory could have made minority students feel strongly involved. Critical Whiteness theory appraises Whiteness as a social construct that ‘attaches (unearned) privileges, opportunities, safety and status to Whites at the expense of people of colour’ (Ellsworth, in Fine et al. 1997, 266). This South Asian student became part of the ‘double bind of Whiteness’ in an academic situation that can ‘confuse and paralyze, ensuring repetitious performances of Whiteness that (unintentionally, unconsciously) reiterate its racist work in academe and other educational contexts’ (ibid., 268). The professor critiqued Whiteness yet unintentionally imposed his ‘Whiteness’ on students of colour.

Faculty–Student Relationships

71

‘Old, White, and Conservative’ Departments Some minority students perceived certain departments in the arts as ‘very male, very [W]hite, very old and very conservative’ (Margolis and Romero 1998, 1). They saw dominant-group professors as insensitive to the struggles and burdens of people living in developing countries. One student I interviewed told me about her discomfort and unease when mainstream professors discussed Third World issues. They did so to make minority students feel comfortable in class, but in fact made matters worse by singling her out and asking for her views on the topic: ‘Every single professor who has taught me is White and I don’t think we think the same. They don’t understand the struggles and the burdens we bear. When a Third World issue is discussed I have to contribute and explain to the whole class. The professors act like they want to make you comfortable in the class but all they are doing is serenading us in front of the whole class. I have to constantly represent my culture and educate the masses. That really makes me feel uncomfortable.’ This student, the only person of colour in the class, felt that she had to explain Third World issues to the rest of the class whether or not she was knowledgeable about the topic. When the faculty are mostly European and mainstream, even a course like ‘world geography’ is more likely to lean towards European subject matter and examples because of the expertise of the faculty. Conversely, a diverse faculty can create a balanced worldview in courses. Professors sometimes expect minority students to represent their group. This second-generation student was unlikely to know enough about her country of origin to ‘educate the masses.’ She therefore felt ill at ease. A law professor at Queen’s University recalled her student days: ‘I had felt very exposed at having my personhood and my reality laid bare on the table in front of the people in class without my consent’ (Monture-Angus, 1995, 271). Mainstream professors can sometimes be conservative and traditional in class interactions with student of colour. Insufficient Guidance Another example of differential treatment by the faculty: White students were given more guidance than students of colour in regard to assignment formats. This reinforced minority students’ feelings of marginalization. Commenting on this ‘hidden curriculum,’ one science student remarked: ‘Definitely there are racist practices followed in guidance given about written assignments. The professors don’t tell you

72

Integrative Antiracism

everything you need to know about writing an assignment, and sometimes they try to confuse you and do not give clear-cut answers. When I ask them, “What do you want me to write?” – say, in my biology journal – they just say, “Write such and such” – no clear-cut answers. If somebody else – say, a White student – asks the professor, he gives him or her very clear guidelines for them. So there is a difference in the way they guide White and minority students. Regarding questions also – more explanations are given to White students’ questions than minority students.’ Professors who are biased in giving academic guidance can inspire feelings of cognitive dissonance in minority students. This dissonance can strain relations between instructors and minority students, which is not conducive to a nurturing campus atmosphere. Aloofness An engineering student perceived some faculty members as unapproachable: ‘Some professors are not easy to approach and I don’t go into the office. I have not had much experience talking to professors. They are not easily approachable. They take their own time replying [to] your e-mail and they don’t give adequate guidance in projects.’ A law student found some professors inconsiderate regarding the difficulties she was experiencing: ‘I don’t think some professors are very approachable. I think the bigger problem for me is that personally, I feel more comfortable if they recognize at least some of the difficulties I am facing. It is clear that I cannot talk easily with certain professors.’ Interviewees from the sciences discussed the indifference of certain professors in terms of lack of contact in large classes. One commented: ‘There is lack of adequate contact between the professor and the students. In the science classes it is rare that professors go out of their way to get to know the students. Because of the large classes in the sciences, there is limited interaction between the professors and the students. They should know that minority students have their own problems and their own ways of learning and that they may sometimes need more help. But this is hardly the case.’ Some faculty members ‘were visibly uncomfortable or inappropriate in their interactions with [minority] students’ (Patterson-Stewart et al. 1997, 489–98). Patterson and colleagues (ibid.) made a qualitative investigation of eight African Americans’ experiences at a predominantly White American university and found that their subjects perceived the White instructors as cross-culturally inept. They narrated disturbing incidents. One

Faculty–Student Relationships

73

participant in that study remarked: ‘One of my professors felt compelled to inform me that I would never publish because of my poor writing skills. I perceived him to be cross-culturally incompetent because he was arrogant enough to predict what I was incapable of learning. I wonder what he thinks now that I have published a book and several articles?’

Lack of Informal Contact The power dynamic between dominant faculty members and minority students can result in a lack of out-of-class contact and, it follows, higher attrition rates (Defour and Hirsch 1990, 487–503). In contrast, minority students who had developed informal relationships with mentors or instructors are likely to succeed academically (Hackett and Byars 1996, 332–40). A graduate student in science remarked to me: ‘My professor and I don’t enjoy the same kind of interpersonal relationship that I had with my professor back home in India. He is very businesslike and abrupt. There is no informal, out-of-class contact with him at all and I had a stressful relationship because of this.’ Brown and Kurpius (1997, 5) have observed that ‘the more informal contact a student has with faculty, the greater the chance that faculty will affect the student’s academic development.’ Informal interactions often influence students’ academic integration and persistence levels (Griffin 1992, 25–44). Such interaction may help generate professional role commitment, especially for graduate students (Weiss 1981, 89–125). South Asian students sometimes maintain some formal interaction with instructors, only to fall short in informal relations, in part because indigenous cultural norms inhibit ‘appropriate’ socializing. Many of my interviewees, especially the international students, did not drink, were vegetarians, and were unfamiliar with dominant cultural practices and mannerisms. As a consequence they often failed to gain academic knowledge. Margolis and Romero (1998, 9) point out that ‘for … students of colour, professionalization requires the adoption of attitudes and behaviour patterns that are antithetical to their culture of origin – requirements that make the path through school more problematic and perilous than it might be for a student who arrives equipped with the dominant forms of cultural capital.’ Academics may see minority students as lacking the social and interpersonal skills seemingly required for academic success. These assess-

74

Integrative Antiracism

ments may be based on stereotypes, which by definition do not account for individual variations. Such information is mostly illogical, as well as distorted to fit the instructors’ biased belief system (Sue 2003, 25). Teaching Styles Eighteen of the students in this study liked their teachers and considered their evaluations fair. Twenty-two felt otherwise, mainly because of teaching styles, which strongly affect the learning process (Dei et al. 1997, 130). Problems in this area affect both academic performance and the class atmosphere. Arts students found the teaching they received ineffective and biased. International students in particular considered the North American accent incomprehensible. ‘I don’t understand what the professor says due to his Canadian accent,’ one told me, ‘and I am not able to follow some of his expressions. I know of a number of students who are in similar situations and are suffering.’ Some of the interviewees commented that some instructors were effective and others not. Ineffective professors failed to actively engage all students in class – mainstream and minority. When accent is a problem, instructional handouts and visual aids such as overheads can be useful. Some interviewees felt marginalized by the Eurocentric emphasis and a bias towards Anglo-Saxon assumptions and premises (see chapter 6). Two students reported: (#1) ‘When examples are used with Western connotations, then the minority students are left out and minority students don’t understand and find it difficult to pick up.’ (#2) ‘I think a Eurocentric bias exists at the level of what is considered good scholarly thought. Especially in English and Film, political analysis is not considered as valid as literary analysis. So, work that deals with racism in texts is often devalued. I think this is especially hard for people of colour, because for me it’s really hard for me to analyse a text or theory “objectively” when it reeks of racism.’ These comments suggest that a Eurocentric emphasis and an unwillingness to talk about issues of race in academic discourse trivializes minority students. Grading Interviewees noted repeatedly that instructor bias was bringing down their marks. Marks are confidential and few students wish to compare or discuss them with fellow students. So it is difficult to say whether a mark is impartial. One student told me she found it difficult to judge whether

Faculty–Student Relationships

75

or not she had received a fair mark: ‘It’s hard to say about marks. In the social sciences I have no idea, because our discipline is so subjective and students of different races and genders I know disagree with marks they have been given. So I don’t know what it is due to. It is possible that I have been given a bad mark because I am a woman of colour.’ This suggests that some students suspect racism in grading. This student was suggesting that instructor bias is more likely in the social sciences, where grading is somewhat subjective. Gender and race may contribute to the underestimation of potential (Margolis and Romero 1998). A computer science student discussed the differential way that a professor graded group presentations, thereby reinforcing racist attitudes: ‘As for group work, this professor gave us the lowest marks though we had the best presentation. The whole class felt it. We were an ethnic group consisting of two South Asian and two Chinese students. The problem was to implement a software program. Our group maxed 95 per cent while the other groups came up to only 25 percent of the implementation. But our group was marked the lowest and we felt that it was blatant racism. That was a terrible, terrible form of racism that was exhibited. Other groups got 90 to 97 per cent.’ This student was visibly upset by the incident. She saw it as blatant racism. But she did nothing and accepted the group mark. Because of confidentiality, two students weren’t sure if they had been given fair marks. (#1) ‘When people grade your essay, you really don’t know if you got fair marks. I wouldn’t know even if I were given marks that are unfair. Unless I myself feel that I deserve more marks than what was given. It is difficult to say.’ (#2) ‘Maybe they don’t know you. How are you going to know? It is subjective and I have never compared my marks with others. You are dealing with people’s minds. But you are obviously not going to eliminate bias. Most of the teaching assistants are White.’ Mainstream instructors and teaching assistants may be biased in marking. Some students suspect that teaching assistants, sanctioned by professors, may apply stereotypes (ibid.). Some interviewees wondered whether the teaching assistants who marked the assignments and examinations were prejudiced. One commented: ‘Some teaching assistants are hard markers and I feel they do not give the marks you deserve. They can find out that you are a South Asian or a minority from your name.’ A science student, who started school in South Asia, felt that his work patterns set him apart from his White peers. As a result he received lower marks than his peers who knew the system: ‘In science subjects the problem is not so much the

76

Integrative Antiracism

subject matter as the way we work, which is different. The way we write, the phrases we use, the way we organize material and things like that. That causes us to be evaluated differently.’ It is true that the student should adapt somewhat. Even so, it is the instructor’s responsibility to explain procedures clearly. A doctoral student explained grading succinctly: ‘My evaluations and grading were also affected since I was originally from India. I received a B-plus average in my master’s degree, which did not get me immediate admission into the doctoral program. I felt I deserved an A grade. I had to wait for two years to get into the doctoral program and this was a sheer waste of my time and resources. Because I got a B-plus I was not given a graduate fellowship or research assistantship. I was not even given any other type of funding in the form of research work with professors. I struggled through my master’s program financially. I feel my race limited my ability to achieve maximum academic success. I feel a lot of anger and resentment within me about this.’ Clearly, teacher’s evaluations affect the academic success of minority students (Roscigno and Ainsworth-Darnell 1999, 171). When they are biased – when the marks do not represent the student’s work – this alters funding as well as future plans. With resources strained and emotions stressed, minority students may find themselves in a challenging position. Tracking Gatekeepers (teachers) may perceive upper-class, high-income students as ‘highbrow,’2 offer them more assistance and attention, and expect more of them (Lamont and Lareau 1988, 153–68). Conversely, they may place those with fewer cultural resources in positions that require less educational investment. Tracking – that is, classifying students into groups on a ladder – is a clear example of such relegation. One student observed: ‘In my master’s program I was assigned to a White professor as supervisor who did not know the area I was working on. She simply could not advise me on the topic because she did not understand some of the indigenous concepts. A lot of misunderstandings and unpleasantness grew between both of us. I could have avoided this if I was given an appropriate supervisor. She felt that I could work only in a clerical capacity in a college after graduation. I felt really humiliated.’ Negative stereotypes regarding potential can ruin careers. Underestimating a student’s level of competence can undermine his/her self-confidence and self-reliance.

Faculty–Student Relationships

77

An arts student told me she had been subjected to ‘cooling out’ (Young 1974, 135–9) – a method for redirecting students to more ‘realistic’ alternatives as an option to having them fail courses. She was made to understand that as a South Asian and a female, she could not do well in mathematics: ‘There was one math course. Before our first test, I had done all the questions in the book ahead of time. So I asked him for additional questions. That professor had some reference textbooks (not available in the library) and I could have photocopied the questions and answers in ten minutes. But he said abruptly that he could not give me the additional questions. I ended up getting a low mark. He didn’t care about my marks and did not want me to do well. He thought I couldn’t do well in math – which is not true because I got 86 percent later on in another math course.’ The professor did not explicitly tell her she could not do well in mathematics, but his not giving her the additional questions perhaps signalled his low expectations and lack of interest. Furthermore, his attitude made her suspect racism and sexism with regard to her ability in mathematics. Tracking provides differential access to scholarships, research opportunities, postdoctoral fellowships, and publishing opportunities. Students may perceive racism in some supervisors’ seeming supposition that minority students are still ‘colonized’ and belong in ‘appropriate’ occupations. In Margolis and Romero (1998, 24), a student affirmed: ‘Personally she [my supervisor] makes a lot of assumptions about me that I find insulting, like maybe I’m destined to teach at a community college instead of a university. She always is the one that takes on a woman of colour as an advisee and it doesn’t matter what your interests are. Our joke is that basically we’re her colonized people because I mean it’s like she doesn’t know who we are. But she has us and it’s sort of like little badges on her shoulders that she works with students of colour.’ Clearly, teaching styles, grading, and tracking affect the achievements of minority students. Some of the interviewees were not sure if this was so; others believed that racism affected their relationships with instructors. Also, the power dynamic heightened the sense that racism was in play. Class Discrimination In faculty-student relationships, the dynamic between racism and classism arises when students of colour experience differential treatment. This is a result of the drop in income and status among migrant parents.

78

Integrative Antiracism

People of colour from Commonwealth countries are recruited as cheap labour to fill semiskilled and unskilled jobs in Canada (Henry et al. 2000, 40). Class inequalities are seen not only in the superficial ownership of material possessions and clothing but also in access to employment after graduation. One science student remarked: ‘I am treated differently because I cannot afford expensive resources that mainstream students can afford such as laptops, photocopying, lab accessories, and even editing my manuscripts. These are luxuries for me. My essays and projects may not get the marks that other White students get who can afford these extras.’ Attitudes towards material possessions result in an odd intra-group dynamic between international and second-generation students. International students are enthralled with the material affluence of the host society and literally show off their clothes and shoes. One second-generation student observed: ‘I feel really funny when these newcomers tell me that they are sporting new shoes or new clothes. I am not in any way awestruck by what they wear or own. We are all classified as lower-class immigrants in any case, despite what we wear – due to our race.’ This comment highlights the importance of the relationship between race and class in a biased campus milieu. This suggests the influence of consumerism in a capitalist society and the use of material possessions as markers of class status. That class disparities can affect the aspirations of South Asian students was a running theme in the interviews. A doctoral student talked about class and race: ‘Even after graduation, there is no guarantee that I will get the job that corresponds to my educational qualifications. White students will get the first job they apply to with a salary that is reasonable and decent. I may not due to my race. I may also have to wait awhile before I get my first job, and … I may be offered a lower salary than my White peers.’ These comments highlight the intricate relationship between class and race and how this reality is perceived in a prejudiced society. That nothing has changed over the years makes this relationship all the more agonizing. ‘Racist ideology is preserved in order to maintain a cheap labour supply’ (ibid., 39). Race and class biases have been uncovered by a number of North American studies (Boykin 1986, 57–92; Dauber et al. 1996, 237–46). Roscigno and Ainsworth-Darnell (1999, 171) studied Black students and found that ‘disparate racial and class returns for cultural and educational resources appear to be partially explained by micropolitical processes that are tied specifically to teachers’ evaluations of students’ efforts and more systematic relegation associated with tracking.’

Faculty–Student Relationships

79

Paradoxically, many American educators have downplayed the impact of race and class in classrooms. An exception is Farkas (1996), who studied American classroom teachers’ perceptions and found some differences along race, class, and gender lines that had the potential to affect students’ grades. Roscignio and Ainsworth-Darnell (1999, 161) maintain: ‘If cultural capital is predicated, in part, on the social position of its possessor and consequential micropolitical processes, the subordinate racial status of [minorities] may limit their ability to convert cultural capital and educational resources into academic success.’ Thus, assuming that cultural capital or class is important to academic success, a minority student’s disadvantaged racial status may lessen his or her academic success. Gender Discrimination The students I interviewed perceived racism, sexism, and classism in some mainstream professor’s attitudes and behaviour. Eighteen of the twenty female students reported such discrimination. One described her experiences with older, White faculty members: ‘I had this philosophy professor who was unpleasant. When I wanted to discuss and write about race and gender issues, he was really antagonistic. I think there is a definite backlash among older faculty. I think they often see women of colour as a threat. They feel as though they are being taken over by identity politics and that they have become obsolete. As a way of dealing with this I think they meet discussions of difference with hostility.’ These hostile feelings helped create a bleak academic environment for this student. Some White male faculty members display sexism towards minority female students (Margolis and Romero 1998). Older instructors may feel ‘pushed around’ by minority women and respond with disapproval towards women of colour. In North America, questions of racial identity have come to the fore as part of social and educational change. Some observers feel that race, is still a compelling and ‘fundamental principle of social organization and identity formation’ (Omi and Winant 1993a, 5). To live in a settler society without a racial identity is ‘to be in danger of having no identity at all’ (Anthias and Yuval-Davis 1992, 50). Some older White male instructors may be prejudiced towards women of colour and perceive female students who wish to research minority issues as a threat. Some may feel exposed when students challenge their lack of knowledge of minority issues. One student felt that instructors and peers considered her slow-

80

Integrative Antiracism

witted: ‘I feel that I am spoken down to because I am a female student by male faculty and peers. I feel like saying, “Just talk to me, forget that I am female,” because they just think that I don’t understand because I am a female. Most males think I don’t know anything because I am in the arts.’ Hall and Sandler (1982) contend that some faculty reinforce sexist differences when interacting with female students: ‘Women and men in the same classroom may have different ex-periences. In the majority of the cases, this chilly climate is inadvertently communicated to students by their professors’ (in D. Williams 1990, 30). It is clear that in the United States ‘the hidden criteria for constructing professionalism include stereotypical attitudes, values and expectations that may require [students] of colour to deny their culture and fit into a [White] male model of behaviour’ (Margolis and Romero 1998, 17). Since female students are likely to receive mixed messages, they appreciate supportiveness and cooperation from faculty. Another female student remarked: ‘I receive mixed messages from dominant male faculty members. Sometimes you feel they are supportive of you and understand you and at other times they are rude and look down on you and your work, your writing, and your opinions. Some of the negative comments they make on the essays you write are unwarranted and unacceptable.’ These mixed signals caused this student to distrust male professors, which had a deleterious effect of her interactions with them. Several studies on gender have found that professors’ behaviour and attitudes have a strong effect on female students (El-Khawas 1989). The shortage of female instructors in most disciplines means fewer role models. Another female student recounted: ‘There are such few minority faculty members on campus in all disciplines – especially in the arts. Even less female minority faculty. And even those who are there are leaving due to the chilly climate.’ Sexist behaviour on the part of professors can make for a chilly climate and reinforce the ‘hidden curriculum.’3 Sexist behaviours include calling mainly on male students for answers, cutting short female students more often than male students, making eye contact with male students more often than with female students, making disapproving remarks about women, using examples with the pronoun ‘he’ rather than ‘she,’ and directing lectures to men’s interests and experiences rather than to those of women. Such behaviour may discourage female students (Hall and Sandler 1982). It may also prevent female students from seeking outside help and cause them

Faculty–Student Relationships

81

to enter traditional areas of study such as the arts, thus lowering their career aspirations. One graduate student felt humiliated when a White male supervisor told her to seek out a female supervisor: ‘I had this male supervisor who treated me with dislike and did not guide me properly in my thesis work. He was indifferent, and we were not on the same wavelength. He never kept his appointments, did not answer my phone calls or e-mails. I could not pursue my graduate work with him and soon found another female supervisor, with whom I could establish a friendlier rapport.’ This student saw women as secondary in classroom situations – the position of the ‘second sex’ (de Beauvoir 1970). Men dominated classroom interactions, especially in male-taught classes. Karp and Yoels (1976) found that in classes taught by male professors, 75.4 per cent of interactions involved men and 24.6 per cent involved women. In female-taught classes, the figures were 57.8 per cent men and 42.2 per cent women. These classes had almost equal numbers of both sexes. One student told me: ‘Probably because I am a woman I am not in classroom dialogues. Men generally overrule women. I see more of a gender issue than anything else. Men trying to interrupt women all the time.’ However, in female-taught non-science classes the number of male–female interactions was similar (Sternglanz and Lyberger-Ficek 1977). In most male-taught classes, male students who initiated discussions were more likely to raise their hands, ask question, and make comments. Regardless of the male–female ratio in the class, male students tended to dominate. Karp and Yoels (1976) found that male faculty were more likely to question male than female students whereas female faculty tended to question both sexes equally. However, Sternglanz and Lyberger-Ficek (1977) discovered no differential treatment relating to gender. Similarly, Boersma and colleagues (1981) found no preferential treatment when it came to initiating questions, asking direct questions, responding to students’ comments, or giving praise. Many female interviewees observed sexism in classrooms. Some felt that their professors talked down to female students of colour; others indicated that male medical students were considered more balanced in their analyses. One graduate student claimed that sexism and agism influenced how male professors treated her: ‘I felt a gender issue, not so much a race issue. You are talked down to a bit, and I even changed from a male to a female supervisor, and I think it is more difficult because you are more scrutinized. I think it is more a gender issue, not

82

Integrative Antiracism

race – because other women who are White, overweight, or look a certain way get treated the same way. I know that girls who are beautiful – that is, White, blonde, and blue eyes – get better treated than others who are overweight. I gained weight after coming here, and I can definitely see a change in people’s attitude because of that. The more attractive you are, the more people want to get to know you. For women, it is definitely looks, and age as well. At thirty-five I feel men think I am eighty-five. Nobody ever looks at me because I am thirty-five.’ South Asian medical interns have faced racism and sexism from patients in hospitals. A female medical student commented on the sexism displayed by old White men she was treating: ‘I noticed that [sexism] a lot more than racism. You are a woman and you can’t do this. I have to tell people, ‘I am not a nurse, or a physio. I am going to be a doctor.’ And they say, “Oh, that’s interesting.” Old men patients say that I can’t understand anything because I am a woman. I am not respected as much because I am a woman and because I am nice and not aggressive. And you get looked down upon. They say, “She is not confident enough and cannot do her job properly.”’ The same student continued: ‘It’s that whole corporate eighties thing – how women had to turn to them to get anything. I think that happens a lot. Anybody who is high ranking in the hospital has had to compromise her femininity somehow. There is a resident who had to cut her hair to get more respect. The change in attitude was noticeable. She had long, beautiful hair. If you give in to your womanly tendencies, people think that you are some kind of softy and you are not that serious in your work.’ Clearly, sexism was evident in the interviewees’ formal and informal interactions with faculty members and with community members out of the classroom. The human rights coordinator on campus, who liaised between students and instructors and who was constantly alert, felt that many students were afraid to lodge complaints of any kind. Many bore their experiences of racism in silence: ‘I have heard a lot of complaints from my interaction with students on campus that some professors on campus are really mean and treat them shabbily. But most students don’t want to speak about them nor complain. They just bear it silently because they belong to the minority group.’ These students feared the repercussions that might ensue in the faculty–student dynamic. They also worried about their future in academe. The process itself stopped most students from complaining. Not a single one of the interviewees had done so.

Faculty–Student Relationships

83

Conclusion It is evident that when students bear racism silently, they feel subjugated and find their feelings stifled. This suggests that they had ‘historically received powerful messages that [minority students] did not belong in White academe’ (Patterson-Stewart et al. 1997, 491). ‘Teachers … are an important factor with regard to student engagement’ (Dei et al. 1997, 78). According to integrative antiracism theory (Dei 1996, 28), instructors are contributing to the pervasiveness of differential power and privilege. Njoki Wane (in Iseke-Barnes 2000, 18) suggests that ‘it is essential that teachers pay more attention to developing caring school environments that can accommodate a diverse range of student needs.’

5 Peer Group Interactions

The data in this chapter validate integrative antiracism theory’s principle of ‘the marginalization of voices and delegitimization of the knowledge ... and experience of subordinated groups in the educational system’ (Dei 1996, 29–30). It also explains how aversive behaviour usually hinders efforts at increasing diversity and improving the campus climate for minority students, especially South Asians. This chapter looks at peer relationships across nine dimensions: skin colour racism; cultural racism; doubts about status and abilities; minimization, silencing, and exclusion, and self-segregation; being the ‘only one’ and speaking up for one’s group; intangible and vicarious experiences and feelings of visibility/invisibility; extracurricular and residence experiences; experiences of postdoctoral fellows and doctoral candidates; and class and gender biases. All forty students I interviewed declared emphatically that they perceived racism in some aspects of peer-group relations. Skin Colour Racism The findings in this study are consistent with the theme that most interpersonal relationships are affected by the colour of one’s skin. One student forcefully remarked: ‘It’s all about skin colour. I know a lot of people who are White and are new immigrants. But because of their White skin and culture they [Europeans] don’t face any racism. They are accepted because they are White and they are considered to be Canadians. It all boils down to skin colour. We are not accepted because of our skin colour.’ This student’s perception is consistent with a study conducted by Warren, and colleagues (1997) on selected ethnocultural

Peer Group Interactions

85

groups. In all, 1,954 students were surveyed in eight schools in Toronto and Vancouver. Of these, 131 were interviewed. This large-scale study founded that central and eastern European adolescents experienced little or no peer-group racism, because they were White and adhered to European culture. The young people, in contrast to Blacks, Chinese, Latin Americans, and South Asians, were perceived as having higher social integration levels. Some medical students perceived skin colour racism among the White patients they interacted with in hospitals. Others experienced skin colour racism in the community, both in bars and in interactions with peers. (#1) ‘A White patient in the hospital refused to allow a Sri Lankan doctor who was very dark to treat him. This was an embarrassing moment for other doctors of colour who were on training. The patient was finally told that he could not have his way.’ (#2) ‘I feel skin colour racism. People look at me more not so much in the university but in the community. People look at you to mean, “Who are you?” or look through you.’ (#3) ‘I felt it a lot in the first and second years in class and in bars. People don’t act normal and you feel you don’t belong here. You think, “Oh my God, what am I doing here? I am different due to my skin colour and this is not my culture and I don’t belong here.”’ It is possible that the White patient doubted the credentials of doctor #1. Yet people in the same community have said that South Asian doctors ‘are very thorough in their diagnoses and prognoses’ and ‘know their stuff’ and are efficient and competent. Despite the positive comments about South Asian doctors, these interns perceived more negativity in the community than in the university. Some respondents perceived skin colour racism during orientation week on campus. During ‘Frosh Week’ at the beginning of the autumn semester, activities are held to familiarize new students with the university. Two students experienced avoidance and exclusion: (#1) ‘I don’t want to think about skin colour racism. It happened during Frosh week. I was excluded from a group of people, and it did not make any sense except that it was for my colour. It was a social event, and it was odd that it happened to me. That made me really angry, and I did not go to my Frosh week events at all. I took part only in 25 per cent of the events, and I did not want to know those people at all. I don’t know what it was due to, but I did not want to get to know those people at all.’ (#2) ‘I remember Frosh week. I felt totally alone. I think that racism at this White university can’t be separated from the general spirit of conformism. There was one other person of colour in my frosh group. He was

86

Integrative Antiracism

really religious and didn’t drink. The Frosh leaders made fun of him. No one minded if your skin was brown or if you just got drunk and assimilated to White culture. If they could forget differences, subsume it into White culture, then everything was fine. But any obvious difference was met with hostility.’ These comments capture the pain of exclusion and alienation. The second student associated skin colour racism with cultural racism (see the next section). Peers sometimes deride or ridicule minority students, as well as other students who abstain from liquor or are vegetarians. In this instance, White peers obviously wanted all students to blend in with the rest of the group. Two students experienced skin colour racism as linked to the beauty norm and patterns of dating (see chapter 7). (#1) ‘I think this [skin colour racism] plays out in terms of beauty. I was very aware at the university that a certain aesthetic was thought to be attractive. When I remember girls in my dorm who were thought to be beautiful, they were White girls who were all very thin and usually blonde.’ (#2) ‘There is this girl who is interested in this White guy. They were compatible and she liked him and he liked her. Something happened and she found out that he was dating another girl, a White girl who was neither smart nor pretty. He stopped asking her out because she was a person of colour, wasn’t White and wasn’t British. And it really got to her. Over something like that it was odd that he had to date a White girl. She didn’t understand and took it badly. He did not want to continue to date her because she was a woman of colour.’ Here we see skin colour racism tied in with the dominant group’s norm, which is to value blue-eyed blondes (Winant 1997). Although interviewee #2 did not elaborate, perhaps she saw racism in the shortlived relationship. Not all people of colour experience such rejections; when they do, it can reinforce negative feelings with regard to White peers and make them wary of future relationships. Many female interviewees yearned to conform to North American standards of beauty and thereby gain more acceptance from their White peers. Others had wanted during adolescence to meet that ideal but had since rejected the notion. In North America, White identity means ‘blue eyes.’1 This trait is ‘normalized’ and ‘privileged,’ while ‘White disadvantage’ (Winant 1997) can only be imagined with ‘almost no evidence at the empirical level’ (ibid., 42). In other words, hardly any studies have been done on the ‘perils’ of being White. The politicizing of Whiteness in the post–Civil Rights era in the United States has challenged the

Peer Group Interactions

87

‘wedge issue’ of race and cast doubt on the meaning of Whiteness (ibid.). In a society that is trying hard to be ‘colour-blind,’ the most recent response to the ‘crisis of [W]hiteness’ has been to don the ‘fig leaf’ of egalitarianism or equality. The dual commitments of privilege and equality pierce White identity with contradictions. Essentialized dichotomies ‘devalue’ or exoticize women of colour (Neal, in Brah et al., 1999). In Neal’s words: ‘In relation to women of colour, White women have been most obviously (re)presented as the measure against which women of colour can be devalued and/or exoticised/eroticized’ (ibid., 103). The essentialist dichotomy positions White women as ‘good’ and ‘virginal’ and woman of colour as ‘exotic’ and ‘erotic.’ This systematic devaluation indicates how all women are socially and sexually controlled. But unlike Black women, White women are accorded race privilege (ibid.). As a consequence, a different set of ‘unmarked and unnamed’ cultural practices examines Whiteness: ‘To be white is to occupy a nonracial category and in this way Whiteness becomes normative, invisible and, perhaps most significantly, thereby dominant’ (ibid.). One must deconstruct White dominance to delineate the phenomenon. Frankenberg (1993, 6) asserts: ‘To look at the social construction of whiteness … is to look head-on at a site of dominance. (And it may be more difficult for white people to say “Whiteness has nothing to do with me – I’m not white” than to say “Race has nothing to do with me – I’m not a racist.”) To speak of whiteness is, I think, to assign everyone a place in the relations of racism’ (ibid.). Solomos and Back (1996, 24) contend: ‘There is a danger of reifying whiteness and reinforcing a unitary idea of “race.” In order to avoid doing this it is crucial to locate any discussion of “Whiteness” in a particular empirical and historical context … Additionally, any discussion of whiteness must incorporate an appreciation of how gendered processes are inextricably articulated with the semantics of race.’ One interviewee perceived skin colour racism in the small-town church she attended: ‘To be honest I felt skin colour racism in a church here in this small town. It was unfortunate, but it was to a point that I could actually feel it. I don’t think that it was because they were maliciously eyeing me as a person of colour – but I did feel my difference. I did feel that “Wow, here is a person who is not White.” And to feel that was something new to me because the Church in larger cities has members of different nationalities who really fit in.’ This student faced antagonism where she least expected it. All ser-

88

Integrative Antiracism

mons emphasize the biblical principles that everyone is created in the image of God and that everyone is equal2 in God’s eyes. Surely congregations should welcome and accept newcomers and interact with them as equals. But members of colour scarcely felt welcome in this church; instead they felt uncomfortable and distanced. There was no unkindness, but the way people looked at her and interacted with her excluded her and set her apart. A feminist interpretation might suggest a subtle tinge of sexism and racism in their treatment of her – God being almost always portrayed as a male and White.3 Four students commented on skin colour racism in academic discussions and in everyday conversations with friends and with people in libraries and public places. (#1) ‘In this particular class, I was the only person of colour. So when I was talking about racism, I felt very ridiculous and to be honest I felt that everyone was talking about me. I had to talk about it in an intellectual way and it was obviously not just an intellectual thing for me. I didn’t appreciate the situation at all and skin colour had something to do with it.’ (#2) ‘I remember telling a friend, “You are so White.” It was suddenly taken in a bad context. And she didn’t like it. Normally being White is okay. But if you say it, they don’t like it at all. I get into a lot of trouble for that. I say what I feel and they don’t like it.’ (#3) ‘I have been mistaken for a First Nations person because of my colour. In the library, I was asked which band I was from by an old White couple. The old man did not smile but just asked this question curtly. The question took me aback because it was a very personal question to ask. I didn’t like the tone of questioning and the interaction was abrupt and unfriendly. The word “tribe” brings in a certain form of primitiveness.’ (#4) ‘It came up in conversation once. The [cultural] differences are obvious between Whites and Browns … I have comments from friends of mine in many instances. I went to Ottawa on a warm day. My friend applied some skin cream on his skin … “Black people don’t need it,” he said. It … wedged in my mind.’ South Asian students’ brown colour generates an intense form of skin colour racism on White university campuses (Essed 1991). Student #1 found it an everyday experience, not simply an intellectual concept that she could talk about. Racism as a reality in her life and as a concept in her mind made her feel intensely uncomfortable. Student #2 indicated that as a woman of colour, she felt awkward even commenting on her friend’s ‘Whiteness.’ The friend might interpret ‘You are so White’ as a form of reverse discrimination. Students of colour can unintentionally offend White peers. The circulating power of racism (Hall 1997b, 261)

Peer Group Interactions

89

gives the dominant group the ‘control’ and ‘right’ to minimize and curtail observations by minority students. Student #3 was upset at being mistaken for a First Nations woman. She did not realize that commenting on the ‘primitiveness’ of First Nations people was itself racism. A friend’s callous remark about ‘Black’ people deeply hurt student #4. The above comments suggest that minority students are ‘othered’ on campus. ‘The spectacle of the “Other”’ converts difference into a representational device for the dominant culture, ‘inscribed by relations of power’ (ibid., 225). Some commentators associate skin colour racism with the colonial experience (Rex 1973; Sivanandan 1990) and with ‘the product of the historical signifier of blackness’ (Anthias and Yuval-Davis 1992, 14). ‘Colour racism’ apparently almost prevents assimilation into the dominant culture (Gandy 1998, 35–92). In chapter 4 (see also chapter 7), students described not fitting in culturally, which suggests that skin colour had something to do with their sense of being left out. Skin colour racism enforces ‘racial meanings’ (Fine, in Fine et al. 1997) in peer interactions and generates aversive behaviour, which labels minority students as intellectually backward and socially inferior. Cultural Racism The next most insidious form of racism experienced by South Asian students was cultural racism. This type of racism was related to clothes, personal names, food, entertainment, mannerisms, accent, and proficiency in English. Regarding attire, four interviewees recounted: (#1) ‘Because of my hijab and Pakistani attire, the whole atmosphere makes you feel uncomfortable and they make you feel that you are an outsider.’4 (#2) ‘About my hijab, students say, “Don’t you find it cumbersome to wear it? Don’t you feel hot in it? Why don’t you take it off? It’s so hot.” I say, “It is my religion.” Everyone sidesteps you because it is politically incorrect. They don’t talk to you at all.’ (#3) ‘People look at my pagri and you can kind of tell from the way they look and behave and from their body language.5 My pagri gives me away and I feel that people react strangely to it. Some people laugh at you because of your pagri. Others say, “You are wearing a nice hat,” or something like that. Fellow students don’t know a thing about the Sikh religion and are totally ignorant about Sikhism.’ (#4) ‘I have been told that I have been brave in wearing the salwar kameez in this small town.6 Being a White supremacist town, this form of dress is obviously out of place. People stare at me, some people do it

90

Integrative Antiracism

in a nice way and say: “You are looking pretty.” People like the exotic atmosphere in the department. People also say silly things.’ For many wearers, the hijab is liberating because it gives them control over their own bodies (Alag 2001, 1). It frees them from being viewed as sexual objects and from cycles of anorexia and bulimia, and it allows people to appreciate them solely for their moral and intellectual qualities (ibid., 1–2). Students who wore the hijab felt uncomfortable and excluded when others commented on it. Some White students tried to sound ‘positive’ by saying ‘nice hat’ or similar. However, such comments served only to reduce religious and cultural practices to stereotypes (Hall 1997b, 225). Cultural differences can take on the same meanings as biological differences – that is, they can signify ‘inferiority’ (Razack 1998, 9). Razack contends that ‘a message of racial inferiority is now more likely to be coded in the language of culture rather than biology’ (ibid., 19). Minority students are sometimes made to feel inferior when they wear indigenous forms of attire. On the subject of South Asian food, three students commented: (#1) ‘When I offer South Asian food to somebody, they say, “Ugh, it looks funny.” When I pray as a Muslim, other students are inquisitive.’ (#2) ‘I explain to people who ask a lot of questions. This is why we do this and this is why we do that. Indians cook a lot and smell of the food that they cook. They use pungent odours and that is how you smell. If you come from an environment that has that smell, you just smell of tasty wholesome food, which is not a bad thing. That’s what I have found.’ (#3) ‘When it comes to food habits, some White students ask me why I don’t eat pork or beef. What’s the problem? I feel this is a culturally insensitive remark.’ These students had experienced what struck them as cultural racism. Even though it is known that many White people are passionately fond of South Asian food, these comments sounded negative to the interviewees. Asking student #3 why she did not eat pork or beef was an example of insensitivity and ‘othering.’ This White person seemed to be saying that being a Hindu7 and not eating beef or pork was a mark of inferiority. Three students experienced cultural racism over names, accents, and traditional customs. (#1) ‘Since my name is Indian I feel the discomfort when people laugh at Indian names. It’s just that Indian names aren’t taken seriously. It’s almost a kind of a joke. So also with African names. Names are not normalized. So also with food and the smell of curry, things like that. A lot of Indian people hang out together. It’s weird – I

Peer Group Interactions

91

have nothing to say to that. Things like that make me feel uncomfortable on campus.’ (#2) ‘Fellow students found it difficult to follow the way I talk. Initially they found it difficult to follow my Indian accent. I found it in reverse also – I found it difficult to follow theirs too. The teaching I found difficult to follow in the first few classes.’ (#3) ‘People misinterpret what you say or have preconceived notions about your way of doing things and I have to explain to them what I mean. White students have all kinds of notions about Hinduism and some of our beliefs – about arranged marriages and about having children. You explain and tell them that you have to make a choice about your priorities and what matters to you most.’ A recurring theme in the interviews was that minority students felt debased because they had indigenous names, accents, and lifestyles. A second-generation student in medicine felt that cultural racism stems from ignorance: ‘The other day I walked to see a patient on my list. He said, “You must be from India. Where is your bindi?” Give me a break, that is a traditional custom and I am not wearing a saree.8 I know he is saying this out of ignorance, but it bothers me. It’s as if my country is somewhere else and I don’t belong here. That’s what the language suggests.’ People make essentialist assumptions when they generalize norms and customs and attribute them to all members of the group. According to the medical student, the White patient was ‘ignorant’ about Indian customs and unaware that she was born in Canada. Perhaps the patient was trying to connect with the student by identifying with indigenous customs. Ignorance or ‘not knowing better’ can be a form of racism with the ‘power to hurt’ (Martin and Warburton 1998). As well, ‘structured ignorance’ can be a form of organized racism (McVeigh 2004). Cultural racism can exclude and misrepresent marginalized groups. One interviewee observed: ‘Racism exists in a subtle way because people here are educated about it. They don’t outwardly show racial bias, but it is still there even between close friends. If we were brought up here, it would have been easier to mingle with others of another race. We tend to mingle with people of our own race here on campus because we can share about our Indian culture, entertainment, movies and songs. Canadians don’t understand that they have their own jokes and things that we don’t know about.’ Cultural racism not only differentiates but also makes it difficult for minority students to interact socially with White peers. Non-participation in informal conversations with dominant peers can marginalize minority students. Conversely, minority group jokes or stories may exclude White students.

92

Integrative Antiracism

Second-generation South Asian students who considered themselves assimilated also found noticeable discrimination. One reported: ‘Cultural racism was probably the biggest form of racism I faced. The truth is that I was born in Canada and I don’t really have any different cultural habits. I am pretty much assimilated. However, there was the constant presumption that I did have cultural habits that I found quite racist. People would often ask me insane questions about worshipping various animals and about whether I was going to be “sold” into marriage.9 Questions are asked about my dress and bindi.’10 Mainstream students sometimes universalize and essentialize certain indigenous cultural and religious practices (Razack 1998).11 However, even within the South Asian group, the students’ very different experiences inhibit generalizations. A persistent theme throughout the interviews was the perpetuation of stereotypes about cultural groups. One student put it this way: ‘I was raised here but I do face the notion of cultural assumptions. They assume many things, like … “Are your parents finding a husband for you?” There are cultural assumptions … which is cultural racism … I hate these stereotypical assumptions they have of you. They think by just looking at you … they know everything about you, your family, and how your parents interact. I don’t appreciate that.’ The assumption is that ‘arranged marriage’ is characteristic of the experiences of all South Asian students. Clichéd assumptions like these made this student feel inferior. This is the ‘culturalization of differences’ (Razack 1998, 17). Mainstream culture masks systems of domination by inferiorizing indigenous cultures. We need to ‘examine these constructs that homogenize our differences or package them as innate, decontextualized and ahistorical’ (ibid., 21). The media provide a lens through which the dominant group views minority groups. East Indians are underrepresented in Western arts – in particular, films – and this echoes social realities. The next two students discussed this: (#1) ‘At a meeting about cuts in education, this trustee came up to me and told me he had seen La Kama Sutra and that the actress in it was a second-generation South Asian Canadian. He said it out of the blue. It caught me off guard. I didn’t really respond – but I knew it was a form of cultural racism.’ (#2) ‘In Hollywood there are very few Indian actors and they are cast mainly in East Indian roles … Basically I have to stay in India. Indian actors are given the East Indian roles. You never see a “die hard” movie – an Indian playing a role in mainstream movies. It affects our self-awareness and what our place in society

Peer Group Interactions

93

should be. There are not a lot of Indians represented in the arts, drama and theatre. We do have representation in science, computers, and medicine. We have to stay in the domains of science and technology and not the arts.’ These students perceive cultural racism in the media through the underrepresentation of South Asian actors in mainstream movies. Representation is a multifaceted process: ‘especially when dealing with “difference,” it engages feelings, attitudes and emotions and it mobilizes fears and anxieties in the viewer at deeper levels than we can explain in a simple, common-sense way’ (Hall 1997b, 226). According to student #1, the trustee had made a cynical remark about a second-generation Canadian who acted in a movie. Perhaps this student did not know that a friend of the university acted in Kamasutra,12 and perhaps the trustee made the comment in a genuinely sympathetic way. Student #2’s comment suggests that aspiring South Asian actors are most likely to be accepted in countries ‘back home’ and that the inclusion of minorities in mainstream movies is almost unimaginable. The student was also implying that South Asian actors usually receive uninteresting roles in mainstream movies. There are some South Asians in the arts, but the perception this student had was that their representation was minimal.13 When minority actors play weak or villainous characters, its suggests that people who are racially different are in some way inferior. The following student perceived cultural racism in her reputation for being unfriendly towards and different from others: ‘I feel the cultural difference. It is just so different here – in little things. Just seeing people walking around, it is most unexpected. You try to defend yourself. You have this mental perception that you are different from these people and you are perceived as not being friendly.’ Minority students sometimes keep to themselves because they feel different. White peers sometimes misconstrue this. Doubts about Status and Abilities The students I interviewed expressed doubts about their status and abilities as students. First-generation students who had degrees from countries of origin felt that their academic status had been undermined and that they had not been placed at the same level as peers with Canadian degrees. One told me: ‘Sometimes I feel that way – my bachelor's degree is not from here so I feel they are on a higher platform than me. One of the things people assume is that you cannot understand and speak

94

Integrative Antiracism

English. They look at you initially thinking that you cannot understand. But once you start talking they change their minds.’ These two assumptions – that South Asian credentials are not equivalent to Canadian ones, and that South Asian students are not fluent in English – create self-doubt. Cultural differences can generate uncertainty about one’s status and abilities. A Sikh student who wore the pagri reported that White students ‘mumbled and laughed’ and that instructors were ‘not expecting much’ from him, and that this affected ‘evaluations, grading, and marks.’ Peers who ridicule South Asian students are in effect telling them they are stupid. This can strongly influence grading and tracking. Another student challenged the assumption that there is a universal Canadian accent. Supposedly, this accent allows most second-generation students to communicate more clearly than students with South Asian accents: ‘I feel that my discipline is very White and very male. So I feel you have to be better than the others and keep proving yourself at every stage. Whereas if you are a White male you will automatically be given that respect. I have to earn it and earn it on a daily basis and because of the question, “Why are you here?” … I don’t think I am on the same status level as the others even though I was born here. I know it would be more difficult if I wasn’t born here and I did have an accent [and] a different educational background. I still feel I have a different status.’ This student found that her academic level was being underestimated because of her race and gender, even though she was born and educated in Canada. Even though she was a doctoral candidate, she had to constantly earn respect. Notwithstanding the university’s stated commitment to diversity, many students of colour reported differential treatment and status consistent with the thought patterns and behaviour of aversive racists (Crim 1998). Minimization, Silencing, Exclusion, and Self-Segregation Some interviewees felt minimized by their White peers simply because they were of South Asian origin and perceived to be – as one respondent put it – ‘of janitorial backgrounds.’ Minimization here refers to the systematic downgrading of an individual’s status or position. One participant felt minimized when colonization was discussed in class: ‘People get upset with me when I say things bluntly. Yes, I have issues with British colonization because they came into my country and destroyed it. My White classmates get upset about [my views] and tend to minimize my position. I have major problems with the British. They get upset and

Peer Group Interactions

95

they say, “Well, that’s not fair,” and I say, “Well, that’s my history. You can’t take that from me.” I get a lot of flak for it and people feel uncomfortable. I usually tell my peers that I am a second-generation immigrant with a completely different upbringing and that I appreciate my background. I also tell them I am their equal and they resent that a lot. White people assume they are better when they are not, and when I tell them that, they don’t like it. If you challenge it [the concept of equality], it becomes weird.’ In this situation, White peers consider the attitudes of students of colour strange and outlandish. They still think of mainstream perspectives as the norm, and any different perspective usually faces resistance and hostility (chapter 7). One student reported that her self-worth plummeted because of her accent and attire and that she was not ‘part of the crowd.’ Another, who described herself as non-verbal and quiet, felt ‘ticked off’ when she was ‘not even given credit when she tried to say something.’ A science student’s ‘upbringing’ caused her to ‘behave in a certain manner.’ These students’ comments suggest that differences in socialization led to their minimization by White peers. The quality of life at an academic institution depends greatly on positive peer interactions and on how students perceive the university climate. Many interviewees invoked their need to be heard rather than silenced. They were frustrated that they were not properly listened to, especially when the discussion dealt with racist texts, Third World countries, and colonization. I feel silenced while voicing my opinions in academic situations. It makes me really angry – that people who honestly don’t have the experience and understanding have any right to say anything over me. I have never felt so actively silenced by my peers in my class than this year when I was doing race. Because suddenly they separate Whites and Blacks. It is so difficult there to sit and face it, especially when you are a very vocal person. … Everything I said was antagonistic especially when I was challenging the norm and I shouldn’t. For instance, we were sitting in a classroom when we were talking about access for immigrants and inner-city schools. You should not call these inner-city because it brings up the Black/White dichotomy. This was met with complete silence. The same thing happens when the colonial aspects are brought up. Why are these countries so defenceless? Indians lived in village societies and of course someone can walk right in. People don’t understand it and I have the right to speak about it. Also, photographing certain cultures and using the pictures

96

Integrative Antiracism makes me really mad. Saying these places is [sic] so exotic, and things like that, and look at the difference in cultures. I am met with silence or hostility. So I just shut up.

This student was silenced, especially when discussing diversity and Third World concerns. Inner-city schools in downtown areas usually serve students from low-income and Black families. White students were not willing to understand the perspectives of students of colour and reacted with intense hostility, which silenced this student. When issues of colonization arose, she encountered open hostility, with her peers refusing to discuss Third World issues. Another interviewee told me that ‘being silenced was worse than being told to shut up.’ When she mentioned that a classic English text or a great film was racist, her peers often responded with a ‘blank stare,’ followed by a moment of silence before the class discussion continued. Mainstream and minority instructors usually went along with the mainstream group. Some students talked about being excluded from social events and study groups. A Muslim female student: Several times I have been excluded from social events and study groups and I felt uneasy and very uncomfortable. Last year the exclusion was so overwhelming that it was damaging to my self-esteem and confidence that I had. I went through a depression that lasted a big part of the year. Everybody grouped together in study groups and went off and they wouldn’t even ask me. They grouped together and did their own thing and did not even ask me. For social events, they would skip my room and do their own thing. Most of them were like that. Students went out every single day and did not include me. They wouldn’t ask me and they excluded me. I cried a lot. They excluded girls who didn’t drink and the rest made friends among themselves. It was so demeaning. In class they wouldn’t speak to me. This boy who knew me didn’t recognize me at all. It is an undercurrent that runs, an uneasiness that you feel. Because I am a Muslim, people stereotype me as a terrorist. The media portrays all Muslims as terrorists. I wanted to dropout or transfer to another university because of this exclusion.

In this low-context spatial communication, White students behaved in an unfriendly manner towards minority students (Hall and Hall 1990). This woman perceived that she had been stereotyped as a terrorist. She explained that Islam believes in peace and that this form of cold distancing and exclusion bothered her greatly. Because she did not conform to

Peer Group Interactions

97

the dominant group’s social norms and practices, she felt depressed and humiliated. She often thought seriously about dropping out, transferring to another university, or killing herself.14 ‘Confronting negative contexts can result in decisions not to persist, particularly for racial and ethnic minority student at predominantly White institutions’ (Gloria et al. 1999, 258). Another student found that in small groups ‘people are not helpful’ and ‘hesitate to include you.’ Some interviewees avoided certain social and cultural activities that are ‘White defined and White dominated’ and gatherings where they would not fit in. Exclusion, for an arts undergraduate, meant being ‘completely ignored [as if] you are not there.’ In conversation, White students ‘don’t even look in your direction.’ As a result of minimization and exclusion, South Asian students tend to segregate themselves and interact less with their White peers. Segregation leads to further isolation and alienation. Many interviewees talked about divisions based on ethnicity and culture. I am not suggesting that they did not interact with mainstream students – many socialized with White friends, and some actually got along better with their Canadian friends. All the same, several reported that they spent more time with South Asians. One international student described the process at his residence: The first thing I look is to see if there is someone Brown like me. Then we begin to narrow down to see if that person is from North India or South India or speaks Tamil or any other language. I tend to stick more to people from Madras. Initially, we try to mix and have friends from all groups. But within two to three weeks, we feel excluded, and students start breaking up into segregated groups. The small crack gets wider, and friendships begin to cool off. It becomes only a ‘hi’ once in a while. These friendships with White boys tend to worsen rather than become closer because they do not belong to our culture. The whole floor becomes polarized into White and minority. By the end of the semester you feel you are no longer a part of them [the larger group] anymore. The White guys start making new friends and these are guys you don’t know. The more the differences between the White guys and Brown guys, the easier it is for the friendship to break. The Chinese are very cliquish and tend to stick to their own group from China and Hong Kong. The Brown guys are a little friendlier but even they ultimately end up with other South Asian guys.

The polarization begins between subgroups or subcultures on the basis of religion, language, and countries of origin. However, the polar-

98

Integrative Antiracism

ization between We and They or between ‘Brown’ and ‘White’ is generally more pronounced. The greater the social and cultural differences between groups, the sooner and broader the divergence. Thus the segregation process accelerates, with the actual pace depending on the extent of cultural differences between coloured and White students, between We and They, and with the polarities based on power differentials. In the We–They dichotomy, ‘We’ refers to the South Asians and ‘They’ to the dominant Whites (Henry et al. 2000, 56). The tendency to fragment and segregate highlights ‘the fact that subjectivities are constructed within the framework of the asymmetrical relations of power in society [depicting] that the social boundaries between “Us” [we] and “Them” [they] are not level playing fields’ (Dei et al. 1997, 236). Another student seldom ‘joined White peers for a beer’ and rarely socialized with the rest of the department. He felt ‘uncomfortable.’ He ‘didn’t conform’ and ‘didn’t play the game,’ and heard in many ways that he was ‘out of the loop.’ He often felt intense segregation when he perceived that he was disliked and ignored. The antagonism became more marked; however, it was usually subtle until he stopped receiving invitations to get-togethers and parties. Such rejection may be a product of ethnocentrism. Ethnocentrism (Henry et al. 2000) – the inability to understand the world from the perspective of others – is obvious in these situations. Being the ‘Only One’ and Speaking Up for One’s Group Many respondents found that being the only student of colour in certain educational contexts generated undue pressure. For example: ‘I think when you are the only one in those contexts you get the feeling, “Am I really supposed to be here?” It’s very true – “One of these things doesn’t belong and that’s me” … the song in Sesame Street. Is this an environment that I should have access to? So it helps to have someone there who has already entered that space … Then you will feel that this is the place that I should be. I feel in the back of my head, “Maybe I shouldn’t be here and maybe I don’t belong. I shouldn’t be trying this.”’ This comment suggests that being the only minority student can further alienate and isolate students of colour on campus. ‘Attaining social integration with peers … can be particularly crucial to the educational persistence of [minority students]’ (Brown and Kurpius 1997, 4). Other comments: ‘I feel funny being the only one in small group discussions’; ‘Sometimes you have to say something because you are the only person of colour, even if you don’t have anything to say.’ Thus a person of

Peer Group Interactions

99

colour always has to have an opinion, and this makes White peers defensive. Being ‘the only one’ in a development studies class made one arts student feel like ‘the object of the study,’ as if she had to ‘represent’ everyone Indian. Being the focus of a discussion and being expected to comment and epitomize the nation made her feel especially ‘disintegrated’ and ‘fetishized’ (Hall 1997b, 266). Several respondents spoke for their group often: (#1) ‘Many a time I have the whole obligation of bringing in that perspective. Because India is so diverse I don’t know if I do justice to it or not. Because you are the only representative you are made to speak for everybody from India. I say something and [then] I say I don’t know. It’s impossible to speak for the whole of India. There are lots of examples in environmental studies like the Narmada Dam, the Bhopal tragedy, and the overall perspective. It may not be the whole perspective but mine only. They may say, “I knew this girl from India who said this.” But my opinion may not apply to the whole of India.’ These respondents felt obliged to speak for the group they belonged to even though their experiences were very specific. This student referred to the Narmada Dam15 and the Bhopal disaster.16 Her perspective on development and globalization17 could not have represented the entire nation. Clearly, some peers assume that South Asian students represent Third World nations and thus lack the cultural capital to meet White norms. Besides, peers are incapable of comprehending the complexity of their experiences, which are as diverse as the countries represented. Other interviewees spoke of their ‘obligation’ to raise Third World perspectives in class. Because India was so diverse, they knew they could not do justice to its complex realities. They found themselves explaining why South Asian girls don’t date or go to the cottage on the weekends and why it was exclusionary for people to be talking about such practices. Other clarifications revolved around the word ‘Hindu’ or ‘weird things like, ‘What do Hindus speak?’’ The students considered White peers ‘completely ignorant about Indians in Canada and about Sikhs.’ One told me: ‘I am constantly explaining about minority women in feminism classes.’ Intangible and Vicarious Experiences and Feelings of Visibility/Invisibility Many interviewees told me that racism cannot be expressed in words and is just a ‘feeling’ or ‘intuition.’ One student summed this up: ‘I

100

Integrative Antiracism

think that happens a lot in my case. I feel the tension is directed towards me and that gets to me. People don’t say anything about it. If there is a problem they should say so. But they don’t and that really affects me because I feel I am not accepted. If there is something they know is going to go on record, they don’t say anything. Maybe I pay attention to the body language, which goes with the whole look.’ It seems as if these intangible experiences of racism are forms of the hidden curriculum, with body language and non-verbal behaviour saying more than words or actions. It seems that White students are afraid to make overtly racist remarks for fear that these will go ‘on record.’ The university culture reflects the values and norms of Canadian society, in which – so I believe – silent racism is common (Trepagnier 1996). Some people distrust certain manifestations of inclusive language and proactive measures as an ‘overdose of political correctness’; some use silent racism to circumvent sensitive situations. Political correctness – an elusive concept – refers to the elimination of offensive language and practices (Fleras and Elliott 1996). Culturally conservative academics may employ the discourse of political correctness to ridicule the inclusion of non-dominant voices and perspectives. This has resulted in an ongoing debate about approaches to implementing social change. The discourse of political correctness calls for universities to use inclusive language with regard to racism, sexism, and equity (Srivastava 1996). It encourages people to avoid certain kinds of discussion. Both in and outside classrooms, educators are especially afraid to engage in debates about minority issues; they are afraid they will not use the correct terminology or take the correct perspective. So instead of ‘talking’ their racism, they practise intangible racism through body language and the looks they give. The interviewees reported many instances of ‘vicarious’ racism in academic and social situations – that is, they had witnessed others in their minority group in racist situations. In their classes, South Asian students watched their peers misconstrue, malign, exclude, and mock members of other minority groups such as Chinese and Blacks. One student reported: ‘In one of the presentations there was this student who was having difficulty with English. [Some of the students said,] “We cannot understand a damn word.” I thought to myself, “Give her a chance, she is probably learning English.”’ Other minority peers were helpless and could do little to ease the situation. In situations like this, faculty and White peers may be able to help the minority student. An arts student reported a vicarious incident of racism in a cafeteria:

Peer Group Interactions

101

‘Minority students who were talking loudly in their native language were “looked at with a rolling of the eyes.”’ In another incident, White students stared with ‘disgust’ at South Asians who were talking with an Indian accent. These students said nothing; they simply stared. A graduate student recounted that at a bar, the bouncer asked a minority student who could not speak English to ‘get out’; she referred to this situation as ‘a reality of our time.’ To her, this incident related mainly to the minority student’s ‘status of not being an English speaker.’ The idea that English proficiency is valuable in mainstream society surfaced in the narratives of several interviewees. Many South Asians students felt both visible and invisible in certain academic and social situations. When they were the only minority member in the group, they felt ignored and glossed over. The resulting pain hurt their academic performance. ‘It depends on the group you are in … I feel both visible and invisible. In a White group, you can feel you stand out for sure. Everything you do is drawing attention to you and you feel different and awkward. In some White groups, you also feel invisible, that your presence is not there and that you don’t count. So it has a double effect on your personality. If you are the only minority in a majority you will begin to feel like that.’ Another student sometimes wished he was invisible and sometimes wished he was visible. In a bar, he wished he was invisible or ‘just White.’ An undergraduate felt that she ‘was not a potential partner to a lot of White guys’ and that she ‘stuck out like a sore thumb.’ She obviously wanted to be asked out, even if she could not accept. Feelings of visibility/invisibility surface when South Asian immigrants are called ‘visible minorities.’ People of colour are more noticeable than others, and this gives them a sense of being peculiar or odd and draws attention to them. They are then ‘selected out’ as not only different but also ‘inferior’ and ‘inadequate.’ ‘Thus, [South Asians’] own bodies are used to construct for them some sort of social zone or prison, since they cannot crawl out of their skins, and this signals what life has to offer them in Canada’ (Bannerji 1993, 149). When perceived as ‘normally’ invisible, they are ‘trivialized’ and made to feel ‘useless,’ as if they belonged to a ‘descriptive category’ (ibid., 148). Feelings of visibility and invisibility are imbedded in the ‘rightness of Whiteness’ (Henry et al. 2000, 299). Some people in Canada think of Whiteness as a universal norm. This ethnocentric notion ‘allows one to think and speak as if Whiteness described and defined the world’ (ibid.). Aversive racists may think of

102

Integrative Antiracism

students of colour as being in a ‘wrong’ category and therefore either visible or invisible depending on the context. Extracurricular and Residence Experiences Students who participated in extracurricular activities on campus and in the community sometimes felt tokenized and unwelcome. One reported: ‘I was involved in the women’s centre. It was probably as progressive as this university got but it was still all White. To the extent that race was discussed I felt tokenized, like I had to teach the White women about racism. Or I felt as though they just wanted me to give my oneminute rant about race so they could go back to talking about “Women’s Issues.”’ Some people expect minority women to represent their own ethnic group and at the same time be on a par with mainstream women (Backhouse 1998, 16–27). Paradoxically, even within feminist groups, minority students felt excluded and ‘shut out.’ During the Second Wave of feminism, White women contended that sexism overruled racism: ‘Sexism and racism must be seen as interlocking,’ with no compartmentalization (Spellman 1988). The perspectives of women of colour should actually be integral to women’s issues. South Asian students perceived racism in their residences. Several talked about feeling totally alienated and about the lack of appreciation for cultural differences. One student had this to say: ‘Where do I begin? I felt totally alienated. Alienated as a woman and as a person of colour and even further alienated because I was politicized around these identities. I remember this guy telling me he had never had experiences with “other” cultures. It was so frustrating because he thought he was being so progressive.’ Clearly, this person thought he should have at least some knowledge about ‘other’ cultures; perhaps he thought his admission of ignorance ‘progressive.’ She felt totally alienated as a consequence of being boxed into a Third World identity. The ‘symbolic power in representation [can] mark, assign and classify’ (Hall 1997b, 259). One student represented a minority group within ‘a certain “regime of representation” as “backward”’ (ibid.). Another student recounted a theft in her residence: ‘In residence there were some problems. We were the only three Indian girls there. A microwave got stolen and we were accused of stealing it. We didn’t do it, so we didn’t get into trouble. They didn’t directly accuse us but it was implied by their “expressive looks” that we did it.’ This student was furi-

Peer Group Interactions

103

ous when she told me about this incident. That others suspected these three students and made it clear they did was deeply unfair; unfortunately, this scenario is all too familiar to immigrants in Canada. Looking on minority students as unethical, immoral, and dishonest is another form of stereotyping and universalizing (ibid.). Yet another student commented about her experiences in residence. There has been a lot of frustration in residence. We are seven minorities in this house of twenty-eight students. I am always very vocal and there have been times when this White woman speaks out about it. I am irritated because she is a White woman. I have also been irritated over coloured women not speaking out simply because they don’t want to spark an issue. This White woman said to me, ‘I don’t know what the politically correct terms are and I don’t want to learn or care.’ I said, ‘You don’t have to learn but I have to live with it. I am a Canadian and you are a Canadian and you learn to deal with your Canadian friends.’ That’s the issue. You just can’t choose to ignore it. I just get very frustrated about it. Just complete apathy. It is easy for you not to care. If you wake up every morning and know that you are an immigrant woman of colour, then you would care.

This student believed that her White peers ‘had to care’ and show consideration towards ‘immigrant’ students of colour. Mainstream students often display insensitivity as a means of ‘radiating power downwards on a subordinate group’ (ibid., 261). The residence experiences discussed above fall within the ‘basic agenda of racism’ (Essed 1991, 186). The argument that racism is a part of everyday experience addresses the discursive expressions of oppression organized around the notion of ‘immigrant’ from a developing country. Oppressive ideological constructs problematize immigrant students of colour and imply that they have low intelligence and competence. The basic agenda of racism makes altercations likely in peer interactions. Experiences of Postdoctoral Fellows and Doctoral Candidates South Asian postdoctoral fellows and doctoral candidates who were instructors or teaching assistants experienced a different and unusual dynamic with White students. Most fellows served as faculty in prestigious institutes, where they felt racism more keenly than other students. The problems they encountered related to South Asian accents, mark-

104

Integrative Antiracism

ing, class discipline, everyday interactions, and instructor evaluations. Four instructors and teaching assistants reported: [#1] As an instructor, I was not given the respect that I should be given. White students don’t even respect us or acknowledge us when they see us in the hallways. They come to us asking us so many questions and I have spent hours helping them. My results were astounding – I raised the standard of the class from a 43 per cent pass to a 94 per cent pass. Yet I was given the lowest evaluation. I felt really humiliated. [#2] I think that when you are a teaching assistant, you are teaching students about the Third World and people will say the most ridiculous things about the Third World. To what extent do you challenge those assumptions? How do you do it? For me that has been a very difficult thing to deal with and I have often found that White guys who don’t like being challenged have very stereotypical notions about the Third World. When you are a person of colour you are not seen as a person with authority. There have been students who challenge your authority a lot when you are leading a discussion. A student last year was a nuisance. Out of the four groups, I would cringe going to this group. This boy was destroying the group dynamic because he was very forceful, very domineering, he had very negative perceptions, and he totally silenced everybody who disagreed with him. He did not see me as a person of authority. He constantly challenged my position as a teaching assistant. [#3] The White students being very White and upper class gave me feelings of incompetence, that the dominant group had White privilege. Some students tried to minimize my status – I had that feeling when I was teaching a science subject. When you try to teach honestly and when you find that more importance is given to accent – that really frustrated me. I did have some doubts about my abilities at that time. [#4] I feel minimized by the fellow students I teach. I think I feel it is hard for me to garner their respect because I don’t think of myself as being like them and I don’t think I will be questioned if I am a White male. I don’t think I am given as much respect as I think is due to me or as I should get. They question my marking – there are always more than one or two students every year.

These interviewees experienced inadequate respect and unfair evaluations and were angry about it. Instructor #1 spent many hours tutoring

Peer Group Interactions

105

students and suspected that racism influenced evaluations of him, despite excellent results. A teacher’s race and class may affect evaluations (Roscignio and Ainsworth-Darnell 1999, 164). Insensitive students ‘could not see the talent behind the colour’ (Trueba 1998, 87). Instructor #2 found her authority continuously in question, and her perspectives on Third World issues were almost always challenged. Such challenges can be very healthy and natural; however, she felt that they were ‘putting down’ her views. She suspected not critical thinking but acts of suppression. Instructor #3 experienced racism because of his accent and doubted his own abilities and competence. Instructor #4 felt minimized by her gender and also by her marking. Students complained about unfair marks, even though she thought her grades were appropriate. The unjust allegations made her uncomfortable. Not a single minority teaching assistant was recommended for an award based on student evaluations. The instructors I interviewed reported little administrative support and were often blamed for problems (Margolis and Romero 1998). Administrators may define minority instructors as the problem and fail to scrutinize the structural and systemic roots of negative experiences within classrooms. ‘Blaming the victim’ reproduces inequality in higher education. Class Bias South Asian students also encountered class and gender discrimination. One interviewee had this to say about class discrimination: ‘White students ask me all the time, “You don’t live in a hut do you?” I say, “No, I live in a house.” One friend asked me: “You don’t have animals like lions in your backyard?” My housemate asked me once: “Do you know how to defrost meat?” I wanted to ask her: “Where do you think I am from? Do you think I am from the jungles of India living in a hut?” I can figure out how I can do it if I am at this university. It blows my mind. That kind of ignorance I find very irritating. This friend asked me if I could operate a VCR. Irritating things like that. I can pick up a book and read about it. We do have a civilization where we come from.’ This student dislikes ‘ignorant’ questions about her background. White peers often know little about the high socio-economic levels that some developing nations have achieved. International students usually hail from the upper class back home and so are used to a standard of living that corresponds to the North American middle class. The world’s largest democracy, India, has almost achieved a level of development in

106

Integrative Antiracism

science and technology that equals the standards of the industrialized world. Abdul Kalam (2002), President of India, has projected that India could develop into a superpower in about fifteen years by unleashing its energy within. His country has the human capital and material resources as well as the power to grow into a developed nation in the very near future. Unfortunately, the media focus on poverty there, and even ‘well-informed’ White students do not know any better. Misinformation that shapes the ideology of class identity perplexes new students and totally exasperates them. Gender Bias Gender bias is part of the ‘hidden curriculum’ (Margolis and Romero 1998) – a strong reproduction of inequality. Administrative staff, faculty, and peers may stigmatize visible minorities as ‘affirmative action’ students (ibid., 12) or ‘token Blacks.’ The authors maintain: ‘The affirmative action classification makes race and/or gender the determining factor in social interaction and occasionally relegates students of colour to positions of affirmative action “mascots”’ (ibid.). Leela MadhavaRau (1995, 315) agrees: ‘To the extent that we fail fully to integrate race and gender analysis, we pursue strategies and goals which replicate oppressive racial structures and behaviour.’ Most female South Asian students I interviewed recounted such experiences in various disciplines. One expressed her intense displeasure at being debased by peers because she was a woman of colour: ‘Some male students talk down to me because I am female. I feel like slapping them in the face and saying, “Just talk to me, forget that I am female.” They think that I don’t understand because I am female. Most males think I don’t know anything because I am in sociology.’ South Asian women tended to possess less confidence and assertiveness, possibly because of their cultural background. Two female medical students experienced both racism and sexism: (#1) ‘Most of the people here come from redneck communities, all farming White communities, where they have never seen any coloured people. They do not know what to expect. The patients here ask me a lot of very silly questions. They assume I can’t be in medical school and that I must be a nurse or an orderly. A lot of people ask me nursing-type questions – “I need a bedpan. I need blah-blah-blah.” I tell them, “I don’t do that, I am a medical student. I am training to become a doctor.” I think because I am woman as well.’ (#2) ‘I had trouble with pediatrics rotation because I am quiet and humble, polite and well-behaved, and I don’t show off.

Peer Group Interactions

107

The medical culture requires people who are extroverts, assertive … I never show off and I have a lot of trouble verbalizing. It’s a hard world out there with two blows against you – you are a woman and you are a minority. You have to deal with a lot of stuff when you become a doctor.’ Since they have seldom been exposed to people of colour, some patients in community hospitals presume that women of colour simply cannot be doctors and can only be nurses. These patients resent being treated by a South Asian female. Intern #2 was less aggressive and was therefore presumed to be less competent and less capable. She added that male students were sometimes asked to confirm her prognoses. Some interviewees thought that gender contributed to the silencing of minority students in classrooms. White male students generally ‘overrule female students,’ ‘take over the conversation,’ and ‘interrupt female students,’ especially in small-group discussions. In seminars, males were ‘challenging [female minority students] in observations made,’ ‘making fun’ of them, and putting them down in ‘competitive’ seminars. Some White students portrayed themselves as intelligent and articulate when many are not – especially ironic when their writing skills are poor. Minority peers see this bluster as a ‘real facade.’ South Asian women in North America are perceived as exotic. This trivializes them; thus ‘de-humanized,’ they live ‘in a vacuum, in a state of constant facelessness’ (Bannerji 1993, 145). The long history of colonialism and the neocolonial status of South Asian countries continue to be potent ideological forces that relegate women of colour to the lowest positions. South Asian women have been subject to stereotypes relating, for example, to ‘passivity, docility, silence, illiteracy, uncleanliness, smell of curry and fertility’ (ibid., 147). These images enable the ruling apparatus to keep ‘objects’ of colour in their allocated place. ‘The institutional climate … is obviously chilly, if not chillier, for women … of diverse races’ (MadhavaRau 1995, 315). Drawing from her experiences in academe. Moghissi (1994, 223) sums up gender bias: ‘For sexist and misogynist attitudes and practices … most intellectuals suffer from a “cognitive incapacity,” to borrow from Anthony Appiah’s term, to recognize racism, particularly their own racism. Underlying the notion of “excellence” in such cases is the belief that being qualified and being coloured and/or female are mutually exclusive.’ Conclusion All forty interviewees told me they experienced racism in their interactions with peers in various contexts. Although most persisted in their

108

Integrative Antiracism

academic careers, some thought of transferring to more congenial universities. Some told me that destructive peer group interactions hurt their academic performance. ‘Perceptions of racial prejudice and discrimination on campus and in the classroom are expected to have a direct impact on withdrawal decisions, while at the same time affecting a student’s academic performance and his or her social and academic experiences at the institution’ (Cabrera et al. 1999, 139). These South Asian students had to struggle to both survive daily life at the university and to justify their right to exist. Universities should admit more minority students and hire more minority faculty (see chapter 8). Antiracism training should be available for students, faculty, and staff. More ethnocultural activities are needed on campus; more minority representation on campus newspapers is also necessary. Both changes will publicize the cause of minority students and help racists unlearn racism. The result will be a more congenial campus atmosphere for all students.

6 Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

In this chapter I examine the impact of a Eurocentric curriculum at the university. Through the eyes of South Asian students and instructors, I explore the characteristics of the hidden curriculum as it is conveyed in texts and discourses. The interviewees describe how the hidden curriculum produces and reproduces inequalities of race, class, and gender. This chapter also discusses the resistance of mainstream students to learning about minority issues, and the lack of administrative support for such learning. A curriculum that instructors teach without thoroughly understanding it must be investigated and interrogated. Doing so will lift the veil from what some of the people involved have implicitly agreed not to see. It is important to understand that university curricula can reproduce racism. The norms and values of educational institutions eventually make their way into society. One of the most difficult tasks is to recognize racism in the curriculum as text and as discourse. As texts1 or syllabi, the hidden curriculum pervades most disciplines, including history, literature, social studies, geography, and science (Henry et al. 2000, 234). Discourse refers to biased interpretations of course materials that infiltrate the experiences of minority students. It also includes teachers’ values and assumptions and the general class environment. English literature may exclude the perspectives of ‘Oriental’ poets and novelists. In history even today, despite efforts on a ‘subdued scale’ (Celik 1996, 202–5) to deconstruct the canon along ethnic lines (Said 1986, 44–64), bias in curricula is clear in textbooks. Historical accounts reflect the perspectives of those who author them; ‘those who tell the story, describe the events and interpret them’ (Henry et al. 2000, 234).

110

Integrative Antiracism

In Canadian academe, early narratives of people of colour very often begin with the ‘discovery’ of them by Europeans. More recent historians have challenged the view that Christopher Columbus was a ‘pioneer of progress.’ Instead, they charge him with ‘grand theft, genocide, racism, initiating the destruction of culture, rape, torture and maiming of indigenous peoples’ (Schlesinger 1992, 16–23). Americans of Spanish descent ‘are torn between pride in the Hispanic heritage and romantic identifications with indigenous Indian traditions’ (ibid., 16). Many older Latinos may view the Spanish Conquest as heralding civilization and religion; in contrast, the young tend to see it as an atrocity (ibid., 17). Many historians continue to see the development of human society in terms of Euro-American legal, political, and economic systems. According to this approach, European culture is ‘superior.’ This ethnocentric perspective often permeates texts, which then play down indigenous views. This can inferiorize and even marginalize minority students. Antiracist educators and activists in Canada, the United States, and Britain point out that academic disciplines still tend to reinforce racist attitudes through their curricula (Lee 1985; Brandt 1986). For example, literary texts such as Shakespeare’s Merchant of Venice 2 and Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn,3 whatever the writers’ intentions, use racist language and suggest representations and ideologies that may harm minority students (Lee 1985). These works raise the ‘important question of how textual interpretations are produced, authorized and sustained’ (Simon 1992, 102). Challenges to the literary canon have led to the questioning of ‘the appropriateness of The Merchant of Venice for inclusion in public school curriculum’ (ibid., 103). Some curricular perspectives still do not consider the art, history, literature, music, and technologies of Canada’s Native peoples as a part of either history or current realities (Doxtator 2000). Instead, they look on Native culture as ‘prehistoric’ or ‘primitive,’ or they contend that it is about ‘wildmen’ and ‘ancient ancestors’ (ibid. , 173). Such a perspective encourages students’ alienation and indifference towards minority cultures. Doxtator asserts that ‘academic disciplines still have great difficulty accepting Indian art, history, literature, music and technology as art, history, literature and technology without first placing it in an anthropological context.’ Until very recently, histories of Black slavery, of Native children confined to residential schools, and of differential policies towards Chinese4 and South Asian immigrants received minimal attention in

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

111

high schools and universities. Very often, educators do not consider the social, political, and cultural backgrounds of the texts’ authors, nor do they consider students’ diverse perspectives on those texts. A Eurocentric curriculum affects minority students (Lee 1985; Dei et al. 1997). The Dei study on dropout rates among Black students in Toronto documents how the total absence of references to Black history in curricula led to massive disengagement from school (ibid., 138). One government report (Four-Level Government … 1992) indicates that biased, exclusionist, and Eurocentric curricula affect students’ identities. When Eurocentric knowledge is reproduced in classrooms through curricula and teaching practices, this perpetuates racist attitudes among mainstream students and faculty (Solomon 1992). In my study, thirty-two students found the curriculum biased; eight – all science students – thought it balanced and objective. Most considered the curriculum obsessively Eurocentric and demeaning as well as sometimes blatantly ‘wrong,’ especially with regard to minority cultures. The following patterns emerged from the data: deafening silences, dissatisfaction with course content, the exclusion or absence of antiracism issues, omission of histories of people of colour, a monocultural focus, the marginalization of minority students, disregard of minority perspectives, and criticism of the ‘Race and Racism’ course. Deafening Silences Two students reported a ‘deafening silence’ (Margolis and Romero 1998, 19) in history classes about the genocide of Canada’s Native people (Dickason 1992). Any references they did hear were not part of the curriculum; they were encountered in other courses. (#1) ‘We are taught a pretty Eurocentric curriculum. What you learn and even the history is not very critical, especially about the racist past. It is coming in more but it is usually set apart in elective courses. You hear about how the Native Indians were used as guides but you seldom hear about the hundreds and thousands who were massacred. You hear about the Chinese immigrants helping to build the railroad but you don’t hear about exclusionary acts of racism or how they were badly treated.’ (#2) ‘I am not happy with antiracism course content. The subtle form of racism is built into our courses for sure. Just the whole perspective. Not overt but everything is Western perspective and all other perspectives are left out. In women’s studies, even aboriginal issues are not considered. The normal perspective is Western. But that is not everybody’s perspective.’

112

Integrative Antiracism

These students were echoing the recurring theme of Eurocentrism. As student #1 pointed out, race, class, and gender issues are still taught in ‘special’ courses rather than in mainstream curricula. Furthermore, historical references ignore the contributions of Native peoples and early immigrants (Dua 2000). Student #2 expressed dissatisfaction with the Eurocentric course content and the curriculum’s subtle racism, which excluded other perspectives. The deafening silences of the hidden curriculum are obvious in these comments. Margolis and Romero (1998) suggest that because indigenous scholars are ignored and because racism in curricula is never exposed, graduate programs are excessively hierarchical. As a consequence, at predominantly White universities, graduate students of colour are hindered from entering teaching/research positions; they also face limited publishing chances and reduced professional recognition. Also, the hidden curriculum tends to cause students to conform to norms that downplay indigenous research projects and perspectives. Even in science subjects, there is little mention of discoveries and inventions by people of colour. Most discussions relating to both are seeded with distortions, omissions, and misleading implications rather than with actual falsehoods. Omission allows people who write, edit, or purchase textbooks to avoid controversy. In this study I uncovered racist practices in terms of both text and discourse. Most participants told me they were dissatisfied with the curriculum and uncomfortable in classroom discussions when minority issues were raised. Dissatisfaction with Course Content Two students told me they were unhappy with the antiracism content of courses and that there wasn’t enough discussion about the topic. (#1) ‘I am not content with course content on antiracist issues. It is done in a very wishy-washy way. You learn about race. But there isn’t enough discussion about race issues. The way it is done is that it is happening somewhere else and not in Canada. They get upset when you say that racism exists in Canada. The Africville incident in Halifax on film shown in class was reacted to with horror – as if such an incident could never take place in Canada.’5 (#2) ‘They do not deal with racism that much. They teach us to be sensitive to other cultures. But they don’t teach us how to deal with racist comments. That should be included especially in this

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

113

small town where you will come across it at some point. Yes, it would be nice if they did – on this touchy topic.’ Student #1’s comment suggests that mainstream students did not want to face up to racism. Furthermore, both students’ comments on the inadequate course content on the ‘touchy topic’ of racism further suggest a Eurocentric bias. Their observations also suggest that institutional racism exists (Carmichael and Hamilton 1967), in the sense that those in power at the university have applied that power to establish a Eurocentric curriculum. Equity policies in most universities call for a balanced curriculum based on antiracism guidelines; even so, many course outlines reflect professors’ preconceptions. Most mainstream professors at this university have implemented a Eurocentric curriculum that is reinforcing racist practices and thereby disadvantaging minority students. Class discussions centre on mainstream topics and pay little attention to indigenous and immigrant issues. A Eurocentric curriculum sustains ethnocentric perspectives. Exclusion/Absence of Antiracist Issues One student saw the exclusion of antiracist issues as a deterrent to insight. She wanted antiracist perspectives to be a part of the curriculum and more readily available in most curricula: ‘There is no content on antiracist issues. It should be brought up all the time in classroom teaching. I feel that in the medical culture, many of the students do not have an inkling of an idea of what they are going to face in the real world situation and I felt that way about issues about women, minority issues, issues of sexuality or disability. These issues should be integrated into the curriculum and not be optional or voluntary courses.’ Notwithstanding some efforts to disseminate information about diversity and difference, she considered the curriculum inadequate to prepare medical students for the real world. Some interviewees were ambivalent about integrating antiracist issues into the curriculum. Some wanted to see this done; others worried about the consequences of imposing discussion of these sensitive issues. Three students thought that antiracism courses should be mandatory. (#1) ‘Antiracism courses should be made compulsory because students will be more aware of racism, especially in this university.’ ( #2) ‘There should be more courses on race and racism and they should be made compulsory. If you ignore it, then people will assume that it has never existed and that it has gone away. Racism is wrong – it is damaging and it

114

Integrative Antiracism

certainly does exist.’ (#3) ‘Antiracism issues should be taught after you have acquired the basics. Cultural awareness should be a part of the curriculum. That will be an interesting course.’ A mandatory course on racism would compel students to look closely at minority issues. Two law students wanted racism taught in more depth, and wanted it to be part of the curriculum with specific reference to the legal system. (#1) ‘In class, it [racism] should be touched on maybe more in depth. What we are taught is that we are different and that we should not impose on other people our Western values especially when we go into a developing Third World setting. There should be more antiracism issues in the curriculum, since there isn’t enough in the legal system. There should be more issues and more subjects on the topic.’ (#2) ‘They don’t talk about racism at all in law courses. If you want to talk about it you take racism as a course. And it is not incorporated. We learned a little bit about it here and there. It is not brought up enough. Students bring it up but do not discuss it. It is definitely not mentioned. Especially in law there are a lot of issues concerning decisions made by judges in court, but they are not emphasized and brought up. People just know that these things exist and people just go on. I don’t know how much impact it would have on the legal practice.’ When race, class, or gender prejudice enters legal decision-making, wrongful convictions are more likely, and so are harsher sentences for indigenous people and immigrants. Prejudice based on cultural differences can harm innocent people of colour (Razack 1998). Because most judges, lawyers, and lawmakers are White, cultural difference ‘can be a mitigating factor in sentencing’ (ibid., 19). An emphasis in legal courses on the interlocking systems of oppression of race, class, and gender could help future lawyers avoid such errors. Tangential references to racism are encountered in the formal curricula of many sciences. One student felt that science disciplines sometimes limit discussions of racism: ‘In the sciences we simply touch upon antiracism issues as in abnormal psychology. We are told that the diagnosis could go wrong because of the cultural perspective they are coming from. For example, voodoo magic would be considered abnormal and not a cultural trait of a society. That is all. To a great extent we are limited because of the subject matter. Other science subjects do not raise the issue of racism at all.’ In stereotyping, a strategy called ‘splitting’ (Hall 1997b, 258) divides the normal and abnormal into acceptable and unacceptable catego-

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

115

ries respectively. Stereotypes are unchangeable within these categories, which represent symbolic boundaries. For a more complete analysis of ‘voodoo magic,’ the above-mentioned course should be incorporating readings and lectures on cross-cultural behaviours; this would enable students to understand and grapple with stereotypes. Other interviewees did not want antiracism issues imposed on students. (#1) ‘You can’t force an issue on someone. It should be an interest course. Sensitivity training is only a facade to be politically correct. If someone is racist they should just tell you not to be polite about it.’ (#2) ‘Antiracism issues should not be made compulsory. What is the issue? We don’t need to study it. Again, students will avoid elective courses on antiracism. Antiracism courses will only introduce the problem. Otherwise we are blissfully ignorant.’ These participants’ views fit within the discourse of denial that sees racism as not a problem in universities (Henry et al. 2000). Some students felt that even to acknowledge racism was painful; thus, they preferred to deny it. For them, evading the problem and/or not thinking about it were coping mechanisms. These students sensed that activating the issue might worsen the situation at the university by fuelling a racist backlash. Omission of Histories of People of Colour One student discussed her professor’s reaction when she challenged her about a text discussed in class: ‘There is an absence of our histories and issues in the curriculum. In class you are not told to shut up or anything, but silence is almost worse. I can remember countless times that I would mention that I thought that a classic English text was racist, or a great film. The teacher would give me this blank stare, there would be a minute of silence and then the class would continue. I was silenced.’ In this course’s content, there was ‘deafening silence’ on minority contributions and histories. Even in classroom discussions, mainstream professors and students overlooked the issue of racism when it was brought up. A mainstream law professor remarked during my conversation with her: ‘Many times during class discussions, I deliberately do not get into hot waters by raising controversial issues, especially those related to racism.’ Sometimes even minority faculty evade issues of racism in classroom discussions. The omission of histories of people of colour and silence in classrooms may make people feel like they are less than full participants at the university.

116

Integrative Antiracism

Monocultural Focus One student talked about the monocultural focus in classroom discussions of Victorian and Romantic literary texts. She commented that the professor did not do enough to portray the perspective of minorities in English literature. In her view, he could have elaborated on the contents of the narratives in order to provide a richer and more diverse perspective on the texts. Omissions in analysis help downplay the presence of minorities presence in classrooms: In English class, the professor would teach modern British literature. He would teach it from the viewpoints and the ideologies that were current at that time. You know, in the Victorian and the Romantic age. Basically in the twentieth century there was the notion that Britain was everything. So the novels have that sense of being White and Eurocentric and any person of a different ethnicity is asserted as being peculiar objects in a foreign country, oriental and really intriguing. Our profs didn’t take time to talk specifically about the way this character is portrayed. They basically stuck with the scope of what was expected of them to teach and did not touch on the fact that there was another perspective. Out of the exploits of the soldiers in colonial India, there is the representation of this poor beautiful Indian maiden who is taken advantage of by a protagonist British soldier. He falls in love with her because she is so beautiful and uses her as a sort of a sidekick while he is sorting out his problems. He comes across as a problem child who could not put two and two together. The character of that Indian girl really bothered me in the book but nothing was really said about her representation in the book because it was a minor episode. That’s expected in the literature at that time and I guess the prof just taught it. He could have elaborated and analysed the episode. If I was teaching that book I would have drawn attention to the fact that ‘Look at how the character is being represented and what does it tell us about ideologies that were prevalent at that time?’ Because if you don’t do that then you are just blind to see the representation from another perspective.

This anecdote indicates the presence of curriculum bias; it also highlights the deafening silence of minority imagery. The student perceived the professor as failing to draw out the local perspective in colonial India. She thought he was typecasting the dominant ideology and teaching the story solely from the vantage point of the ruling class. According to her, leaving out the perspective seemed a gross error.

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

117

In this situation, sorely lacking was ‘a question[ing] of Eurocentric knowledge as the only valid way of knowing’ (Dei, in Dei et al. 2000b, 70). Furthermore, the professor was failing to draw out the novel’s ideology as well as any indigenous modes of representation. ‘Insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ often have diverse perspectives on the same proceedings, and both points of view are needed to capture overall societal and historical realities (Merton 1972, 9–47). Perhaps the professor lacked the intellectual and analytical tools to interrogate the representations of British and Indian characters in the novel. As the student was implying, a re-representing, re-reading, re-thinking, and re-conceptualizing of Anglo-Saxon modes of interpreting themes can uncover multiple perspectives and interpretations of any text. Moreover, a ‘decolonizing’ (Fanon 1967) of the human mind – a historical process that contributes to changes in the social order – can bring into question colonialism, its aftermath, and the continued devaluation of the knowledges of subordinate groups. Marginalization of Minority Students An instructor expected one student to explain matters relating to developing countries in classroom discussions. The assumption that she ought to be knowledgeable – an assumption that was part of the hidden curriculum – made her feel marginalized: ‘Racism is not really brought up. Our history is determined at present. I don’t hear about India. It is hard to say in economics. We talk about developing countries and it depends on the issues we talk about. I took a course on Hinduism and every time he talked about a Hindu god or a myth, he would look at us expecting us to comment on it. But we are all the same and we are all learning. What if I was a Christian or a Muslim? What if I did not know anything? He was just making the assumption that I knew.’ The instructor expected her to explain religions with which she was unfamiliar. The professor was oblivious to the religious diversity of South Asian students and assumed that she was knowledgeable about her religion, which was Hinduism. This placed her in an embarrassing position. Structured ignorance ‘acknowledges that the world can look quite different to individuals depending on their position in the social structure’ (McVeigh 2004). A Disregard of the Minority Perspective Even in sociology, the course content completely disregards the minority perspective. One student explained: ‘In sociology they were outright

118

Integrative Antiracism

racist in the book. Some portions. I was really upset. There were studies referred to which indicated that Whites are superior and that Blacks are inferior. I thought they were very racist. In Canada, studies are being done to promote racism, like Rushton’s. They should tell us that it is wrong, whereas they just taught it. They were racists. In the course content, they take dominant views and they don’t take minority views. Sociology is very racist as the lectures are based on “Canadian culture.” It is a very neglecting view and we need to consider other views as well.’ In sociology one would expect balance between Western and indigenous perspectives; instead, there were extreme Eurocentric points of reference that deserved questioning but did not receive it. Moreover, mainstream professors’ non-critiquing of the dominant view helped keep alive the Eurocentric curriculum. The human rights antiracism coordinator on campus reported: ‘Regarding curriculum, we have had complaints about the course not covering certain issues. Students complain of falsehoods being taught in classrooms. In a development course on India, an Indian student reported that the prof was teaching what happened in the 50s – so outdated. Being an Indian, this student knew that there were more modern theories that needed to be looked into.’ The coordinator believes this student’s report indicated an appallingly Eurocentric curriculum and that little was being done to correct the situation. Mainstream faculty teaching development courses were not keeping abreast of rapid changes in the Third World. I conclude that only minority faculty should teach the subject6 and that the curriculum needs updating and revamping. The above comments suggest that the formal curriculum at this university is racist. The education system and the local economy may well reproduce this racism. A clear example relating to classroom discussions is the common reference to scientific theories of ‘race’ that depict Whites as more intelligent than Blacks and they use the Bell Curve to prove as much.7 Many faculty regard curriculum as sacrosanct and refuse to be told what or how to teach. This strongly suggests how the Eurocentric biases of most present-day university curricula have been endorsed (Razack 1998; Fleras 1996). Critique of ‘Race and Racism’ Course Three South Asian students thought the ‘Race and Racism’ course on campus ought to be more practice-oriented and less historical in em-

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

119

phasis. The course had to not only label issues but also consider the views of White participants. (#1) ‘More on race has to be taught in the race and racism course. Here it is very theoretical. We have to be taught how it can be applied in everyday life. We are doing the history of tea and colonization and how the countries were divided and about the East India Company. The emphasis is more on the historical aspects rather than practical applications in everyday life.’ (#2) ‘Even in the ‘Race and Racism’ course, issues are merely defined. So it basically gives a name for your personal experiences. Generally as a community, White people suppress minorities in the real world and this university is not the real world.’ (#3) ‘Even in the “Race and Racism” course, the White students’ perspectives need to be taken into account. They should not be imposed and everyone’s opinion should be taken into consideration. It is a sensitive topic and the prof should not try to push them away instead of making them understand.’ In my view, the course should balance theory and practice to enable minority students to cope with real issues. Furthermore, class discussions should sensitize all mainstream students to help them avoid the pitfalls of racist behaviour. Minority instructors should initially give credence even to the racist views of students taking the course, and then progressively make them realize the damage that racism can do to their peers. Clearly, teaching about racism can be a complex task. For this reason, teachers should be aware of the subtle nuances of student feedback. Minority Professors’ Views Several faculty of colour at Canadian universities have claimed that their institutions have not recognized their background, history, or presence on campus (Carty 1991; James 1994; Bannerji 1991b; St Lewis 1996). Carty (1991, 19) affirms as a woman of colour: ‘There is little difference between what we experience on the streets as Black women and the experiences that we have inside the university … The university’s commonsense appeal to reason and science may take the rough edges off or sediment the particular behaviour but the impact is no less severe.’ Faculty of colour are socially positioned in a way that displays a set of meanings of a culturally represented system. These sets of meanings include societal values that are detrimental to their well-being as educators. James (1994, 19) maintains: ‘That I am a professor does not make me immune to the stereotypes and concomitant issues and problems

120

Integrative Antiracism

that go along with being a racial minority and a Black person in particular in this society.’ Commenting on her teaching experience as a person of colour, Bannerji (1991b, 72) writes: ‘The perception of the students is not neutral – it calls for responses from them and even decisions. I am an exception in the universities … I am meant for another kind of work – but nonetheless I am in the classroom … I am authority.’ St Lewis (1996, 28) observes: ‘The colour of my skin drives the engine of my public life. It defines relationships and sets out possibilities. Attitudes and beliefs make it real.’ I interviewed a science professor of colour, who affirmed that his mathematical formulae had not been satisfactorily credited: ‘In my department, due to my status as a professor of colour, I am the underdog and I continue to be so. Even though the sciences try to more objective than the arts, I have seen racism rampant in the form of colleagues not giving proper credits or citations to minority faculty when a new formula is discovered.’ A recipient of several prestigious awards, this professor has experienced non-recognition for his work because of racism among mainstream colleagues and students. Campus journals and newspapers in some universities make little comment on professors of colour who have won awards. A South Asian instructor in the life sciences discussed how biased support staff can hamper or delay work: ‘Support staff can often be barriers for success for those who are not mainstream. For example, a secretary who has a bias can easily delay work on the excuse that he or she has more urgent things to do, or do it poorly so it generates more work for the faculty member. Or a junior staff can ‘lose’ items.’ This is an example of subtle racism of the sort that can undermine the success and credibility of minority faculty. Some White staff know how to hurt minority instructors in devious ways. An arts professor points out that mistakes by minority faculty have been known to receive undue attention: ‘Even in departments where diversity is supposed to be celebrated, faculty of colour are not recognized or merit given to their credentials. A single mistake committed is magnified tenfold and spread around the department among all the rest of the faculty members. I find the attitude of White faculty members in this department to be the most racist on campus.’ A minority professor commented on the lack of intellectualism and globalization in the arts: ‘There was not enough diversity in courses such as economic development. Hardly a course or two on international perspectives. If sociology is to grow, it has to depend on other countries.

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

121

Sociology is more North American-centred, and the kind of orientation next door [in the United States] is very dominant. It is appalling. We need to look beyond our boundaries and not exclusively confine ourselves in our own environment. Ignorance about other countries and the resistance to reading about other minority groups is a lack of basic education. They are failing to discover and rediscover themselves. I sympathize with the dominant faculty who will stay so until such time they realize that intellectualism is a global phenomenon.’ Sociology in many Canadian universities is still American-centred; a global perspective would open it up. Few mainstream students on the campus we are studying show much interest in the few courses on minorities that are offered. Resistance by Mainstream Students to Courses on Minority Issues This study found that White students resist courses on minority issues. Courses on Native, Black, and Asian issues that challenge existing canons have met a range of reactions from mainstream students, from polite indifference, disdain, and arrogance to open hostility. In a revealing study of fourteen Canadian minority professors hired to teach antiracism and/or indigenous perspectives, Dua and Lawrence (2000, 107) discussed this sort of resistance. They found that these people faced ‘tremendous challenges and difficulties.’ Besides experiencing systemic discrimination in their careers and personal lives, they faced hostility from mainstream students. These responses ranged from sticking to Eurocentric course materials to overt anger at lectures that focused on racism or colonialism. On this campus, most White students were reluctant to learn about or discuss antiracism. Minority faculty told me that mainstream students did not give their full attention to the lecture and were rude and indifferent to professors of colour. (#1) ‘In class, when antiracism issues are taught, students are rude. They start talking and do not pay attention to the professor in the sociology class. My women’s studies was the only class that dealt with race, class and gender in any kind of meaningful way.’ (#2) ‘When I was discussing a Third World topic in the class, this White student openly made the remark that it was a waste of time going into a discussion on the topic since none of the students had anything to say about it. She walked out of the class, which made me feel humiliated. When I talked to her about it before the next class, she was blatantly

122

Integrative Antiracism

rude and said that it was the tuition fees of students that paid my salary and that I should not be wasting students’ time in pursuing discussions that were of little interest to them.’ In some arts courses, minority professors encountered overt hostility from mainstream students when discussing racism. Some White students may view faculty of colour as ‘extreme’ in their perspectives. As a consequence, they may disregard or reject the views of minority professors. It is possible that White students exhibit hostility towards minority professors ‘for having taken away their jobs.’ This reaction creates a weird dynamic between the White student and the professor of colour: the former exhibits a form of power over the latter. Minority faculty may also bear ‘students’ sense of guilt’ (ibid.). Most instructors reported negative responses to issues of White hegemony in the curriculum; some students displayed patronizing attitudes to how courses were taught. A teaching assistant told me that an instructor was ‘corrected’ on her lecture content in the women’s studies course. The White student interrupted the class and gave her own ‘superior’ and racist interpretation on the topic of violence against women in the developing world. Another form of devalidation occurs when students blame minority professors for presenting a ‘biased curriculum’ or when the syllabus contains too many readings from people of colour or Native people (ibid.). Some mainstream students perceive the ‘biased curriculum’ as a means of forcing indigenous cultures down their throats. One White student, voicing the opinion of several peers, told me: ‘I didn’t think this course was going to have such a strong focus on Native Indian issues’ – this, even though it contained only a few readings on indigenous peoples. Accusations of a biased curriculum surface when White students complain about unsafe classrooms, negative course content, unfair marking, and improper teaching by minority professors (ibid., 108). Many instructors – especially those with non-Canadian accents – experienced overt forms of racism from White students. For example, they received hate stares, were accused of incompetence, and generally were treated with hostility. They usually responded with kindness and gentleness – with little result, because the behaviour persisted behind their backs. Most minority professors realized that White students have considerable power within the institution. A South Asian faculty member told me: ‘White students have the power to destabilize the position of a minority faculty member. They can easily complain about the teaching, marking,

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

123

or course content and create an atmosphere that is not conducive to a positive work environment for the minority faculty member.’ Minority faculty encounter more scrutiny, and this makes them more vulnerable than their White colleagues if they become involved in a controversy. Two factors are crucial in theorizing about racialized classrooms (ibid., 109). First, academe marginalizes scholarship about antiracism and indigenous subjects, and second, departments and classrooms are sites of power reflecting institutional racism. Some minority instructors told me they had to cover too much material in too short a time. In some courses they had to cover histories of colonialism and racism spanning more than five hundred years that were deeply entrenched in Western perspectives. Lectures had to deal with this entire period and with class and gender issues as well. Yet the department considered one course in these areas sufficient (ibid.). The same teachers found that antiracism and indigenous materials were difficult to teach in women’s studies departments: students and colleagues feared that such teaching would undermine the study of ‘women’ (ibid., 110). One faculty member observed a strong focus in the curriculum on empowering women in a changing society, but no critique of the concept of Whiteness, which further silenced minority instructors and minority issues. A South Asian faculty member in this study told me: ‘It was extremely difficult for me to discuss race issues in class. There were constant interruptions and interference among the students in the classroom situation. Discussions sometimes fell flat and did not take off. There was no enthusiasm among the students to discuss racism as an issue. I had to do all the talking many a time. Those who participated in the discussion stated that there was no racism on campus and were in a constant state of denial.’ Uninterested students were able to drop the course, and numbers slowly went down. Some students called the instructor too ‘harsh’ or claimed that she was calling mainstream students ‘racists.’ Most minority teachers, both in the sciences and in the arts, received poor evaluations. As reasons why, they cited their marginal status and their non-Canadian accents. In many universities, standardized testing procedures are flawed with the result that minority members are consistently evaluated lower than their White peers. Barbara Kisilevsky (2001, 2) notes: ‘There are problems related to systemic biases currently inherent in student/faculty evaluations (for example, members of equity seeking groups are systematically rated lower). Each component of the [Evaluation Standard Test] – conduct, distribution, instrument, bias –

124

Integrative Antiracism

interacts with every other component resulting in a web of confusion about what the results mean.’ This testing, which may well be highly problematic, can cause faculty great stress. It may delay or prevent renewals and/or promotions. Most of the faculty I interviewed felt that they had to work twice as hard and go the extra mile in teaching, supervision, and publishing; even so, they received poor evaluations from White students. Most felt that they could not exert their full authority as faculty. Lack of Administrative Support for Minority Faculty Most of the minority faculty I interviewed received very little administrative support from colleagues, department chairs, and deans compared to their White counterparts. Wilson (1989, 85–97) writes: ‘Women Ph.D.s – and to a lesser extent administrators – are growing as a proportion of all Ph.D.s, but there will be required the continued removal of burdens of sexism, lower salaries and career impediments to achieve parity for women in general, and women of color in particular, in academic administration.’ Minority professors lack administrative support because there are few minority staff in the administration (ibid.). Mainstream administrators often do not understand or are indifferent towards minority instructors (Dua and Lawrence 2000, 114). Minority personnel may receive positions in the institution, but they have little authority. Many instructors find themselves blamed for the racism they encounter in classrooms. All the minority faculty I interviewed told me their overall performance was evaluated rigorously and that they received no protection from student racism. One of them commented: ‘I think there is something wrong with the evaluation criteria. The questions they ask – like “What do you think of the material?” – only could be asked by someone who knows what the material contains. But if you ask an ignorant person who has read little or nothing about the material – but has the privilege of being asked his or her opinion – it is obviously misleading and erroneous. There were certain questions which were invalid, and there were irrelevant answers given. They need to ask someone who knows. … Students who did not fare well wrote negative comments to give vent to their frustration and anger. The student evaluations did affect me as the administration did take those evaluations seriously. Unfortunate – but they did. They should not take it in blind faith. To get a student to evaluate a teacher is based on a very nasty premise. It is like asking the chil-

Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members

125

dren to evaluate their parents … It is like asking patients to evaluate their doctors – those who know little or nothing about medicine. They pamper the students by democratizing the evaluation process, which is invalid, and use it against a professor. Probably it did affect my promotion to full professorship.’ Minority faculty are extremely vulnerable if students evaluate them prejudicially. Student evaluations may well be erroneous, yet administrators often accept them anyway when it comes to promotions. One minority professor observed: ‘The first major thing that struck me as a minority faculty was at the time of my first promotion. There were two of us who started at the same time, same rank and same promotion and my résumé was definitely not less than his, in fact better. But we had different personalities, different backgrounds and maybe different evaluations. This guy gets promoted and I don’t.’ When promotions relate solely to an instructor’s dominant status and erroneous evaluations, we need to question such ‘unearned privilege’ (McIntosh 1989). Another minority instructor reported a lack of encouragement and funding for research projects on non-Canadian topics: ‘Any research which is not Canadian oriented is not encouraged. They have to be more broadminded and not so narrow in their outlook. When I discussed this matter with the dean, he was unsympathetic. Is someone prepared to understand the agonizing experiences of “Others”? So when they could have their salaries intact by not doing anything, why should they take the trouble to understand what goes on in India? This is a shortcoming of the faculty and administration. Getting funding for Third World topics is another huge problem. With such little money available in the arts, acquiring grants for research is next to impossible. How can faculty carry on their research work when they don’t have enough financial backing? And publish we must to survive.’ Most instructors I interviewed felt the extra burden of organizing new courses and programs and counselling and supervising students of colour. The few minority faculty had the difficult task of helping students of colour who were facing racism; sometimes these same students accused them of failing to provide enough attention. Many students of colour were reluctant to approach White professors for fear of not being understood or not obtaining the appropriate guidance on Third World issues; so they went to minority instructors. Administrators rarely acknowledged the resultant stress and overburdening. New faculty and adjunct professors/instructors – especially women – often face these responsibilities, and when they teach about racism they

126

Integrative Antiracism

are evaluated more harshly. As a consequence, some departments experience the ‘revolving door’ syndrome (Trueba 1998, 76); that is, they repeatedly hire and then quickly let go of minority teachers. Typically the newcomers are rejected ‘without being counseled, mentored, assisted, supported and taught to be productive intellectuals like White faculty. In other words, ethnically different faculty were placed in a rather hostile environment and simply dismissed’ (ibid.). Some left the university to join more congenial environments; others were dismissed subject to the ‘revolving door syndrome’ (ibid.). The resulting ‘toning down’ of academic standards is not at the ‘heart of good pedagogy’ (Dua and Lawrence 2000, 116). Conclusion I recommend that minority issues such as antiracism and indigenous thought become formal parts of curriculum design. Antiracism, Third World, and immigrant issues, which often signify ‘difference,’ ‘viewpoints,’ and ‘outsider perspectives,’ require consideration. A curriculum that deals with race, class, and gender may reduce mainstream resistance to learning about minority issues. As well, full administrative support would improve the academic climate in many ways for all minority professors.

7 The Psychosocial Dimension

This chapter explores the social-psychological impact of racism in the lives of South Asian students in academe. I relate social-psychological processes to integrative antiracism theory’s notion of multiple, overlapping, and shifting identities. These negotiated identities emerge through the binary oppositions of traditional/modern, Indian/Canadian, Western/Third World, and advanced/backward. I examine the psychosocial experiences of South Asian students in terms of five processes: acculturative stress, identity crisis, cultural electrocution, the best of both worlds, and coping mechanisms. Acculturative Stress Acculturation (Berry 1997) is the psychological adjustment process involved in moving to a new culture. Berry incorporates cultural change, acculturation, and psychological acculturation into his integration framework. Cultural change is internal and takes place through dynamic internal events such as creativity and insight; acculturation is external and happens through cultural contacts; psychological acculturation involves a change in emotional qualities. The processes of adaptation transform the individual’s identity, values, attitudes, and behaviours. A two-dimensional model of acculturation addresses two issues: cultural maintenance, and contact and participation. Cultural maintenance relates to the extent to which ‘cultural identity and characteristics [are] considered to be important, and their maintenance strived for’ (ibid., 5). Contact and participation refer to how much individuals ‘become involved in other cultural groups or remain primarily among themselves’ (ibid.).

128

Integrative Antiracism

These two dimensions generate four acculturation strategies: assimilation, separation, integration, and marginalization (ibid.). Assimilation takes place when the migrant group fully adopts the cultural values of the dominant group. Separation (or segregation) occurs when there is little contact with the broader society. Integration involves maintaining cultural cohesiveness during the gradual process of becoming part of mainstream society. Marginalization takes place when confused identities within migrant groups prevent contact with dominant groups. In this study, thirty-four of the forty students I interviewed considered themselves caught between the majority culture and the minority one. South Asian students trying to integrate themselves experienced either acculturative stress or forms of identity crisis. Acculturative stress manifested itself as feelings of depression as the students tried to adjust to the host society. The next section looks at the following areas of stress: conflicting worlds, interpersonal relationships, being Brown and Indian, and living a double life. Conflicting Worlds One form of acculturative stress arose when people saw the students as neither fully Canadian nor fully South Asian, and/or as ‘freaks.’ Two students told me they considered themselves Canadian but that their White peers did not accept them as such. Feelings of rejection caused them pain. (#1) ‘I feel stress when I realize that I am neither 100 per cent Canadian nor 100 per cent Sri Lankan. Most of the time you consider yourself to be 100 per cent Canadian. In Canada, you are not considered to be a Canadian. In Sri Lanka they don’t consider me to be Sri Lankan at all. In both places they look at me like I am a freak. I don’t seem to have anything in common with Canadian or Sri Lankan people.’ (#2) ‘I did experience the feeling that I was caught between two cultures and do so now more with experience of racism. In India, I was considered a freak and a Canadian. When I came back I felt I was not a Canadian. You are not accepted anywhere and it is difficult to deal with. Part of me wants to go out and experience the other culture and part of me wants to keep my own culture. This causes a lot of stress in my life.’ These students’ comments highlight the acute pressure of living in conflicting worlds. Much of the stress they feel has arisen from their efforts to integrate into the host society. Perhaps they have underestimated the role of racism in inhibiting integration. Both students discussed the conflict they experienced once they realized they fitted into

The Psychosocial Dimension

129

neither society. Strangely, people often perceive minority groups or Others through a stereotypical image of the ‘Orient’ that is static, backward, inferior, and traditional (Said 1993). These images of ‘Orientalism’ produce discursive sites of contested meanings that may become locations for conflict. The comments of these two students point clearly to the tension between cultures as well as to the frictions that emerge in the struggle to be not too ‘South Asian’ and not too ‘Canadian.’ The students have violated these ‘symbolic boundaries’ (Hall 1997b, 236). Another student recounted being caught between cultures: ‘I feel I am caught between Canadian culture and Indian culture. Most Indians speak Punjabi and wear the Indian dress. My parents were brought up in the West and people always ask me a lot of questions, which is irritating. A lot of White students have never seen Indians before. I have dated only Indian boys.’ Questions about cultural differences were a constant source of frustration to this woman. This acculturative stress probably affected her interpersonal relationships. Possibly, she only dated Indian boys in order to avoid culture clash. Interpersonal Relationships The following student believed the two cultures incompatible, especially when it came to interpersonal relationships. She downplayed her culture, which caused her stress: ‘I feel some boys I meet are not my type – cultural as well. Caucasian guys do not have a clue of the dimension you are a part of. Even when White boys relate to me, I think, “You really don’t know me.” You have to come to Toronto [her home] to see the other Indian aspect of me, the submerged Indian culture. I know our two cultures are not compatible. This causes annoyance and irritation in my life.’ Interpersonal relationships are a crucial area of acculturation (Lee and Zhan 1998). This female student did not date White boys because she felt the two lifestyles would be incompatible. I suggest that this scenario may correspond to the dynamic between White men and women of colour that bell hooks discusses – to the ‘commodification of Otherness’ that offers ‘a new delight, more intense, more satisfying than normal ways of doing and feeling’ (hooks 1992, 21). These feelings become submerged in fantasies, ‘embedded in the secret (not so secret) deep structures of White supremacy’ (ibid.) – in structures that display a curious interest in the ‘primitive’ (ibid.). In these circumstances the woman’s sexuality becomes ‘a site of contestation’; the Other male seeks

130

Integrative Antiracism

‘to take over, consume, transform via the experience of pleasure’ (ibid.). Is it possible that this student was aware of White boys’ ‘desires for the ‘primitive’ or fantasies about the Other’ (ibid.)? That being so, was she therefore cautious in her interactions with them? Knowing that ‘difference can seduce’ and ‘transgress’ (ibid.), she kept her distance. Or perhaps her parents did not want her to date White boys. Being ‘Brown’ and ‘Indian’ One interviewee believed that minority identity surfaces in relation to being ‘Brown’ or ‘Indian.’ She tended to mingle more with her own Indian group but did not want to seem ‘stereotypically’ Indian. She contested the internal homogeneity of the category ‘Indian’ and felt she had acquired a more amalgamated culture. She accounted for the culture conflict in terms of a ‘feeling’ that depended on the type of group with which she was associating: ‘I think being caught between two cultures is a sort of feeling. I know I feel it when I am with different people. I am more Sri Lankan when I am with Sri Lankan people and more Canadian when I am with Canadian people. I have a more intellectual approach to Third World issues. I am “Brown” on the outside and “White” on the inside.’ Another student also felt the emotional push and pull between Brown and White. The minority culture she adhered to as a student was more Westernized than the ‘traditional’ Indian culture at home. However, some South Asian girls try to date within their own minority group. ‘Feelings’ about racism that are inexpressible and overwhelming have been described as ‘spirit injury’ (Wing and Merchan 1995), or as the ‘disregard for others whose lives qualitatively depend on our regard’ (Williams 1987). Spirit injury can wound the soul and even destroy ‘a way of life or … an entire culture’ (Wing and Merchan 1995, 516). Living a Double Life One student described cultural diversity among South Asians: ‘In this White university, I feel that I am living my culture in a different way, a sort of a double life that causes stress in my life. I am moving with a lot of Indians and here it is consistent with hanging around with a lot of Indian friends, going to Indian restaurants, and having parties with Indians. I also have a few Canadian friends. When I am at home, I do more traditional things – perhaps a little ceremony. I do traditional

The Psychosocial Dimension

131

dances and talk my language at home – not here. So here it is so isolated that you can’t do that. I feel that I can’t practice my traditional culture here on campus and I am more Westernized. Students normally tend to date within their own ethnic groups.’ Leading a ‘double life’ was making this student uneasy. Some female South Asian students tend to have two ways of life – one on campus and the other at home. Perhaps they think their ‘traditional’ ways unacceptable, even inferior to Western modes of life. They may find ‘more acceptance’ from White peers when they try to conform to dominant patterns. However, they prefer to date within their own ethnic group because they find more comfort and cultural acceptance. They probably have little contact with White boys or obtain less recognition from them. For one student I interviewed, the source of culture conflict was unclear. This confusion was evident in her interactions with other South Asians: ‘The centre of origin of the culture conflict is confusing. I am not comfortable, whether I am an Indian or a Canadian. This is gradually becoming negated. Indian boys are hesitant to date girls from other backgrounds. Indian boys do not typically consider me beautiful.’ Again, her comments centred on her bewilderment over culture conflict and dating practices. She cited her ‘average’ physical appearance.1 She felt she was gradually overcoming her feelings of inadequacy; at the same time, she felt that Indian or White boys had not accepted her. Her reserved nature was perhaps a contributing factor. Many South Asian students do not fully assimilate; they are struggling to integrate into the host culture. They are trying both to preserve aspects of their own culture and to participate in the dominant culture (Oetting and Beauvais 1991). Racism, which can cause identity crises, seems to be hindering their integration at this university (Berry 1997; Phinney 1990). Identity Crisis Phinney’s (1990) theory of ethnic identity can help us grasp the psychosocial impact of contradictions in the binary categories of traditional/ Indianized and modern/Canadianized on the lives of South Asian university students. Phinney proposes a three-stage model for the development of ethnic identity: unexamined, searched for, and achieved. In unexamined ethnic identity, the individual (typically an adolescent) has not yet explored ethnic identity; during this vulnerable phase in identity for-

132

Integrative Antiracism

mation, racism can have a strong impact. People who are not interested in their cultural heritage may possess a diffused ethnic identity. Adolescents who are strongly influenced by family and peers or by the larger society may foreclose ethnic identity (Phinney and Rosenthal 1992, 150). During ethnic identity search, the individual is negotiating his or her identity. Achieved ethnic identity enables a person to acquire knowledge of his or her own cultural heritage as well as a confident sense of self. One student experienced culture conflict through an identity crisis. As an adult she had to make choices about her values: Definitely I have experienced the crisis of being caught between two cultures. I guess, I mean, I know when that happened – sometime between high school and university. I did not feel it when I was younger. I don’t think I really suffered from it. I was not born with it – there was an entry point. You are also very aware that you are from an Indian background and are familiar with all the Indian things that happen in your life, which is a part of your identity. I think the crisis came as an adult – I have to choose what aspects of culture I am going to have in my life. It is really a choice – what aspects you want to keep and what aspects you don’t want to keep. So I think the identity crisis will be like, ‘What do I want to keep in my Indian culture and what is a part of who I am and what I believe?’ It’s not the way I live my life – what parts of the Canadian culture do I believe in, living in Canada, and what parts of it do I reject, and so on. In that sense, I prefer the value of my Indian culture, the customs, and so I think that the key to the crises is realizing that … it’s never going to be a 100 per cent this or a 100 per cent original that. Especially when you live in the city or in two or more cultures in that context. You have to live in a hybrid kind of a culture. You have to continually transform yourself within the culture you are in, and this can be really stressful.

An identity crisis generally involves ‘conflicts and contradictions posed by a minority status in society’ (ibid., 150). This correlates with Phinney’s second phase of ethnic identity search, during which the individual probes his or her identity (Phinney and Rosenthal 1992). There is usually a triggering experience or entry point – possibly a racist incident, an ethnic awareness program, or an incident relating to school or work (ibid.). For this student, the crisis emerged from a choice she had to make between two value systems. It seems that after her identity crisis, this student explored alternative beliefs and ways of life before accepting a ‘hybrid’ culture. Hybridiza-

The Psychosocial Dimension

133

tion involves ‘translating’ or ‘grafting’ more than one culture onto a body that is continuous, fluid, and sometimes turbulent (Minh-ha 1992). This ‘new ground in the making’ involves hard work (ibid., 138). The interviewee explained the ‘hybrid place’ as the place where one negotiates differences between cultures, where ‘borderlines’ always ‘cancel out,’ leading (one might say) to a ‘problematization of the insider–outsider position’ (ibid., 144). South Asian students who struggle to live in postcolonial hybrid spaces consider themselves outsiders relative to the dominant culture but insiders in their own group. At the same time, they experience disruptions of the ‘insider position’ within themselves. Minh-Ha (ibid., 140) asserts that ‘in the complex reality of postcoloniality it is therefore vital to assume one’s radical “impurity” and to recognize the necessity of speaking from a hybrid place.’ Developing an amalgam culture heightened tensions surrounding this student’s identity both inside and outside the group. The next interviewee felt caught between the two cultures. As with the earlier students, her conflict played out in interpersonal relationships: I have had this for sure – the feeling that I am caught between two cultures and that I am experiencing an identity crisis. I went to an international school back home. A lot of my views have changed. I have become more of a feminist now. I don’t know which culture to choose. The two cultures conflict with one another. I don’t think I can live in an Indian culture and live in that community again. I haven’t lived there for so long – like religion. It’s one of the things I have to resolve, like my beliefs and values. Like drinking or sex, should I do that or not do that? I have been brought up to believe that I have to be the good girl. I am not ready to have sex – but if I have, does it make me a bad girl? Everything I have lived so far is going to be a lie if I have gone out with a boy once. That’s the problem I have. If I think of the future, which I don’t want to think of. I don’t want to live a lie and will I be accepted for who I am? I have met subcontinent people and I have never gone out with them. I have only dated one German boy and we are just friends. I have no boyfriends – just the guilt issue and you freak out. I broke up and we are just good friends. That plays a huge part – you have to be comfortable with a guy.

South Asian youths may experience culture conflicts in social interactions with peers (Desai and Subramanian 2000, 54). Young women in particular face tensions relating to being ‘custodians’ of culture and

134

Integrative Antiracism

family values. Parents are anxious to socialize their children into traditional family norms and customs, especially through restrictions relating to clothes, social interactions, and – above all – the ‘Western’ practice of dating, which can lead to premarital sex and unwanted pregnancy. Most South Asian parents are adamant about dating and sex, no matter the pain they are inflicting on their girls. South Asian girls grow up feeling guilty and ashamed (about living a ‘lie,’ being a ‘bad girl’) when they even think about dating. Boys generally have more freedom, but despite this imbalance, confusion persists over dating practices. This inequality between the sexes may well have a strong impact on the integration of South Asian communities into Canadian society. One student expressed her pain over these matters. She seemed to be in the second stage of ethnic identity search (Phinney 1990) when she asked ‘Who am I?’ She questioned the roots of her identity – whether she was South Asian or Canadian. The search for an identity confused her and affected her relations with the opposite sex: I have experienced lots of identity crises. What am I? Am I an Indian or a Canadian? Half and half just because a lot of my habits, beliefs, and mannerisms come from India and the other half come from here. Popular culture and my friends shape me. Most of my friends are of Chinese origin because we share the same value system. The others are too Westernized and do not fit in. It has always been a struggle. I was not allowed to date till I was twenty-three. I was told that boys are bad and asked not to talk to them. I had guy friends but never dated. My mother broke up a crush a boy had on me. I don’t get too much attention from boys, maybe it’s a race thing. I look to the White community first and then look to the Indian community for boys. I am wary of Indian boys because they are spoiled rotten by their mothers and expect their wives to do all their cooking and cleaning and still have a job. Since I am a medical student, Indian families who are gold-diggers have started asking about me and my sister. The trend now is that my parents are going to introduce me to boys and we have had a couple of offers.

An arranged marriage may not involve the giving of dowry. Even so, this student views Indian boys and their families as highly materialistic. She and her parents have noted a sudden ‘undue interest’ in her medical profession. She is disgusted at the thought of marital alliances based on this sort of consideration. However, she has not dated anyone and has accepted a hybrid version of arranged marriage: she will get to know

The Psychosocial Dimension

135

the boy first and then decide about marriage. The breakdown of traditional practices such as arranged marriage has helped liberate minority women. The following student also expressed confusion over her identity. She believed her parents were open to her dating and marrying a White boy: ‘I am caught between two cultures and it depends on who I’m hanging out with. If I am with traditional Indian friends, then I feel a certain way and I feel that I am not as Indian as them. If I am with my Canadian non-minority friends there is always the difference that is brought up. And so I am caught between the two cultures. They ask you the stereotypical question – “Where are you from? Where are you really from?” I am not able to choose. With boys it has never been an issue. I have dated only friends. The difference is dwelled on because it is obvious. My parents say they would not mind if I married a White but they would mind if I, being a Hindu, married a Muslim or a Sikh.’ The stereotypical questions ‘Where are you from?’ and ‘Where are you really from?’ indicate that to some people, ‘Canadian’ means only White people and excludes people of colour. When people asked this student these questions, they were denying her what was rightfully hers – her birthright, her heritage, and her place in the host country (Shadd 1994). Shadd tells us that ‘except for the Native people, the rest of us are just immigrants anyway’ (ibid., 15). We should challenge the not so subtle ways that White students sanction their own power and privilege. This student’s parents probably would not mind if she married a White boy but did not want her to wed a Sikh or a Muslim. This is indicative of the intragroup biases found among minority groups, which are generally powerless in Canadian society; it also highlights the antagonism between religious groups in India. Resentments of this sort further complicate identity politics in Canadian society. The following student experienced an identity crisis. Although she was successful in her studies, racism and the pressure to stay slim brought about feelings of depression. To cope, she went for professional counselling and began taking medication: I had to go to professional counselors as I don’t cope with culture conflict, identity crises, and reactions to racism very well. I am hypersensitive and I walk around feeling very irritated. I spend a lot of the day very irritated. I go through the university journal and when I see nobody of colour there I feel very irritated. It’s just little things that I keep noticing and I feel paranoid about noticing. I walk around in this constant state of irritation. It is

136

Integrative Antiracism

worse now than in the first year. In the first year I was in a constant struggle to integrate. Now I don’t care but I feel very defenceless. I have never had problems with my work but I spend a lot of time irritated. Race is a big issue for me, more than sexism. I went to professional counsellors because I was diagnosed with chronic depression. I am under medication and have been for two years. The medication brings me up to a normal level and I don’t get irate and mean. If I get upset I say things and I am not able to cope with it. I go in and out of body image problems. My mom wants me to stay slim. I used to be very thin, then I started gaining weight. It bothers me and I will continuously be aware of it.

This comment exemplifies the ‘beauty myth,’ whereby women want to ‘embody’ the quality called ‘beauty,’ which men supposedly want to ‘possess’ (Wolf 2000, 302). From this perspective, beauty is a currency, just like gold, and perpetuates male dominance. Standards of beauty can be expressions of power relations and thus prescribe behaviour rather than appearance. Women often strive to ‘unnaturally compete for resources that men have appropriated for themselves’ (ibid., 302). The repercussions of the beauty myth can exhaust women and do them physical harm. These women need to struggle against the powerful forces of the beauty myth by learning to see themselves ‘in a new way’ (ibid., 308). Cultural Electrocution One of the most intriguing participants was a second-generation Muslim student who used to wear the hijab, only to stop because of the racism she faced when wearing it. She told me the racism and culture shock were so intense they amounted to ‘cultural electrocution.’ She talked to me about her feelings of low self-esteem, alienation, exclusion, and depression: Culture shock, huh? What a clever and interesting name for experiences that deal with students’ insights about culture. However, the term culture shock doesn’t adequately describe my experience of first year in this predominantly White university. A more appropriate description would be more like culture ‘electrocution.’ It was being an ‘invisible’ minority that got to me, because being treated as an invisible person was a deliberate act. What I mean by this is that what

The Psychosocial Dimension

137

I experienced at this university was not an overt, confrontational type of racism. It was a subtle, silent racism. I was avoided, ignored, and excluded from social and even educational circles simply because I happened to look a certain way and belonged to a certain ethnic background. I became ‘different’ because I looked it by wearing the hijab or the veil. Some avoided me like the plague. Others had a nickname for me: ‘Hanky Girl.’ It was almost funny, had it not been so ignorant and prejudicial. It’s the sort of thing that completely undermines one’s confidence, self-esteem, and worth as a human being. For this to be happening in a university of all places was unbelievable. I always viewed university as a place where only the brightest minds would gather, where people would be seen as individuals and judged on the basis of their intellect. The ‘cultural electrocution’ doesn’t apply so much to the difference of culture here at this university, but more to the differences in attitudes of people towards someone who is of a visible minority. But the negative experiences of last year will stay with me always, even though I don’t wear the hijab anymore. I continue to be a student of this university but still have bouts of depression. I am on antidepressant medication.

This Muslim student’s account relates perhaps to the media stereotype of ‘terrorist’ in North America – a stereotype that arose in response to 11 September.2 It is crucial to challenge the dominant stereotype that South Asians are terrorists. Most South Asians – Muslims in particular – like most people in most communities, favour peace and harmony. Even though many Muslim, Hindu, and Sikh religious leaders denounced these attacks as terrorism, the media universalized a handful of ‘terrorists’ and thereby endangered minority groups. Several South Asians have been attacked, beaten, and killed – a powerful manifestation of media stereotypes of the Other (Hall 1997b; Said 1993). Race is immaterial yet at the same time invincible, and how are we to respond to that? Goldberg (1993, 6) tells us ‘race is irrelevant, but all is race,’ and that encapsulates the problem. This student’s narrative illustrated the dichotomy: the norm of ‘sameness’ trivialized her ‘difference.’ Some people consider South Asians ‘Others’ because they do not wear the same clothes, speak the language, or ‘sound Canadian’ (Desai 1994, 193). The racism directed at this student resulted in depression and suicidal thinking. Suicide is a distressing trend among young South Asians. Wadhwani (1999) found that 30 per cent of the 104 participants in her study had considered suicide and that racism was a significant factor.

138

Integrative Antiracism

One student transferred to a more diverse and congenial university: ‘The price for being included was too great. Non-Whites can assimilate into the university culture, which is largely White, masculinist, and heterosexist, or they can find themselves marginalized. This was my experience. Looking back, I was very depressed that year. I had grown up in a small, predominantly White town. I fast-tracked through high school so I could go to university. Transferring was the best decision I ever made.’ This student’s experiences were similar to those of several others who left for more inclusive environments. Huffman (1991) studied Northern Plains Indian students who experienced racism through verbal harassment and found that these students usually left the campuses where they encountered this. ‘Feeling isolated and alienated certainly can contribute to students’ desire to leave an unfriendly academic environment’ (Brown and Kurpius 1997, 5). Best of Both Worlds One international student found that the best strategy was to conform to the dominant culture – that is, to adopt ‘the best of both worlds’: I strongly believe that whichever culture you live in you must try to assimilate in that culture. I support the second-generation Canadians who try to assimilate into the Canadian culture. That’s a practical requirement. Unless you do so you will be left out and will not be a part of the group. They will not consider you to be one of their own. So you will have to dissociate yourself from your past. It is a different ideology that you have to preserve your culture and that you have to maintain and preserve your cultural values inherited from your family in India. But I don’t think you can be an Indian and a Canadian at the same time – you cannot be both. I have a lot of discussion with friends. I strongly believe in adopting Canadian values and dissociating yourself from any kind of Indian or South Asian values.

This young person believed that total assimilation (Berry 1997) was the best way to avoid tensions and strife in one’s life. Perhaps he was in the ‘honeymoon stage’ and perceived for now that everything Western was superior and that everything South Asian was inferior. Perhaps he thought that following the cultural norms and values of the host society was the route to academic success. It is unclear whether he had been fully accepted into mainstream society. I contend that no matter

The Psychosocial Dimension

139

how hard immigrants try, the host society will never completely accept them. Five students – most of them international – told me it was better to draw out the ‘best’ values in both cultures and then negotiate a space in mainstream society: (#1) I believe that I am Sikh and Indian. I don’t have an identity problem. My friends were Indian and British when I was growing up. It is very clear for me and I understand it very well. I understand what my community expects of me. A lot of people come here and change by colouring their hair purple or blonde. I like the way I am and I am not caught between anything. (#2) I did experience the culture clash in my academic work. They expect a higher standard in your performance here. But it was not an identity crisis. Since I am staying here for only a short time, this really did not affect me much. (#3) I have no conflicts as I try to draw out the best of both worlds. I have very liberal parents and I try to follow the best of both cultures. So I have never had any problems. I have dated only Indian boys and have had no problems. As long as the boy is from a good family. Boys brought up here are more liberal. Boys from India have a second mother–type thing and I don’t like that. Some Indian boys want a second mother and want to be taken care of because they want to be served hand and foot. Family background is important and such marriages survive. I don’t mind an arranged marriage. In any case it is going to be my decision – it’s my life that I am dealing with here. (#4) I accept both cultures. You don’t turn your back on your own culture. You accept both and try to maintain a balance between both cultures. I don’t feel caught between both cultures. I wore the pagri when I was young. My father wants me to wear it. I have had it on since I was young. I don’t mind and obviously my parents started it. I wear the comb, the bangle, and the pagri. The comb and kirpan after baptism. It is a minor inconvenience. It is a part of my culture and I don’t mind it. You try to avoid confrontations and people’s remarks. (#5) I am willing to share my culture. I prefer South Asian girls, arranged or whatever. Most of the Indians are educated in British schools, convents,

140

Integrative Antiracism

and missionary schools and are open-minded to the situation here. People coming from India are the top one per cent and are rational thinkers.

The integration process led these South Asian students to accept the ‘best’ values from both cultures (Taylor and Hegarty 1985) and to negotiate a space for themselves in the university milieu. Intercultural and intergenerational conflicts do not necessarily harm students and ‘can be a source of growth and personal development’ (ibid., 164). Some students respond by maintaining high levels of self-esteem and pride in their background. In a racially discriminatory environment, family and community support, together with religious and cultural affiliations, can provide tremendous strength. That these students were willing to accept the best from both cultures was evident in comments relating to academic work (#2), to cultural practices such as wearing the pagri (#4), and to dating and arranged marriage (#5). These students seemed deeply committed to their studies. Also, they had a strong sense of self-identity and apparently were unaffected by cultural differences as a result of their ‘broad-minded,’ Westernized backgrounds (#3: ‘I have very liberal parents’). It may well by that they did not perceive the subtle racism that second-generation students often detected. Coping Strategies and Conclusion International and some second-generation students who experienced less psychosocial stress generally shared their concerns with family and friends. Two of them explained: (#1) ‘I talk about my problems and concerns with my family a lot and talk to my friends. It is a part of first year and it will go away.’ (#2) ‘I share with my supervisor and family and try to keep a balance. Other profs as well – those who are good to speak to. Sometimes I take a walk, listen to music, introspect, or think about it.’ In dealing with their concerns, these students relied heavily on family members or themselves (Lee and Zhan 1998, 155). Minority students usually underused counselling and psychological services, perhaps because of the associated ‘stigma and shame’ (Chin 1998, 488) and because they mistrusted people they did not know. Perhaps the assistance available was of poor quality (Lee and Zhan 1998, 155). Some students may internalize negative feelings through the practice of Buddhism3 or Vedanta philosophy.4 Spiritual thought changes consciousness about one’s existence and relationships. Some students at-

The Psychosocial Dimension

141

tended lectures on meditation and/or Vedanta philosophy on campus. A South Asian professor I interviewed told me that Vedanta philosophy explains negative feelings in response to racism as a ‘discord within.’5 Another interviewee told me: ‘If I harbour negative feelings of racism within me, it is my problem and I have to live with it. So it is better I get rid of these negative feelings.’ Buddhism and Vedanta philosophy advocate meditation, introspection, and reflection to achieve internal harmony. Perhaps unaware of the structural roots of racism at this university, these people blamed themselves for the ‘discord within.’ The following second-generation graduate student coped with racism by talking with friends and family: I just talk about it with different people and friends. Everybody has stress, and I have less stress because I come from a privileged background and have the support of family and friends. I think it would have been different if I was Black, if I was poor, and if I was different in a lot of ways. I could be much worse off than I am. So I think the way that you cope is that you are moving on from your childhood. When you are a child you think it is your problem and when you grow older you think it is somebody else’s problem. You don’t get so stressed out by those things. Talk about it, think about it … I would try to not hide it and be open about it. If you really think about the plight, you would have to sit in the house, walking back and forth and feeling depressed about it. Because it is very depressing – all these issues are incredibly depressing. So you must not think about them all the time and make them a defining characteristic of your life all the time. Think about them and realize that they are there but don’t let them take you over and make you upset so much that you cannot continue with your life. Think of some of the positive aspects of your life – balance it by saying that yes, race is a bad part of your life. But I also have all these wonderful things about my life – balance it and speak about race.

Clearly, some middle-class South Asian students were coping well with racism in academe. In reflecting on the psychosocial impact of racism on South Asian students, we should recognize conditions of vulnerability (Chun et al. 1998) and low self-esteem (Young and Tekeuchi 1998). Immigrants are especially vulnerable to low self-esteem because of environmental stresses such as racism, unemployment, culture conflict, and lack of social status (Chun et al. 1998). In this study, both international and second-generation South Asian students found themselves susceptible to low self-esteem because of factors such as language barriers, loss

142

Integrative Antiracism

of social support networks, homesickness, and lifestyle changes. Most asserted that despite their academic success, efforts to integrate left them feeling exposed. Almost all were succeeding in their studies despite psychological stress. Sue and Zane (1985, in Chun et al. 1998, 461) caution that for minority students, ‘academic performance should not be used as an indicator of psychological well-being or adjustment.’ In a study of Japanese- and Chinese-American college students, Asamen and Berry (1987) found that Japanese Americans, who experienced more racism, had lower self-esteem than Chinese Americans. The Japanese were third-generation immigrants whereas the Chinese were of the first generation. During the integration process, Japanese Americans’ self-concept and cultural identity seemed incompatible with the host culture; as a consequence, the subjects felt constant ‘dissonance’ (Young and Takeuchi 1998, 426). Consistent with Asamen and Berry’s hypothesis, some of the second-generation students I interviewed experienced more dissonance and culture conflict than first-generation international students. It is imperative that the university appoint enough cross-cultural counsellors to oversee the psychological well-being of minority students. This service would go a long way toward enabling students to integrate smoothly and cope with racism, sexism, and classism when these problems enter their everyday lives.

8 Challenges and Conclusion

Following in the Freirian tradition, we see education systems both as a source of oppression and a site for social transformation. – Dei et al. 2000b, preface

In this book I have argued that South Asian students experience racism in covert rather than overt ways in Canadian academe. I have shown that the conceptual framework of integrative antiracism is applicable to their lived experiences. I have further argued that their lives as university students are deficient and unsatisfactory and need improvement in several areas. An antiracism perspective illuminates other issues besides the racism faced by South Asian students. To provide a more complete and inclusive perspective on what I consider their oppression, antiracism scholarship should explore students’ class, gender, history, and culture (Dei et al. 2000b; Razack 1998; Bannerji 2000; Dua and Lawrence 2000). Moreover, these interlocking systems make sense only if we use them to organize positions and space for South Asian students in university settings. In this chapter I discuss the challenges evident in four areas: faculty– student relationships, peer group interactions, curriculum, and psychosocial well-being. I then offer strategies for the future. The interviews I conducted offer overwhelming evidence that changes must be made relating to all four areas of investigation. Faculty–Student Relationships Challenging the status quo,1 this South Asian student asked for more

144

Integrative Antiracism

minority faculty: ‘They should have more minority professors as role models and more minority students. There are very few around now. They definitely need a minority administrator to whom I could go and talk to so that they can understand me. I don’t want to take the risk of going to the professor herself, especially with regard to marks.’ South Asian professors had more to say: (#1) ‘As a faculty member and researcher, I am of the opinion that more minority students and faculty members have to be accepted into this university. I have tried to bring in researchers and postdoctoral fellows from South Asian countries to expose them to the sciences in North America. I have limited grants and what I am doing is not enough. There has to be more recruitment of visible minority faculty members and instructors in the sciences and definitely more in the arts.’ (#2) ‘We need more visible minority faculty in the music department teaching South Asian music. They need to employ non-Western artists and faculty members in the department. This is a much neglected area.’ One science professor saw a need to appoint minority instructors on the basis of ‘merit.’ He argued that they should first enter the pool of applicants on the basis of qualifications and experience. He added that the Equity Office2 on campus should help monitor hiring. He also emphasized that minority appointees needed a supportive and affable atmosphere, especially early on: At the higher level, especially for the position of a dean, the internal system simply excludes people of colour. They should go out and hire people at all levels. I don’t think that there should be a different measure or that you should drop your standards. The argument is that if you bring someone who is a visible minority or a woman, then that person is second quality or not as qualified. The criteria should be to take the best person. In the pool you should include them if you are not biased in the first place to exclude them. There should be simply no lip service to say that we welcome candidates from various categories such as minorities, gays, lesbians, women, and the rest, and not do anything about it. That’s not good enough. That’s step one. What you do with the applicant pool is important. And when you are searching, you should not stereotype the people and say where he is from or where he got his degree. Because you begin to knock the person already rather than say that this person has these qualifications and has ten or twenty publications and so is qualified for the position. The other thing is the environment. Even if one colleague exhibits nega-

Challenges and Conclusion

145

tive body language or turns them off, minorities don’t want to come here. Why should they, if they are good? If someone is involved in some controversy of some sort, the end result is going to be negative. What is crucial is that this may not be the case with a White candidate. If there are things to pick on, then people jump more readily on visible minority candidate. It is very bad in the arts, rather than the sciences, and it is going to take time to change.

This professor, a thirty-year veteran who had been part of the hiring process in the past, wanted minority people included among the applicants. The university should advertise in minority journals and newspapers to attract the best candidates. Often, bias works in the early stages by rejecting people of colour. If the applicant makes it to the pool, qualifications should determine whether he or she reaches the short list. If bias distorts the university’s understanding of ‘merit,’ even well-qualified candidates may not reach the applicant pool. Most university hiring committees subscribe to the ‘myth of meritocracy.’ This myth propagates the cultural assumption (Lawton 2002) that prejudice is rare and that merit is the reason why so many Whites occupy high-paying and high-status jobs. The assumption is that minorities do not make short lists because they lack the skills as well as the drive to succeed. Furthermore, the selection process is not faulty; rather, minority candidates are not up to the standard. This myth explains why even with an Equity Office monitoring the hiring process, hiring methods at most universities are imperfect and inconsistent. The net result is that most positions go to mainstream applicants. We need to challenge the concept that merit is always rewarded at Canadian universities. A professor in the arts wanted to see a process established for advancing diversity. This process would help address weaknesses in mainstream scholarship. Lack of funds was no excuse not to begin such a process. All departments could achieve a global perspective by admitting more minority students and hiring more minority faculty: My first recommendation would be the reorientation of the faculty and administration. They must go beyond their own confines and boundaries and see that there are other groups out there. Life is multifaceted, and people live in diverse circumstances, and so people should have the ability to appreciate and empathize. They must have the capacity to appreciate the transcendental capacity of other forms of human existence. This is how the arts can progress. We need more international students admitted

146

Integrative Antiracism

because they will bring in fresh perspectives to the disciplines, and more minority faculty members need to be hired. This process of diversity should be followed at all levels. We need to integrate globalization and world disciplines into our curriculum. There is a general ignorance about other countries and a resistance to learn about other minority groups or developing countries. They are failing to discover and rediscover themselves. This notion pervades academia and hence they are intellectually handicapped. They will stay so unless they acknowledge that intellectualism is a global phenomenon. These students and faculty members will bring in new perspectives. Instead they have one simple answer – no funding. They have ready-made answers for all these issues. They are basically lethargic and inactive. They are not able to convince provincial or federal ministries that these are also important departments that need funding.

Promoting diversity among students and faculty and in the administration helps universities rise above the specific differences of race, country of origin, language, and religious affiliation. Doing so promotes the notion that we are living in a global village and should share and integrate ideas, material resources, and technical knowledge. A global perspective will ensure that we value universal human rights, understand historical perspectives and develop intercultural capabilities (Bennett 1992, 195). Another professor discussed the teaching of minority courses by White instructors: More minority faculty need to be hired on the basis of merit [rather than] quotas to teach minority courses. For example, in the development studies department, almost all regular faculty members are White – all of them teaching studies related to the developing world. There are only a couple of instructors – PhD candidates – who are visible minorities. Even in the women’s studies department, a White woman taught the course on ‘international women’ last year. When there are highly qualified South Asian and minority women around who are available and willing to teach the subject effectively and efficiently, why are they not hired? If accent and soft skills [ability to interact appropriately] are a problem, something should be done about it. The university should run a program for the improvement of soft skills and accent reduction. Professors and instructors need to be understood by their students, and since accent affects their evaluations, this area needs to be attended to. Ideas have to

Challenges and Conclusion

147

be effectively expressed so programs must be provided to rectify this situation.

It makes sense to hire minority instructors to teach minority courses. Doing so enhances the legitimacy and authenticity of indigenous knowledge. Universities must begin hiring the many available minority instructors who are qualified and well versed in the field. How departments teach indigenous knowledge is important, but even more important is who teaches it. The following professor sought change in the administrative sector: This university has changed since the 1960s, with more visible minorities than before. Traditionally the culture is British, but now, with the American influence, things are changing. However, there is room for more improvement. A major area that needs improvement is in the administrative staff. This sector needs minority representation the most. Students have maximum interactions with the staff, and this area is sorely neglected in terms of minority recruitment. This is because of institutional barriers in the form of historic conditions and following a policy of internal recruitment. So what has happened is that historically the staff consists of White women and hiring has come from that group alone. And there are very few new jobs. Consequently there are very few visible minority staff. As far as faculty members are concerned, there has been an increase of visible minority women due to strong feminist voices being heard, but visible minority men are decreasing, particularly in the arts. However, there have been more men of colour in the sciences, business and medicine recruited in the recent past.

It is clear that in recent years, nothing much has changed at many Canadian universities. In most of them, fewer than 10 per cent of professors are visible minorities (Rushowy 2000). A ground-breaking study by Shah (ibid.) reveals just how few faculty positions are held by visible minorities – who are a designated group under the Federal Contractors’ Program.3 Canada’s multiethnic, multilingual, multiracial population is growing rapidly, but many university workplaces do not reflect this. Roberta Hamilton (2001, 3) remarks: ‘A diverse student and faculty will raise a wide range of issues, questions and insights with implications for curriculum and the broader learning environment.’ To facilitate positive relations between faculty and students, some

148

Integrative Antiracism

respondents recommended ongoing antiracism training. Haroon Siddiqui, a Toronto Star editorial columnist, has noted: ‘There needs to be on-going anti-racism training given to personnel at all levels to instruct them in equity and human rights issues.’4 But diversity training cannot be simply ‘pedagogical moments requiring cultural, racial or gender sensitivity’ (Razack 1998, 8). The power differentials that are entrenched in systemic and structural racism must be loosened, and antiracism policies must be implemented effectively. To challenge racism in faculty–student relationships, an ‘anti-racist cast of mind’ must be promoted (Novogorodsky 1996, 187). Conceptualizing antiracism involves ‘the work of undoing and unlearning racism’ (ibid.). Novogrodsky believes that ‘the nitty-gritty [of] what we say and do must be informed with an anti-racist cast of mind’ (ibid.). Such an approach encourages us to locate and reflect on antiracist ideas and then disseminate them in day-to-day interactions. These ideas should inform the attitudes of the faculty towards students. Instructors can change things by challenging racist practices, foreseeing opposition, and developing ways to overcome apathy. In his integrative antiracism discourse, Dei (2000a) contends that privilege needs to be ‘unlearned’ (Spivak 1990, 40). Professors are in the best position to interrogate race, class, gender, and sexuality as key venues of social difference. The concept of Whiteness needs to be decentred; furthermore, the power of White privilege needs to be questioned in classroom lectures and discussions. Nieto (1997) asserts: ‘We have to talk about it. There’s very little talk about race, racism and other kinds of oppression in classrooms and that’s what we need to do’ (in Trueba et al. 1997, 14). Faculty may misunderstand minority students’ behaviour. They may ‘a) make mistakes in estimating a student’s or a cultural group’s intellectual potential; b) misread achievement in academic subjects such as creative expression; c) misjudge student’s language abilities and d) have difficulty establishing rapport and communication. Consequently, the academic success of students of colour is negatively affected’ (Hilliard 1989, 68–9). Obviously, faculty influence the academic success of minority students. Even though they spend only limited time in classrooms, they help shape the thinking of students in relation to vitally important issues such as racism and sexism. Baker (1983) contends that ‘the attitude of the teacher is crucial in helping students develop attitudes that will prepare them for a harmonious existence in a society that is culturally diverse’ (in Klassen and Carr

Challenges and Conclusion

149

1996, 129). When instructors act on their own biases, they influence students’ experiences in classrooms. Majority faculty must become knowledgeable about student diversity by adopting the above strategies and by establishing a positive learning environment for all students. As we saw in chapter 5, students of colour are exceedingly sensitive in their interactions with mainstream faculty, be they positive or negative. Teaching styles and these interactions influence learning and persistence rates as well as the academic potential of minority students. It is imperative that minority students become full contributors to Canadian society. In this regard, we cannot overemphasize the role of dominant faculty in establishing a balanced classroom atmosphere. Furthermore, mainstream faculty need to overcome the ‘stereotype threat’ (Steele 1997) by creating a ‘wise’ environment for minority students – that is, an environment designed to understand the full humanity of stereotype-threatened groups and accept them for who they are. Strong communication between minorities groups and the majority can reduce the stereotype threat and enable minority students to improve both their grades and their persistence rates. The enriched relationship that results will foster healthy learning and maximize minority students’ potential. Integrative antiracism strategies support and advance these goals. Peer Group Interactions The interviewees expressed a desire to challenge racism in peer relationships. Many South Asian students felt that the campus climate was chilly, with little diversity. They perceived White students as insensitive to racism and as inept at handling difficult situations. In particular, the university seemed to them a highly ‘traditional’ place that offered a false front of heterogeneity. In fact, it was a very homogenous milieu. The cool reception some students of colour received and the ‘Whiteness’ of the university often resulted in culture shock. Some doubted they would ever be accepted; others saw the university as accepting only ‘up to a point,’ after which they were barely tolerated. They suspected that minority students were refraining from applying because of the university’s reputation for being ‘White’ and that the university was missing out on the vibrancy, enthusiasm, and motivation that students of colour could bring. Most interviewees perceived a dire need for more minority students at the university. (#1) ‘Accepting up to a point and in some situations they

150

Integrative Antiracism

are tolerant. I am sometimes naive, and I don’t know at times. It is hard to discern and pinpoint in certain situations.’ (#2) ‘Both accepting and tolerant. I am the only one in the minority group. They have to attempt to diversify the student population and increase the numbers of minorities. A lot of the students don’t apply because they know that it is White. I can see that. Students of ethnic background always bring something to the class and contribute to the discussion. There has to be more integration of minorities on campus.’ One student discussed how changes in minority enrolment were affecting ‘gendered racism’: But I think the way would be to increase the number of minority students so that White students would be able to interact with them more. You just learn by interacting with them and learn that South Asians and minority students are just like me. They have feelings, problems, and emotions like everybody else. And they are people also. And it is important to know that that’s the only way to end racism. Not by doing more courses but by reallife experiences with people from different cultures. Courses only theoretically inform you about these people. You need to interact with them more and be friends with them and realize that they are also mere people and are longing to be understood.

The students I interviewed believed – reminiscent of Sojourner Truth’s maxim ‘Ain’t I a woman too?’5 – that having more minority students and more interaction would make White students realize that South Asians ‘are people, too,’ with similar thoughts and emotions. That is, more interaction would lead to less racism. The students felt that courses on racism would not do enough; generally, they claimed that the way to reduce alienation and marginalization was through everyday interactions. In their study of minority students at a predominantly White university, Patterson-Stewart and colleagues (1997, 497) affirmed: ‘As university consumers, minority students, like their White counterparts, deserve equally educational opportunities in an accepting and appropriately challenging environment, which is critical for persistence in the [academic] process and the personal growth of these students.’ And according to Desai and Subramanian (2000, 73): ‘The larger South Asian community has the responsibility of taking a more active interest in the way [universities] are run. The community needs to get involved in mak-

Challenges and Conclusion

151

ing the educational system more inclusive and equitable. It should also be good for the community to support initiatives by youth ... The youth today feel alienated not just from the dominant White society but also from leaders and people of influence from their own communities.’ Like Desai and Subramanian, the people I interviewed suggested that the community should help make the university less xenophobic. They talked about experiences in the community that indicated more intolerance than those on campus. It is imperative to challenge community racism, which can seep into universities. Dei and colleagues (2000) emphasize the community’s role in lessening racism in educational institutions. They define the ‘local community’ as ‘parents/caregivers and extended families, neighbourhoods and racial/ethnic/cultural/ religious groups’ (2000, 198). They argue that for a university to better understand minority groups, its practices and curriculum should reflect local experiences, knowledge, and histories. Communities can do a great deal to reduce racism, especially at small-town universities. Christensen has suggested a five-stage cross-cultural development model for majority and minority students. The first stage involves feelings of unawareness; at this point, ‘serious thought has never been given to cultural, ethnic or racial differences or their meaning and influence of individuals and groups’ (1995, 7). The second stage is ‘accompanied by uneasiness and/or beginning [a] sense of cognitive dissonance’ (ibid.). Dominant students begin to question assumptions and to disassociate themselves from minority-group oppression; minority students begin to grow aware of overt and covert racism and to critique the societal position of oppressed minorities. The third stage is conscious awareness, during which both groups confirm conflictual behaviour relating to racial and cultural differences and their implications in various historical settings. During the fourth stage, consolidated awareness, majority and minority students commit themselves to effecting positive social change and encouraging intergroup harmony and appreciation; group differences appear in a positive light. During the fifth stage, transcendental awareness, students go beyond societal norms so that cross-cultural awareness becomes ‘a way of life’ (ibid., 8). Curriculum One student suggested that racism be discussed in classes and that minority histories be incorporated into existing curricula:

152

Integrative Antiracism

Everything is Eurocentric rooted in Irish or Scottish tradition. They are representing a whole lot of people, and they have to really change their perspective on that. To have issues about race, class, and gender as part of the curriculum and not a separate part, to integrate it into the curriculum, is absolutely necessary. When you are talking about the history of minority groups in Canada – in the history course – talk about the indigenous people, the Chinese, and the Asians. We need to talk about the immigration policies and the history of the Indians 150 years ago and how they were excluded. Blacks, Chinese, and Aboriginals have been here several years ago before us. They are a part of our Canadian history. It is not enough to simply have a ‘race and racism’ course separate from the rest of the courses. We need to integrate them in our histories, literatures, and sciences and make the curriculum less Eurocentric. If you only talk about White people, it is not inclusive education. Antiracism discourses need to be included in the mainstream curriculum.

A more inclusive curriculum would help the younger generation understand the many ways that minority groups have contributed to Canada’s development; it would also make the curriculum more representative of the country’s diversity and progress (Desai and Subramanian 2000, 71). The Queen’s University report on race and race relations has proposed changes in curricular design. These changes would address the following issues: • The existence of course titles that do not reflect their content, e.g., ‘The History of Political Thought’ which should be renamed ‘The History of Western Political Thought.’ • The prevalence of core courses (required of majors students) in departments that include only Eurocentric issues; • The lack of anti-racist courses in the curriculum and the need to make these mandatory in some curricula; • The need to hire faculty who can teach courses that do not have a Eurocentric focus; • The need to introduce more interdisciplinary studies such as Black studies and Native studies [taught by minority faculty members]; • The need to review the science curricula to make the important point that even science is not value free; • The need to develop bridging and supplementary programs for minority students that would help them meet academic standards. (In Henry and Tator 1994a, 81)

Challenges and Conclusion

153

Similarly, at the University of Toronto, a Presidential Advisory Committee on Race Relations and Anti-Racism Initiatives (Memorandum, 1992) has investigated equity-related issues such as curriculum, the hiring and promotion of instructors, and student recruitment. Its report calls for more non-Eurocentric courses, more diverse perspectives in current courses, and greater cultural sensitivity in traditional courses. For example, academics who teach traditional courses in literature, philosophy, or sociology should consider the historical context and how these texts have become canonical. The marginalizing of issues relating to racism in the curriculum can affect students of colour. All Canadian university curricula should include a mandatory course on diversity, multiculturalism, and immigration, the purpose being to dispel myths about other students (Hall, Kulig, et al. 1998). Students will acquire a richer and more enduring understanding of minorities and gain the flexibility and group awareness to participate more fully in the Canadian workforce. The interviewees recommended that integrative antiracism strategies be incorporated into regular courses in the arts, sciences, medicine, and law. Integrative antiracism policies foster an atmosphere more receptive to racial differences. In the curriculum, such an approach would help develop critical thinking and reasoning and serve as a powerful voice for students of multiple backgrounds and identities. The interviewees suggested that the curriculum become more inclusive of the shared histories, literatures, and narratives of minority groups. From a critical integrative antiracism perspective, we need to develop a ‘double-voiced’ discourse. Bakhtin (1986) describes single- and double-voiced discourses. In a single-voiced discourse the instructor dominates the dialogue without allowing room for difference and other oppressed voices. The instructor takes someone else’s discourse and infuses it with his or her own meanings while retaining the original speaker’s purpose and goal. A double-voiced discourse correlates with what bell hooks (1989) refers to as ‘the social construction of the self in relation’ to not one ‘I’ but the synthesis of many ‘I’s.’ The self is perceived ‘not as a signifier of one “I” but the coming together of many “I”s,’ the self embodying collective reality past and present, family and community’ (ibid., 31). Sheldon (1992, 99) explains double-voiced discourse: ‘The primary orientation is to the self, to one’s own agenda. The other orientation is to members of the group. The orientation to others does not mean that the speaker necessarily acts in an altruistic, accommodating, or self-sacrificing manner. It means, rather, that the speaker pays attention to the

154

Integrative Antiracism

companion’s point of view, even while pursuing her own agenda.’ In such a discourse, teachers and students adopt a dialogic interaction, which is not always in harmony, and sometimes in conflict – although it always strives to bring about social change. We need to use differences and oppressed voices as springboards for producing creative change within institutions. Emphasis on minority groups’ contributions in Canadian nation-building would make the curriculum less Eurocentric. Minority faculty deserve a better position and improved status on campus. First, they need more support from colleagues and administrators to lessen their alienation (Dua and Lawrence 2000, 118). The first step is to speak out about racism against minority instructors, especially women. As one participant in the Dua and Lawrence study affirmed: The silencing of our voices reproduces hegemony by the mere force of our exclusion and invisibility. The world needs to hear from us. For too long these institutions have gotten off believing that they are doing us ‘a favour’ with ‘equity’ hiring, that we should be ‘grateful’ when they hire us and ‘let’ us teach equity or race relations. Problems of institutional racism for too long have been accounted for in terms of our personal psychological problems. Of course each of us believes that we are the ‘problem’; we are indoctrinated to do so. This serves the needs of the system. (Ibid., 119)

Second, minority faculty should develop mutually supportive relationships with open-minded colleagues (ibid.). Third, antiracism studies and indigenous thought should become part of disciplines to help students think inclusively. Fourth, administrative support would do a great deal to encourage minority instructors. This could help end the practice of blaming minority professors for their students’ racism. It would involve structural changes in faculty unions and the cooperation of senior administrators such as principals and deans. Lawsuits were suggested as another way to bring about administrative change, notwithstanding the time and stress involved. A positive proposal was support centres for instructors and faculty who were experiencing racism in classroom situations. Another recommendation was that regular conferences about these issues be held (ibid.). Minority faculty require supportive and congenial workplaces if they are to help minority students who come to them with problems. With adequate support from minority faculty – who can serve as role models – students of colour can maximize their academic potential. I believe that all universities should hire more minority administrators

Challenges and Conclusion

155

and academic officers. Some observers have cited institutional barriers as the reason why there is so little diversity in hiring. The South Asians I interviewed proposed that these obstacles be broken down.6 Other recommendations they made: get the administration to acknowledge systemic racism; loosen the power structures, working through the Equity Office and Human Rights Office;7 and improve the status and position of minority instructors. Before these things can happen, however, the existing power structures must be acknowledged. Too often, universities deny that White privilege exists and silence voices that contend there are systems of dominance (McIntosh 1989, 12). Acknowledging White privilege would lead to a loosening of these systems, which are part of the ‘hidden curriculum’; it would also reconstruct power systems on a ‘broader base’ (ibid., 19). Racist assumptions must be discarded. The dichotomizing tendency needs to be resisted in classrooms: When one uses categories like Oriental and Westerner as both the starting and the end points of analysis … the result is usually to polarize distinction – the Oriental becomes more Oriental, the Westerner more Western – and limit the human encounter between different cultures, traditions and societies. In short, from its earliest modern history to the present, Orientalism as a form of thought for dealing with the foreign has typically shown the altogether regrettable tendency of any knowledge based on hard-and-fast distinctions … to channel thought into a West or an East compartment. (Said 1979, 45–6)

Said points to the backlash that results from dichotomizing identities between North Americans and immigrants of Asian heritage. Academe should investigate hyphenated identities in terms of political, historical, and social constructs. Teaching should reject binary oppositions such as East/West and Black/White; it should inform narratives with difference and reshape them into multiple forms of discourse. In classes on racism, students may come in with ‘investments of privilege and struggle already made in favour of some ethical and political positions concerning racism and against other positions’ (Ellsworth 1997, 301). In many instances, classroom situations do not ideally reflect integrative antiracism strategies (i.e., through empowerment, dialogue, and voice). Even among oppressed and marginalized groups there are tensions and conflicts. These tensions play out in relations between students and/or between professor and students. Sometimes there is little

156

Integrative Antiracism

institutional support for antiracism work. To counteract hostilities in classrooms, both teachers and students need to redraw the boundaries for critical work. Ellsworth suggests that we respect the diversity of voices, of stories and of narratives, and validate them through critical reflection on difference and voice. She recommends ‘building trust,’ ‘encouraging social interaction,’ and ‘naming inequalities’ as useful strategies (ibid). Ground rules are necessary for communication in class. A starting point might be the premise that we all have fragmentary knowledge of ourselves and that we come from different subject positions. In my experience, autobiographical accounts are an excellent way to begin a dialogue. However, this does not rule out negative reactions, resistance, or hostile comments. Again, we need not avoid key issues. The antiracism strategy of narrative inquiry ignores political correctness and attempts to dislodge dominant perspectives and stereotypes about minority students. The Psychosocial Dimension The people I interviewed made several suggestions for improving the psychological well-being of minority students. One recommended that minority-group religious holidays be observed: ‘The mainstream groups should acknowledge the fact that this university is not a Scottish White male-dominated university anymore. They have to acknowledge and evolve and realize that there are other minority groups on campus. They should not have exams on religious days like Diwali and Id, but be more culturally sensitive.’ Respect for and appreciation of the minority presence would contribute to a wholesome campus environment. Other students suggested organizing more cultural activities for second-generation students and majority students. (#1) ‘More cultural activities are required to explain where they come from to second-generation immigrants so that they can be accepted for their knowledge.’ (#2) ‘We need to start Indian cooking clubs and promote our culture and food habits. With education comes understanding. Polite racism exists here to a great extent because the atmosphere fosters it. We have to maintain our culture as well as learn to live within the White culture.’ Cross-cultural activities based on song, dance, and food could foster mutual understanding and acceptance of minority groups and could also connect mainstream with minority students. Another student recommended more funding for the campus’s International Centre: ‘More finances for minority students – an area that

Challenges and Conclusion

157

needs to be improved upon. More direct bus services for students to the university. The International Centre needs more funding and more activities and programs. They are struggling to survive. There is always room for improvement.’ Allocation of finances for minority-group activities could foster a harmonious environment. Another student talked about encouraging minority groups to enrol at the university and empowering them financially. It is going to be a difficult process because the university attracts only upper-class White students. However, I think you have to empower the groups. Not only give them a little space but by financially supporting the groups. It is true that minority groups need a budget to do their thing because they need a spot for themselves. But more than that these groups should thrive and be empowered. But why would the university want that? To what extent would you want them to thrive before they really become a threat to you? That is the question. We have our budget money for the various groups. But honestly if you want to bring them to the forefront from a very traditional image – an Anglo-Saxon majority – to a place that is fostering ethnically diverse groups then you need to empower those groups, and I don’t think that this university has given much thought to that. There has to be someone saying that it is my burden that there must be more Blacks, Chinese, indigenous people, and South Asians and encourage students to come and give them incentives to come. There should be active empowering of minority groups. Otherwise, there is that cold atmosphere prevailing here.

Empowering minority groups through an increase in numbers would help develop a rich and productive academic, social, and cultural atmosphere. Another student suggested organizing antiracist activities from the first day of the semester. Minorities should get more involved with the dominant group. Tamils have to be supportive of each other and expect others to do the same to you. Offering opportunities for people of different backgrounds to organize events, and having speakers come from different groups. I think that what the social events committee does is great. Have antiracism marches and get people out there. And also teaching acceptance from day one – the day you set foot on campus. That’s what you are basically told. You are told that you are going to meet lots of different people from different places, economic strata, different race, colour, religion, and background and that you are to

158

Integrative Antiracism

accept them because you are different to them as well. That’s fostered from day one. But sometimes that does not happen, and there have been individual acts of everyday racism directed towards me.

Antiracism marches would propagate the human rights of minority students and reduce racial tensions and conflicts on campus. There would be less tolerance of prejudicial comments and biased incidents. The dignity of every student would be enhanced in an atmosphere that is congenial and affable. Another student recommended more minority representation on campus newspapers and journals and more cultural activities organized by ethnic associations: ‘In the campus journal and newspapers, there needs to be a section that focuses on culture in celebrating a few festivals like Toronto’s Carabram or something like that. The undergraduate society can take more of a role in promoting such events and finding out more about cultures rather than the [ethnic] representatives themselves approaching them. There has to be more of an understanding and promotion of cultures in the everyday lives of the students.’ Adequate media representation of minority groups would bring to the forefront their talents and capabilities and improve the image of students of colour. Endorsing positive images of minority groups would deepen respect and mutual understanding between majority and minority groups on campus. One student suggested cultural-sensitivity programs: ‘There should be public awareness campaigns that will help to reduce feelings of racism. General discussion groups should be conducted. Videos and documentaries on different cultures and religious practices should be shown in the student centers. You really can’t change individuals but you can make them aware of other cultures and other cultural groups.’ Other students talked about organizing activities for minority groups during frosh week to make them feel more welcome. (#1) ‘Organizations should be more aware, coordinate more, and make minority students feel at home during the first week. Otherwise students will feel socially isolated, have low self-confidence, and feel that they do not culturally fit in.’ (#2) ‘The associations have to do a better job and contact the students within the first week itself. By the end of frosh week the students should know there are people who are willing to help you out with any kind of problem. That way the students will know the list of associations and benefit from and take advantage of them as early as possible. More publicity of the associations is necessary. So also the International Centre. We can also promote Indian culture through these associations.’

Challenges and Conclusion

159

Another student suggested debates between majority and minority groups on selected topics, especially in the light of 11 September: ‘Promote more discussion between the minority and majority groups by organizing informational sessions, with speakers coming in and having informal debates on Christianity and Islam. We are here in the university to acquire knowledge. The interest is out there and it has to be promoted.’ Another student emphasized the need for minority groups to be heard: ‘They need to listen to the minorities on campus. Most of the minority groups have the same concerns. I don’t know if we are not saying enough or we are not voicing our opinions loud enough. There are enough ethnic associations on campus but students don’t know enough about the International Centre because it is kind of separate and segregated. The International Centre needs to be publicized more by advertisements all over campus. They generally support all cultural groups and have potlucks and dinners often. Other than the international programs to Europe and England, the university needs to have ties with other developing countries as well.’ Another student observed: ‘They should have more cross-cultural counsellors. There is one on campus, but I hear she is booked for a couple of weeks at a time and that it is difficult to make appointments with her. Even though South Asian students are socially oriented rather than psychologically oriented, these counsellors need to be appointed for the psychological well-being of the minority students.’ Students under psychological pressure require careful handling and maximum emotional support. Further neglect and negativity would only add to their difficulties and could lead to chronic and/or more intense mental disorders (Chun et al. 1998, 474–7). Hiring more cross-cultural counsellors of various ethnic backgrounds would improve the emotional lives of minority students on campus. Some minority students need to spend time with mentors who can understand their identities in relation to the dominant group. The development of self-esteem is vital to their psychological well-being, for it ‘plays an important role in academic success’ (Kalsener 2004). Two students felt that little could be done to change the campus climate. (#1) ‘Sometimes it is hard to change and it is difficult to suggest something as it may be viewed as radical. We are our worst enemies in not helping each other. I came here to get an education, not socialize. The university can do nothing. Issues of racism should begin to be taught in primary school.’ (#2) ‘There are few associations but they cannot do much more in terms of establishing a support network for stu-

160

Integrative Antiracism

dents to meet other students in the same situation. I think we have always been dealing with racism.’ These pessimistic views suggest that there are deeply entrenched power structures in Canadian society that prevent any kind of change. Dei and colleagues (2000, 80) point out that holistic and spiritual approaches to education do carry the potential to infuse educational sites with a sense of connection and responsibility to a greater purpose and vision. However, we would draw specific attention to our use of the word ‘potential.’ We do this to emphasize that the implementation of superficial or haphazard initiatives is not a sufficient condition to improve education and effect positive social change. For ‘transcendent’ knowledges to have a critical/political meaning for, and impact upon educational reform, they must be accompanied by pragmatic strategies for inclusion. Such strategies would have to originate within a framework that is open to new ways of knowing and new ways of doing.

Conclusion The South Asian students I interviewed were complex subjects, facing conflicting and contradictory situations, who had to constantly negotiate spaces for themselves and find meaning in locations of which they were a part. Some tried to fit the model minority stereotype by being the ‘ideal’ students with few concerns in academe; others faced myriad problematic situations. Some benefited from faculty and peer relationships; others were victims of racism who were planning to leave the university. Some succeeded academically; others could not maximize their academic potential and fell short. Some tried to resist racism by speaking against it in class and in interactions with faculty and peers; others remained silent. Some tried to achieve equal status with their White peers; others yielded to prejudice and ended up alienated and marginalized. Some received awards, scholarships, and bursaries; others struggled to make ends meet. Most coped with the acculturative stress by discussing problems with family and friends; others sought professional help. Clearly, they were a multifaceted group as well as a challenge to traditional stereotypes. To create cross-cultural awareness as a ‘way of life’ in academe, we need to consider the pedagogical implications of the power relations that shape relations between groups. I believe that dominant discourses

Challenges and Conclusion

161

and ideologies define ‘difference’ not as value-neutral but rather as ‘different’ and ‘inferior.’ We need to analyse the role of White middle-class privilege in constructing and reconstructing knowledge. Governing ideologies, discourses, dogmas, and curricula that marginalize minority groups require questioning. The objective is to facilitate social change and generate a paradigm shift in such a way that theories, premises, and knowledge will be inclusive of minority groups in academe (Razack 1998; James 1999). It is imperative for the university under study to recognize the cutting impact of racism and embrace pedagogical practices that will address the vital needs of South Asian students and other minority students on campus. The callousness and indifference of some professors, peers, staff, and administrators can easily overwhelm students. University personnel should be open to minority students and allow them to make space for themselves in the academic milieu. Minority students need to be appreciated, acknowledged, and recognized. Despite considerable lip service to antiracism, this does not always happen. The application of an integrative antiracist theoretical framework in Canadian universities could liberate all students. Some South Asian students have ‘made it.’ Antiracism should become ‘performative interpretation … transform[ing] the very thing it interprets’ (Derrida 1994, 51). These agendas should lead to ‘integrative critical language through which values, ethics and social responsibility’ (Lacy 1995, 43) are rudimentary to producing ‘shared critical public spaces that engage, translate and transform’ (Giroux and Shannon 1997, 9). They should examine how power structures affect culture, institutions, and text, ‘within and through a politics of representation’ (ibid., 5), and thereby produce and reproduce knowledge and meaning about race, gender, class, and history. We can code new meanings by taking existing racialized regimes of representation and reappropriating them (for example, ‘Black is beautiful’)(Hall 1997b, 270). By reversing negative stereotypes we can appropriate new meanings. Positive images that influence dominant representations have the ‘approach of righting the balance’ (ibid., 272) and interrogate stereotypes, perhaps reducing them. We need also to consider the possibility that the positive does ‘not necessarily displace the negative’ (ibid., 274), such that the binaries continue to be in place. We could overcome this perhaps by contesting the uncertainties of representation from ‘within’ by working on race, gender, class, history, and culture, since meaning ‘can never be finally fixed’ (ibid.).

162

Integrative Antiracism

Mainstream educators cannot be forced to deny privilege or ‘displace the negative’ (ibid., 272). Antiracist strategists are fully aware that there is a need to challenge the dominant forces of privilege that have been in place for centuries. How much of a dent can antiracism educators make in White educational institutions? This question warrants further inquiry.

Notes

1 Introduction 1 I define South Asians as those who have migrated to Canada mainly from South Asia – namely, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, and Sri Lanka. South Asians share a common history of colonialism and similar values, beliefs, and traditions that shape their social and political identities as migrants in Canada. 2 The income levels of respondents’ parents and instructors ranged from $60,000 to $120,000 per year. This places the participants in a position of privilege and dominance. An interesting and complicating factor is that South Asians are categorized or grouped with the working class. This ‘shift’ is explored in this book. 3 Chapters 4 to 7 will elaborate on aspects of ethnocentrism, cultural insensitivity, and ignorance as forms of racism. 4 The majority group (or the dominant/mainstream group), in contrast to the minority group, occupies a dominant position in society. The dominant group in this inquiry is predominantly English-speaking White Canadians. ‘The majority group enjoys a disproportionately larger share of wealth, power and prestige whereas the minority group shares a disproportionately smaller portion of these resources’ (Yang 2000, 62). 5 In this study, a ‘migrant group’ refers mainly to South Asians who have immigrated to Canada. 6 A ‘minority group’ is defined as ‘an ethnic [assemblage/conglomeration] that occupies a subordinate position in a society’ (Yang 2000, 62). 7 Working Group on Employment Equity Data (1993). Most immigrants from Sri Lanka, India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh self-identify themselves as members of visible minorities (Grayson and Williams 1994, 6). Hence, several terms –

164 Notes to page 8 visible minorities, ethnic minorities, minorities, South Asians, students of colour, and migrant students – appear interchangeably throughout this study. 8 Pakistan was part of India until 16 August 1947. ‘Pakistanis are now one of the largest South Asian Canadian populations after the Sikhs’ (Buchignani and Indra 1985, 132). In Canada, Pakistanis have congregated in cities more than Sikhs have; most have settled in Montreal, Toronto, Edmonton, Calgary, and Vancouver (ibid., 117). Bangladesh – formerly East Pakistan – gained its independence in 1971 with India’s military help. Although it had a population of about 80 million, Bangladesh sent only fifty-eight immigrants to Canada in 1982 (ibid.). Sri Lanka (formerly Ceylon) gained independence from the British in 1948. Immigration to Canada started in the 1950s with the Burghers (of mixed Dutch and Sinhalese origin). Like the Anglo-Indians in India, they considered themselves marginalized. Immigration from the island accelerated in the 1960s and 1970s when Tamil and Sinhalese professionals began leaving the country (ibid., 143–4). 9 Sri Lanka has been called ‘resplendent island,’ ‘the island of the cosmos,’ and ‘the enchanted island,’ and has been ‘viewed by many as the tear-shaped diamond of the Indian Ocean’ (Naidoo and Schaus 1988, 1). 10 Naidoo and Schaus (1988) narrate that around 500 BC the Mahavama, Prince Vijaya, came to Sri Lanka from northeastern India (Bengal) with five hundred followers. They were Sinhalese, presumably of Aryan stock. The Tamils are of Dravidian stock and settled in Sri Lanka around the same time. Controversy surrounds the origins of the two groups – the Sinhalese who are Buddhists, and the Tamils, who are Hindus (ibid., 2–3). ‘Sri Lanka’s rich and varied but troubled Sinhalese and Tamil histories go back some 2,500 years, when both ethnocultural groups migrated from India to this island of unique beauty and natural abundance. The IndoAryan Singhalese hailed from the regions of Gujarat in Western India, and Bengal and Orissa in Eastern India. The Tamils migrated in waves from the Dravidian kingdoms of South India and indeed, intermittently dominated the Northern part of the island during the Anuradhapura Era which lasted from about 250 BC until 1055 AD. Although Vijaya and his followers, the legendary founders of Singhalese race are believed to have brought brides from South Indian royal dynasties, a distinct “separateness” marked the settlement of the two groups. The Sinhalese adopted Buddhism brought to the island three centuries after their initial arrival; the Tamils brought Hinduism from South India’ (ibid., 14). With western colonization (1505– 1948), Christianity was introduced to the island. The latter part of the nineteenth century brought South Indian Tamils to work on the island’s tea plan-

Notes to pages 8–11

11

12

13

14 15

16

165

tations. ‘By the close of the colonial era, Sri Lanka was multiethnic with a Sinhalese majority, followed by the Tamils, Moors/Malays and Burghers (mixed descent). It was also multireligious represented by Buddhism predominantly, then by Hinduism, Islam and Christianity. Finally the country was multilingual; most people spoke Sinhalese, followed by Tamil and English. The roots of discord seem inherent in this diverse society’ (ibid., 14). Definitions of first- and second-generation minority students are problematic. In this study I define first generation as those who have migrated to Canada. The offspring of first-generation immigrants constitute the second generation. International students come under the first-generation category. They generally experience problems relating to assessment of prior learning, access to professions and trades, and the Catch-22 situation – ‘Canadian work experience.’ Other related problems involve accent, language proficiency, mannerisms, and unfamiliarity with the Canadian education system. Second-generation minority students are more prone to ‘identity and culture conflict.’ The first generation has no doubts about being South Asian. The second generation faces culture conflict and identity issues – perpetual Indo-Canadian quandaries. Both groups generally experience racism but in different degrees and forms. Statistics regarding numbers are not available for the university under study. I use the term ‘predominantly White university’ to emphasize that the institution, being in a small town, has more White students than do universities in larger urban areas. International or visa students are temporary residents who come to Canada to study; most of them return to their countries of origin afterwards. The tuition fees they pay are almost twice as high as those of landed immigrants and Canadian citizens. Second-generation immigrant students were born in Canada or have accompanied migrant parents. All interviewees reported that their families belonged to the upper-middle class in the country of origin. Their class status in Canada may have dropped to lower class (sometimes lower-middle class) as a result of initial adjustments to the host society. However, most South Asian families rise to the middle or even upper-middle class after years of hard work. For a discussion of South Asian students’ initial experience of class status or ‘status-shock’ see chapter 3. See Lee 1994; Razack 1995b. The ‘model minority myth’ originated in the United States in the 1960s, when the media paid attention to success stories regarding ‘high family income, high educational attainment and low rates of deviance among Asian Americans.’ See Chan and Wang, in Altbach and

166 Notes to pages 11–32 Lomotey 1991, 44. However, the media ignored the other side of the coin: ‘Many Asian-American kids experience immense psychological stress when they cannot live up to the “whiz kid’ stereotype” (ibid.). These children endure ostracism and taunting that they are ‘nerds.’ Furthermore, teachers refuse to help them because they are intelligent (ibid.). The ‘model minority myth’ was originally applied to Chinese and Japanese Americans; later it was also applied to South Asian Americans because of their general academic excellence. In this study, twenty-five interviewees were faring well academically and fifteen believed that they could have excelled but for barriers they faced in the university setting. Chapters 4 to 7 discuss these issues in greater detail. 17 South Asian immigration patterns have affected university climates in Canada. South Asian migration started (slowly) in the early twentieth century. In 1906 there were about 5,000 South Asian immigrants; by 1996, 670,860; by 2003, 963,190. Numbers of relocating individuals have been subjected to changes in Canadian immigration policies. See Statistics Canada, 1996 Census: ‘Education, Mobility and Migration’; Statistics Canada 2003 Census. 2 Theory and Method: Antiracism, Racism, and Ethnographic Interviews 1 The antiracism mandate is part of the mission statement of the university’s Human Rights and Equity offices. 2 First, Pierre Trudeau established Canada’s multiculturalism policy in 1971 under the title ‘Multiculturalism within a Bilingual Framework.’ The policy engaged the concerns of ethnic minorities vis-à-vis the Royal Commission on Bilingualism and Biculturalism, which recommended equal partnership to the British and French ‘charter’ groups. Second, the Immigration Act of 1967 paved the way for immigrants of colour to enter the country; it stated that Canada did not discriminate on the basis of race, national origin, religion, or culture. Third, the policy of multiculturalism granted Canada a distinctive symbolic identity. See Esses and Gardner 1996, 3-4. 3 I refer here to colonization as a racist process whereby the Indian Subcontinent was politically, economically, socially, and culturally subjugated from 1535 on by the Portuguese, followed by the French, Dutch, and British during the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. See Ram 1991; Chitnis 1988. India gained independence from Britain on 15 August 1947. 4 For the sake of confidentiality I will not disclose the name of the university. 5 The Equity Office ensures equity throughout the university. The structure includes the Office of the University Advisor on Equity, the Council on Employment Equity, and the Senate Educational Equity Committee.

Notes to pages 32–48

167

6 Besides the Equity Office, new positions in the Human Rights Office and in Human Resources relate directly to equity. 7 Work/study programs help students financially over and above funding from the Ontario Student Awards Program (OSAP). Students obtain about ten hours of paid work a week within university departments. 8 After each interview I asked the respondent how he or she felt about the interview process. In this way I obtained instant feedback. 3 Adjusting to Canada 1 ‘In the past 145 years (from 1852, when what we now call Statistics Canada started publishing records, to 1997) Canada added about 14.9 million immigrants to its population. Of this number, 1.2 million were admitted in the last five years alone (between 1993–1998) almost two-thirds coming from Asia. Most Asian immigrants have settled in Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal. Between 1981 and 1991, about 4.3 million out of 26.6 million Canadians (16.3 per cent) were foreign born’ (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 1997, 3, cited in Laquian et al. 1998, 3). 2 South Asian people were first recruited in settler countries, particularly the West Indies, as indentured labourers, bonded to employers until they paid off the debt of passage. 3 The Sikhs are from the Indian state of Punjab. ‘The first Sikh to arrive in Canada was probably Prince Victor Duleep Singh, grandson of Maharaja Ranjit Singh, “The Lion of the Punjab” in 1899’ (Tracey 1999, 234). 4 Restricting the entry of wives and children into Canada limited South Asian population growth. As aliens, Sikhs lived under spatial and residential segregation and constantly faced deportation (Tinker, 1975). Only after India gained independence in 1947 did the Canadian Citizenship Act of 1947 grant citizenship to South Asians in Canada (Malik 1982, 23). 5 Chinese immigration to Canada started in 1858 (Burney 1995, 4). Numbers in outmigration to all countries between 1858 and 1875 were 3 to 10 million (Yi and Qinwu, in Laquain et al. 1998, 75). Historical statistics regarding Chinese outmigration during this period are scarce. Likewise, figures for Chinese and Japanese women immigrants are scanty and unreliable. We do know that Chinese and Japanese immigrants were considered ‘outsiders’ and that their entry into North America was ‘restricted’ (Dua 2000, 70). 6 The brain drain to developed countries is a problem that the developing world has faced since the inception of immigration to North America. ‘The most serious loss sustained by developing countries may be the one which is the most difficult to measure: that is, the loss of political and managerial tal-

168 Notes to pages 49–55

7

8 9

10

11

12

ent and of men and women of vigour and enterprise whatever their professions and skills may be’ (Hawkins 1972, 21). Lester Pearson, chairman of the Commission on International Development, saw the brain drain from poor to rich countries as a problem of ‘serious proportions’ (Commission on International Development 1969, 79, in Krauter and Davis 1978, 93). The ‘public consultation’ took place in the middle of a recession, during which the Reform Party was bemoaning crimes committed by immigrants and refugee applicants. Visible minorities in Canada rose from 3.2 million in 1996 to 3.9 in 2001 (Statistics Canada, 2001 census). I draw the concept of the ‘subaltern mentality’ from Mayo 1927, 19-32 (emphasis added). She discusses the ‘slave mentality’ of the Hindu: ‘The whole pyramid of the Hindu’s woes material and spiritual – poverty, sickness, ignorance, political minority, melancholy, ineffectiveness, not forgetting that subconscious conviction of inferiority which he forever bares and advertises by his gnawing and imaginative alertness for social affronts – rests upon a rock bottom physical base.’ (The term subaltern refers to any group or person generally of inferior rank or station.) ‘Though postcolonial discourse has reestablished a voice and collective agency in South Asian subalterns, the trend is a dependence on western intellectuals “to speak for” the subaltern condition rather than allowing them to speak for themselves’ (Spivak, in Guha and Spivak 1988). Spivak, a Marxian and postcolonialist, contends that by speaking out and claiming cultural solidarity, the heterogeneous people only re-establish their subordinate position in society. ‘Generations to come will scarce believe that such a one as this walked the earth in flesh and blood’ (Albert Einstein about Gandhi). Mohandas Karamchand Gandhi (1869–1948) was one of the century’s most respected spiritual and political leaders and helped liberate the people of India from British rule through non-violent resistance. He is called Mahatma, or Great Soul (Chew 2001, 1). The point system is a set of selection criteria for immigration to Canada based on education, age, proficiency in English, and skills. It was introduced in 1967 during the third wave of immigration (1967–79). An immigrant needs to earn 70 points; the skill factor alone accounts for 15 points. Manipulation occurs in the skills category. Selection occurs mainly in correlation with Canada’s economic requirements and demonstrates systemic racism, sexism, and classism. It unduly emphasizes educational qualifications and language proficiency (Khan, in Laquian et al. 1998). The Jews were delivered from captivity in Egypt by the Prophet Moses and promised a land ‘flowing with milk and honey.’ However, because of their

Notes to pages 56–87

169

disobedience to God, they wandered for forty years in the wilderness and reached the Promised Land only after many adversities. Joshua, successor to Moses, finally led them into the Promised Land (Exodus 3:8). 13 I challenge the notion of a ‘foreign’ accent in this context. All accents may be ‘foreign’; I refer here to a non-Canadian accent. 14 In jest, second-generation youth are CBCDs or ‘Canadian-Born-ConfusedDesis.’ ‘Desi’ means ‘native’ of South Asia. First-generation young people are ‘Fresh-off-the-Boat’ or FOBs. 4 Faculty–Student Relationships 1 ‘Deconstruction’ is the brainchild of the French philosopher Jacques Derrida (1976). This school of thought attends to ‘how words say more than to what words say’ (Powell 1998, 99). Deconstruction is thus a style of reading that explores ‘how language can say many different things simultaneously’ and not ‘convey a single, authoritarian message’ (ibid.). Specifically, deconstruction involves decentring or ‘unmasking the problematic nature of all centers’ (ibid., 100). According to Derrida, all Western philosophies revolve around the idea of ‘a Centre, a Fixed Point, an Ideal Form, a Truth, an Essence, a God or a Presence’ (ibid.). Beliefs are customarily ‘capitalized’ and assume all meaning and significance. Derrida contends that this focus on the idea of a Centre is an attempt to exclude, inhibit, discount, or marginalize ‘others’ (or ‘Others’) (ibid., 101). Thus, in male-dominated settings, women are marginalized ‘Others.’ Similarly, in a White-dominated university milieu, minority groups are the ‘Others.’ In this study, several participants portrayed White instructors as marginalizing minority students. 2 ‘Cultural capital,’ or societally valued knowledge, is also termed ‘highbrow’ culture, which is defined as the cultural cues exhibited in families with higher socio-economic status and linked to a superior level of academic success. Highbrow cultural practices related to class ‘include attending museums and taking extracurricular classes in dance, art, music and the like’ (Ganzenboom et al., 1990). 3 Current statistics are not available from the Equity Office of the university under study. However, information suggests that more than five female faculty members of colour in the arts departments left the university between 1998 and 2004. 5 Peer Group Interactions 1 I refer to Toni Morrison’s book The Bluest Eye (1970), in which she talks

170 Notes to pages 88–90

2

3

4

5

6 7

about a young Black girl’s longing to have blue eyes and how she ‘learns racial self-loathing’ (Searls 1997, 164). In the novel Morrison asks questions such as, ‘Who told her?’ and ‘Who made her feel it was better to be a freak than what she was?’ Morrison (1970, 210) lashes out against ‘the damaging internalization of assumptions of immutable inferiority originating in an outsider gaze.’ A critical theme that emerges from this story is ‘an exploration of the racism implicit in dominant notions of literacy and the hidden curriculum of formal education’ (Searls 1997, 164). ‘So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them’ (Genesis 1:27). Creating all humans in His image implies equality for all individuals. Until recently most pictures of Christ and his apostles rendered them as blond, blue-eyed White people – even though they hailed from the Middle East. This suggests an ethnocentric depiction of purity, holiness, piety, and sanctity in terms of the ‘being White.’ Some Muslim women cover their heads with a hijab (or veil). It bears a religious significance: ‘We have bestowed raiment upon you to cover your shame’ (Quran 7:26). ‘And say to the believing woman that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what appears thereof; that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands’ (ibid. 24:31). According to Cole, ‘the term “hijab” comes from the Arabic word “hijaba,” which means to hide from view. It is the long dress and veil worn by many Muslim women with the function of distinguishing them from non-Muslims, reminding them of their Islamic faith, and concealing them from the public view of males’ (Cole 1998, 1). The pagri, the turban worn by Sikhs, has a religious significance. In 1699, Guru Gobind Singh created the Khalsa Panth on Baisakhi Day (30 March). At that time he instructed the Khalsa, or Sikh community, to wear a turban for the proper upkeep of hair. Thus the turban became an important religious symbol for the Sikhs. Many have suffered greatly to preserve this symbol (Alag 2001). The salwar kameez is a South Asian form of attire worn by women. Most Hindus are vegetarian and consider the cow (and some other animals) to be sacred. ‘Certain foods are also disallowed ... particularly in households where several family members practice strict vegetarianism. This is further complicated by the dietary restrictions imposed on Hindu widows, young and old, whereby they are forbidden to partake of any meat, fish, eggs, onions, garlic etc. To enforce the separation of taboo and non-taboo foods, Hindu households often have two kitchens’ (S. Mazumdar and S. Mazumdar 1994, 41–9).

Notes to pages 91–2

171

8 The saree is more than five thousand years old. It is mentioned in the Vedas (3000 BC), the oldest existing work of literature. It is the principal item of clothing for most Indian women. It is worn by around 75 per cent of Indians (of whom there are more than one billion) and is always made without a single stitch. It consists of five to nine yards of loosely tied cloth, pleated and folded by hand. It is sometimes worn as a working dress or party wear. Made of cotton or silk, it can be used for pagris and turbans as well (Kamath 2001). 9 The term ‘being sold into marriage’ is a direct reference to the dowry system in India, which is related to the practice of arranged marriage. Dowry refers to money and other material goods given to a bride/bridegroom at the time of marriage (see Srinavas 1984, 10). Most families in South Asian countries, whatever their class or religion, give and take dowry. 10 ‘Bindi is a dot that is worn by Hindu women on their foreheads and signifies the third eye of Lord Shiva, one of the Hindu pantheon of gods. The bindi also serves as a means to avert the male gaze and/or the evil eye. Married women wear the sindhoor, kum kum, or red powder to signify their marital status. Kum kum powder, a sacred element, is applied to one’s third eye during puja or worship ceremonies. Men wear the tilak, a mark made of sacred ash or sandal wood paste, on their foreheads, after worship in the temple. The bindi and the tilak signify that a person’s soul has been purified through puja and that a person can perceive things through God’s eye, beyond the material world, by seeing the divinity in all beings. In another sense, they light up in the astral world so that the devas (gods) can see the persons who wear them more clearly. Unmarried women and children wear black bindis or pottus (in Tamil), and widows wear only sacred ash or no bindis. People apply vibhudhi, or sacred ash and sandalwood paste, in different shapes according to their religious sect. For example, Shaivites (followers of Lord Shiva) apply vibhuti in three horizontal lines on the forehead and apply kum kum and sandal wood paste in the centre of the middle line. Vaishnavites (followers of Lord Vishnu) apply vibhuti and sandalwood paste in a “V” shape. For Shaivites, Shiva, the lord of dance, is the main god, who constantly keeps things moving. Parvati, Ganesha, and Murugan are associated gods. This sect places special emphasis on yoga and devotional activities. For Vaishnavites, Vishnu is the main god, the protector and sustainer of things. Other associated gods are Rama and Krishna. Vaishnavites place special emphasis on temples and mantras’ (What Is Hinduism? 2001). 11 In Hinduism – the religion of most Indians – people venerate animals such as the cow, the elephant, and the monkey. The sacred cow, the elephant god (Ganesh), and the god of the monkeys (Hanuman) are examples.

172 Notes to pages 93–109 12 Kamasutra: A Tale of Love is an Indian movie starring Indira Varma, Sarita Choudhury, Naveen Andrews, Ramon Tikaram, and Rekha and directed by Mira Nair. It is based on a story set in sixteenth-century (i.e., precolonial) India and deals with sexuality and power at the royal court. 13 Two good Indian roles given to minority actors in the 1980s were Art Malik in Jewel in the Crown and Ben Kingsley (an actor of Indian and British origin) in Gandhi. 14 In this study, two students told me they had been thinking about transferring. 15 In India, the Sardar Sarovar Dam in the Narmada Valley will displace between forty and eighty million people. Most dams are expensive and inefficient and do enormous ecological damage. This struggle has been going on since 1985. ‘The commission recommends that large dam projects should only be approved if they meet a framework and guidelines, set out in the report that recognize the rights and assess the risk of all interested parties’ (Reuter 2000). 16 ‘The Bhopal tragedy occurred during the midnight of 2–3 December 1984. Over 40 tonnes of highly poisonous methyl isocyanate gas leaked out of a pesticide factory of Union Carbide in Bhopal. Union Carbide in Bhopal, affiliated to Union Carbide in North America, was responsible for the tragedy. Thousands died immediately and another 10,000 have died in the following years due to exposure-related diseases. Survivors suffer from acute breathlessness, brain damage, menstrual chaos and loss of immunity. Dubbed as “Chemical AIDS,” the effects of gas poisoning is still being felt. Despite concrete evidence that the tragedy occurred due to unsafe design and reckless cost-cutting, it has lacked the will to take any action against the Corporation. The government sold out the people it claimed to represent by agreeing to a settlement of just $470 million with the Corporation, which is meager in comparison to the loss of life and side-effects.’ In the name of development, charges of manslaughter and other criminal offences have been ignored; see Bhopal (2001) www.ucaqld.com. 17 Alexander and Mohanty (1997) refer to this globalization process as ‘recolonization.’ They mean that racism generates hierarchical relationships in developing countries. 6 Curriculum and Minority Faculty Members 1 I distinguish between ‘curriculum as text’ and ‘curriculum as discourse.’ What is taught as text in classrooms permeates the lived experiences of students in university campuses. ‘Curriculum as text’ refers to the subject matter

Notes to pages 110–18

2

3 4 5

6

7

173

taught in classrooms, ‘curriculum as discourse’ to the pragmatic effects of such teaching on students. Text and discourse of the hidden curriculum are closely connected. Shakespeare’s The Merchant of Venice (1594) has been accused of anti-Semitism because of its portrayal of the Jewish moneylender Shylock. Moneylenders have long been portrayed as bloodsucking misers seeking vengeance against non-Jews (Schneider 2001). Mark Twain’s Huckleberry Finn is strongly racist; it also illustrates the controversy over gender and sexuality. The Chinese are Asians, not South Asians. In the 1960s, Africville, the largest Black community in Halifax, was ‘expropriated and residents [were] evicted from homes that had been in families for generations’ under a program of ‘urban renewal.’ Urban renewal destroyed many viable, usually poorer neighbourhoods across North America in the name of progress. Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms (1982) excluded property rights, and this loophole was used to attack the ‘weak and suppress free expression.’ Africville – a symbol for the struggle against racism and de facto segregation in Nova Scotia – was a growing community with a bonemeal plant, a slaughterhouse, and a city dump. Residents sought to improve it by installing minimal services and safety measures such as water and sewage lines and police protection. Declaring it a ‘slum,’ the Halifax city government expropriated the land, demolished the houses, and destroyed the community. It paid off the residents, who moved – some against their will. Today the site is an open, underused park; McMahon 1999. This wholesale eviction shows government indifference to history of Black poverty and racism. In the university under study, fourteen out of sixteen faculty in development studies were White. Only two (both PhD candidates) were from minority groups. This explains the Eurocentric curriculum. See Herrnstein and Murray 1994. The Bell curve – a widely applied statistical tool to rank elements in a group – has been used to compare IQ tests, which gained ascendancy in the United States in the second half of the twentieth century. According to Herrnstein and Murray, when the Bell curve is applied, people with high IQs tend to belong to the top echelons of society and are more likely to be ‘dominant and prosperous.’ Those with lower IQs are likely to be in the lower strata. According to the authors, people of colour and the poor ‘overrepresent’ the unintelligent because of inherited low intelligence rather than because of the damaging results of structural racism and other flaws of society. Measuring intelligence has become more and more complex. Many people now regard this application of the Bell curve as ‘a bankrupt concept.’ A forceful criticism in 1995 called it ‘full of mistakes ranging from

174 Notes to pages 118–40 sloppy reasoning to mis-citations of sources to outright mathematical errors’; see Leman 1997, 2, at www.slate.msn.com/features/bellcurve/asp. 7 The Psychosocial Dimension 1 I have placed ‘average’ in quotes because I challenge the notion that South Asian female students are less attractive than their White counterparts. 2 I refer here to the 11 September 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center in New York by a few Islamic terrorists (CNN news, 11 September 2001). 3 Buddhism, founded by Siddhartha Gautama about 535 BC in Nepal, is based on four goals: to be fully understood – the universality of suffering; to be abandoned – the desire to have and control things which cause suffering; to be made visible – the supreme truth and final liberation of nirvana, which is achieved as the cause of suffering is eliminated; and to be brought into being – the truth of the eightfold ariya path leading to the cessation of suffering. The Buddha’s eightfold path consist of right understanding, right thinking, right speech, right conduct, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness, and right concentration. ‘Buddhism has the characteristics of what would be expected in a cosmic religion for the future: it transcends a personal God, avoids dogmas and theology; it covers both the natural and spiritual and it is based on a religious sense aspiring from the experiences of all things, natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity’ (Einstein, www.religioustolerance.org/ buddhism.htm). 4 Chin 1998, 492–3. In this study a South Asian professor who is well versed in Vedanta philosophy explained: ‘Vedanta philosophy is a school of thought that recognizes four faculties of the ultimate mind, namely, thinking, feeling, acting and restraining. At present we think in one way, feel in another, act in a third and are restrained in the fourth. The discord within manifests itself in the external role as conflict between individuals. The fourfold yoga of Vedanta is a means to achieve harmony within. Vedanta says that these four faculties – thinking, feeling, acting, and restraining – can be sharpened and purified and be given a higher direction for the purpose of achieving unity within’ (emphasis added). ‘The Vedanta school of thought was founded by Sri Ramakrishna Paramahamsa (1836–1886), a great religious teacher who preached that the realization of God is the only purpose in life. Chief of his disciples was Swami Vivekananda (1863–1902), who established the Ramakrishna Order of India in 1894. The Ramakrishna Order does not believe in conversion nor does it indulge in the occult or the sensational. The Order places utmost importance on personal spiritual unfoldment and selfless service. Inspired by the idea of

Notes to pages 141–54

175

the harmony of all faiths, its centres encourage adherents of different faiths to meet in a spirit of friendship and mutual appreciation and to learn from one another without having to give up one’s faith. In the words of Sri Ramakrishna: “God has made different religions to suit different aspirants, lives and countries ... all doctrines are only so many paths, but a path is by no means God Himself. Indeed one can reach God if one follows any of the paths with whole-hearted devotion”’ (www.Vedanta-seattle.org). 5 This South Asian professor was citing from some of the teachings of Swami Vivekananda. 8 Challenges and Conclusion 1 The 1998 statistics for the institution under study indicate that of 801 faculty members, only 63 belonged to a visible minority; that was 7.9 per cent. Representation of visible minorities in the Canadian workforce is 12 per cent. The figures for minority students are yet to be collected. 2 The university created its employment equity plan in June 1992. The equity objectives are to increase the diversity of the workforce and the numbers of underrepresented groups, to develop an infrastructure that supports diversification, and to develop special measures and community involvement in order to increase the participation of underrepresented groups at the university. 3 The Federal Contractors’ Program mandates the hiring of four target groups – women, visible minorities, the disabled, and people of different sexual orientation. 4 See Haroon Siddiqui, ‘How Prejudices Manifest Themselves in Police-Citizen Relationships,’ speech to the Kingston Police Services Board Advisory Committee on Race Relations, Annual General Meeting, at the John Deutch University Centre, Queen’s University, Kingston, Ontario, 13 June 2001. 5 Sojourner Truth, with the name Isabella, was born a slave in 1797 in Ulster County, New York. She became a free woman when New York abolished slavery in 1827. In 1843, a year of revelation, Isabella named herself Sojourner Truth and preached about the end to come. Gradually her speeches became politicized to include social reforms, women’s rights, and the cause of freed slaves. Her last cause was to fight for landless former slaves (www.web. com.com/duane/truth.html). ‘Ain’t I a woman’ is the title of a speech she delivered at the Women’s Convention in Akron, Ohio, in 1851. In her words: ‘That man over there says that women need to be helped into carriages, and lifted over ditches, and to have the best place everywhere. Nobody ever helps me into carriages, or over mud-puddles, or gives me the best place! And ain’t I a woman? Look at me! Look at my arm! I have ploughed and planted, and

176 Notes to pages 150–62 gathered into barns and no man could head me! And ain’t I a woman? I could work as much and eat as much as a man – when I could get it – and bear the lash as well! And ain’t I a woman? I have borne thirteen children, and seen most all sold off to slavery and when I cried out with my mother’s grief, none but Jesus heard me! And ain’t I a woman?’; see hooks 1981. 6 Statistics for visible minorities are 12 out 428 staffers at the university – that is 2.8 per cent of the total. 7 The Human Rights Office works through proactive strategies in the following areas: education and documentation; training; implementation of individual intervention mechanisms; fostering complementary initiatives throughout the university; and advising on equity policies.

Bibliography

Abu-Laban, S.M., and P.S. Li. 1998. ‘Canadian Immigration and Immigrant Adaptation at the Millennium.’ Canadian Ethnic Studies 30, no. 3. Abu-Lughod, L. 1991. ‘Writing against Culture.’ In R. Fox, ed., Recapturing Anthropology: Working in the Present. New Mexico: School of American Press. Adams, M.V. 1996. The Multicultural Imagination: ‘Race,’ Color and the Unconscious. London: Routledge. Aguirre, A., and R.O. Martinez. 1993. Chicanos in Higher Education: Issues and Dilemmas for the 21st Century. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report no. 3. Washington, DC: George Washington University School of Education and Human Development. Alag, S.S. 2001. ‘Pagri.’ www.punjabonline.com. Alexander, J.M. and C.T. Mohanty. 1997. Feminist Genealogies, Colonial Legacies, Democratic Futures. New York: Routledge. Allahar, A. 1996. ‘Race, Ethnic Identity and the Search for “Home.”’ Paper, Department of Sociology, University of Western Ontario. Altbach, P.G. 1991. ‘The Racial Dilemma in American Higher Education.’ In Altbach and Lomotey, eds., The Racial Crises in American Higher Education. Albany: State University of New York Press. Altbach, P.G., and K. Lomotey, eds. 1991. The Racial Crisis in American Higher Education. Albany: SUNY Press. Anthias, F., and N. Yuval-Davis. 1983. ‘Contextualizing Feminisms: Gender Ethnic and Class Division.’ Feminist Review 15. – eds., 1992. Racialized Boundaries. London: Routledge. Arat-Koc, S. 1999. ‘Gender and Race on Non-Discriminatory Immigration Policies in Canada.’ In Dua and Robertson, eds., Canadian Anti-Racist Feminist Thought. Toronto: Women’s Press. Asamen, J.K., and G.L. Berry. 1987. ‘Self-Concept, Alienation and Perceived

178

Bibliography

Prejudice: Implications for Counseling Asian Americans.’ Journal of Multicultural Counseling and Development 15, no. 4. Backhouse, C. 1998. ‘“I was unable to identify with Topsy”: Carrie Best’s Struggle against Racial Segregation in Nova Scotia.’ Atlantis 22, no. 2. Baker, G.C. 1983. Planning and Organizing for Multicultural Instruction. Don Mills, ON: Addison-Wesley. Bakhtin, M. 1986. Speech Genres and Other Late Essays. Ed. Emerson and Holquist. Trans. McGee. Austin: University of Texas Press. Balibar, E. 1991. ‘Is There a “Neo-Racism”?’ In Balibar and Wallerstein, eds., Race, Nation, Class: Ambiguous Identities. London: Verso. 17–28. Banks, J.A. 1994. ‘The Historical Reconstruction of Knowledge about Race: The Implication for Transformative Teaching.’ Paper read at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 4–9 April. See also Educational Researcher 24, no. 2 (1995). Bannerji, H. 1991a. ‘Racism, Sexism, Knowledge and the Academy.’ Resources for Feminist Research 20. – 1991b.‘But Who Speaks for Us? Experience and Agency in Conventional Feminist Paradigms.’ In H. Bannerji, ed., Unsettling Relations: The University as a Site of Feminist Struggles. Toronto: Women’s Press. – 1993. ‘Popular Images of South Asian Women.’ In Bannerji, ed., Returning the Gaze: Essays on Racism, Feminism and Politics. Toronto: Sister Vision Press. – 2000. The Dark Side of the Nation: Essays on Multiculturalism, Nationalism and Gender. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press. Bean, J.P. 1990. ‘Why Students Leave: Insights from Research.’ In Hossler et al., eds., The Strategic Management of College Enrollments. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Belkhir, J. and M. Ball. 1993. ‘Editor’s Introduction: Integrating Race, Sex and Class in Our Disciplines.’ Race, Sex and Class 1: 3–11. Bennett, K. 1992. ‘Feminist Bisexuality: A Both/And Option for an Either/Or World.’ In Weise, ed., Closer to Home: Bisexuality and Feminism. Seattle, WA: Seal Press. Bernard, J.K., M.L. Lefebvre, G. Chud, and R. Lange. 1995. Paths to Equity: Cultural, Linguistic and Racial Diversity in Canadian Early Childhood Education. North York, ON: York Lanes. Berry, J.W. 1990. ‘Psychology of Acculturation.’ In Berman, ed., Cross-Cultural Perspectives – Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 1989. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press. – 1997. ‘Immigration, Acculturation and Adaptation.’ Applied Psychology: An International Review 46, no. 1. Bhabha, H. 1994. The Location of Culture. London: Routledge. ‘Bhopal.’ 2001. www.ucaqld.com.

Bibliography 179 Blee, K.M. 2002. Inside Organized Racism: Women in the Hate Movement. Berkeley: University of California Press. Bock, M. 1997. ‘The Measure of Professorial Productivity: Using Student Learning Outcomes Criteria.’ ASHE annual meeting paper. Boersma, P.D., D. Gay, R.A. Jones, L. Morrison, and H. Remick. 1981. ‘Sex Differences in College Student-Teacher Interactions: Fact or Fantasy?’ Sex Roles 7: 775–84. Boice, R. 1993a. ‘New Faculty Involvement for Women and Minorities.’ Research in Higher Education 34, no. 3: 291–341. – 1993b. ‘Early Turning Points in Professional Careers of Women and Minorities.’ New Directions for Teaching and Learning 53: 71–9. Bolaria, B.S., and P. Li. 1988. Racial Oppression in Canada, 2nd edition. Toronto: Garamond Press. Boykin, A.W. 1986. ‘The Triple Quandary and the Schooling of Afro-American Children.’ In Neisser, ed., The School Achievement of Minority Children: New Perspectives. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Brah, A., M.J. Hickman, and M. Ghaill (eds.). 1999. Thinking Identities. London: Macmillan. Brandt, G. 1986. The Realization of Anti-Racist Education. London: Falmer Press. Brown, L., and S.E.R. Kurpius. 1997. ‘Psychological Factors Influencing Academic Persistence of American Indian College Students.’ Journal of College Student Development 38, no. 1: 3–12. Bruner, J. 1971. ‘The Process of Education Revisited.’ Phi Delta Kappan 53: 18–21. Buchgnani, N. 1979. ‘Social Identity Formation and Interpretation: Recent East Indian Immigration to British Columbia.’ In Elliot, ed., Too Many Nations, Many Cultures. Scarborough, ON: Prentice-Hall. Buchignani, N., and D.M. Indra. 1985. Continuous Journey: A Social History of South Asians in Canada. Toronto: McClelland & Stewart. Burney, S. 1995. Shared Histories: Coming to Gum San. The Story of Chinese Canadians. Toronto: Multicultural History Society of Ontario. – 2002. ‘Brecht in the Basthi: Performance and Meaning across Borders.’ In B. Rasmussen and A.L. Ostern., eds., Playing Betwixt and Between: The Idea.’ Dialogues (2001), 3–127. Bergen, Norway: Idea Publications. Cabrera, AF., A. Nora, P.T. Terenzini, E. Pascarella, and L.S. Hogedorn. 1999. ‘Campus Racial Climate and the Adjustment of Students to College: A Comparison between White Students and African-American Students.’ Journal of Higher Education 70, no. 2: 134–60. Carmichael, S., and C.R. Hamilton. 1967. Black Power: The Politics of Liberation in America. New York: Random House.

180

Bibliography

Carty, L. 1991. ‘Black Women in Academia: A Statement from the Periphery.’ In Bannerji, Carty, Delhi, Heald and McKenna, eds., Unsettling Relations. Toronto: Women’s Press. Celik, Z. 1996. ‘Colonialism, Orientalism and the Canon.’ Art Bulletin 78, no. 2: 202–5. Chan, S., and L. Wang. 1991. ‘Racism and the Model Minority: Asian Americans in Higher Education.’ In Altbach and Lomotey, eds., The Racial Crises in American Higher Education. Albany: State University of New York Press. Chavez, R.C., and R.V. Padilla. 1995. ‘Introduction.’ In Padilla and Chavez, eds., The Leaning Ivory Tower: Latino Professors in American Universities. Albany: State University of New York Press. Chew, R. 2001. ‘Mahatma Gandhi: Indian Spiritual/Political Leader and Humanitarian.’ San Francisco, CA: Lucid Interactive. Chin, J.L. 1998. ‘Mental Health Services and Treatment.’ In Lee and Zane, eds., Handbook of Asian American Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Chitnis, S. 1988. ‘Feminism: Indian Ethos and Indian Convictions.’ In Ghadially, ed., Women in Indian Society. New Delhi: Sage. Christensen, C.P. 1995. ‘Cross-Cultural Awareness: A Developmental Process in a Multicultural and Multiracial Society.’ Multiculturalism 16, no. 1: 4–8. Chun, K.M., K.L. Eastman, G.C.S. Wang, and S.S. Sue. 1998. ‘Psychopathology.’ In Lee and Zane eds., Handbook of Asian American Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Citizenship and Immigration Canada. 1994. Citizenship and Immigration Statistics, Cat. No. MP22-1/1997. Ottawa: Minister of Public Works and Government Services Canada. – 1997. Facts and Figures, 1996: Immigration Overview. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services. – 1999. Facts and Figures, 1996: Immigration Overview. Ottawa: Strategic Policy, Planning and Research. Cohen, M.N. 1998. Culture of Intolerance: Chauvinism, Class and Racism in the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Cole, S. 1998. Donning the Hijab: How Not to be a Sex Object. www.ibiblio.org/ prism/mar98/donning.html. Commission on International Development. 1969. Partners in Development. New York: Praeger. Cotler, I. 1991. ‘Racist Incitement: Giving Freedom of Speech a Bad Name.’ In Schneiderman, ed., Freedom of Expression and the Charter. Toronto: Thompson Professional Publishing. Crim, Elton, J. 1998. ‘Aversive Racism on Campus: Explaining Mechanisms of

Bibliography 181 Isolation for Students and Staff of Colour on Campus.’ Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Miami. Das-Gupta, T. 1994. ‘Political Economy of Gender, Race and Class: Looking at South Asian Immigrant Women in Canada.’ Canadian Ethnic Studies 26, no. 1: 59–73. Dauber, S.L., K.L. Alexander, and D.R. Entwisle. 1996. ‘Tracking and Transitions through the Middle Grades: Channeling Educational Trajectories.’ Sociology of Education 59: 237–46. de Beauvoir, S. 1970. The Second Sex. New York: Vintage Books. Defour, D.C., and B.J. Hirsch. 1990. ‘The Adaptation of Black Graduate Students: A Social Network Approach.’ American Journal of Community Psychology 18: 487–503. Dei, G.J.S. 1995. ‘Integrative Anti-Racism: Intersection of Race, Class and Gender.’ Race, Gender and Class 2, no. 3: 11–30. – 1996. Anti-Racism Education in Theory and Practice. Halifax, NS: Fernwood. – 2000a. ‘Recasting Anti-Racism and the Axis of Difference: Beyond the Question of Theory.’ Race, Gender and Class 7, no. 2: 1–19. – 2000b. ‘African Development: The Relevance and Implications of “Indigenousness.”’ In Dei, Hall, and Rosenberg, eds., Indigenous Knowledges in Global Contexts: Multiple Readings of Our World. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Dei, G.J.S., and I.M. James. 1998. ‘Becoming Black.’ Race, Ethnicity and Education 1, no. 1: 91–108. Dei, G.J.S., I.M. James, L.L. Karumanchery, S. James-Wilson, and J. Zine. 2000. Removing the Margins: The Challenges and Possibilities of Inclusive Schooling. Toronto: Canadian Scholar’s Press. Dei, G.J.S., J. Mazzuci, E. McIsaac, and J. Zine. 1997. Reconstructing ‘Dropout’: A Critical Ethnography of the Dynamics of Black Students' Disengagement from Schools. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Denzin, N.K., and Yvonna S. Lincoln. 1998. The Landscape of Qualitative Research: Theories and Issues. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Derrida, J. 1976. Of Grammatology. Gayatri Spivak, trans. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press. – 1994. Spectres of Marx. New York: Routledge. Desai, S. 1994. ‘But You Are Different: In Conversation with a Friend.’ In James and Shadd, eds., Talking about Difference: Encounters in Culture, Language and Identity. Toronto: Between the Lines. Desai, S., and S. Subramanian. 2000. Colour, Culture and Dual Consciousness: Issues Identified by South Asian Immigrant Youth in the Greater Toronto Area. Council of

182

Bibliography

Agencies Serving South Asians (CASSA) and the South Asian Women’s Centre (SAWC). Dickason, O.P. 1992. Canada’s First Nations: A History of Founding Peoples from Earliest Times. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Dines, G. 1994. ‘What’s Left of Multiculturalism? Race, Class and Gender in the Classroom.’ Race, Sex and Class 1, no. 2: 23–34. Doxtator, D. 2000. ‘Fluffs and Feathers: An Exhibit on the Symbols of Indianness: A Resource Guide.’ In Iseke-Barnes and Wane, eds., Equity in Schools and Society. Toronto: Canadian Scholars Press. Dua, E. 2000. ‘The Hindu Woman’s Question: Canadian Nation Building and the Social Construction of Gender for South Asian-Canadian Women.’ In Anti-Racist Feminism: Critical Race and Gender Studies. Halifax, NS: Fernwood. Dua, E., and B. Lawrence. 2000. ‘Challenging White Hegemony in University Classrooms: Whose Canada Is It?’ Atlantis 24, no. 2. DuBois, W.E.B. 1970. W.E.B. DuBois Speaks: Speeches and Addresses 1890–1919. Philip S. Foner, ed. New York: Pathfinder, 1970. – 1975 (1899). The Philadelphia Negro: A Social Study. Millwood, NY: KrausThomson Organization. Duclos, N. 1993. ‘Disappearing Women: Racial Minority Women in Human Rights Cases.’ Canadian Journal of Women and the Law 6, no. 1: 25–51. Einstein, A. 2000. www.religioustolerance.org. El-Khawas, E. 1989. Men and Women Learning Together: A Study of College Students in the Late 70s. Providence, RI: Brown University Press. Ellsworth, E. 1989. ‘Why Doesn’t This Feel Empowering? Working through the Repressive Myths of Repressive Pedagogy.’ Harvard Educational Review 59: 297–324. – 1997. ‘Double Binds of Whiteness.’ In Fine, Weis, Powell, and Wong, eds., Off White: Readings on Race, Power and Society. New York: Routledge. Escuerta. E., and E.O. O’Brien. 1995. ‘Asian Americans in Higher Education: Trends and Issues.’ In Nakanishi and Nishida, eds., The Asian American Education Experience: A Source Book for Teachers and Students. New York: Routledge. Essed, P. 1990. Everyday Racism Reports from Women of Two Cultures. Alameda, CA: Hunter House. – 1991. Understanding Everyday Racism. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Esses, V.M., and R.C. Gardner. 1996. ‘Multiculturalism in Canada: Context and Current Status.’ Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science: 1–11. Special issue: Ethnic Relations in a Multicultural Society. Fanon, F. 1967. Black Skin, White Masks. New York: Grove. Farkas, G. 1996. Human Capital or Cultural Capital? Ethnicity and Poverty Groups in an Urban School District. New York: Aldine de Gruter.

Bibliography 183 Fine, M. 1997. ‘Witnessing Whiteness.’ In Fine et al., OffWhite: Readings on Race, Power and Society. New York: Routledge. Fleras, A. 1996a. ‘Behind the Ivory Walls: Racism/Anti-racism in Academe.’ In Aladdin, ed., Racism in Canadian Schools. Toronto: Harcourt Brace. –1996b. ‘Are Teachers to Blame if Play Arouses Racism?’ Toronto Star, 16 July. Fleras, A., and J. Elliott. 1996. Unequal Relations: An Introduction to Race, Ethnic and Aboriginal Dynamics in Canada, 2nd edition. Scarborough, ON: Prentice Hall. Foucault, M. 1993. The Order of Things. New York: Random House. Four-Level Government/African Canadian Community Working Group. 1992. Towards a New Beginning: Report of the Four-Level Government/African Canadian Community Working Group. Toronto. Frankenberg, R. 1993. The Social Construction of Whiteness: White Women, Race Matters. London: Routledge. Gaertner, S.L. 1976. ‘Nonreactive Measures in Racial Attitude Research: A Focus on ‘Liberals.’’ In Katz, ed., Towards the Elimination of Racism. New York: Pergamon Press. 183–211. Gaertner, S.L., and J.F. Dovidio. 1986. ‘The Aversive Forms of Racism.’ In Gaertner and Dovidio, eds., Prejudice, Discrimination and Racism. New York: Academic Press. Gandhi, M. 1991. Anti-Racist Education Handbook. Toronto: Toronto Board of Education. Gandy, O.H., Jr. 1998. Communication and Race: A Structural Perspective. London: Arnold. Ganzenboom, H.B., P.M. Degraaf, and P. Robert. 1990. ‘Cultural Reproduction Theory on Socialist Ground: Intergenerational Transmission of Inequalities in Hungary.’ Research in Social Stratification and Mobility 9: 79–104. Ghosh, R. 1981. ‘Minority within a Minority: On Being South Asian and Female in Canada’ and ‘Social and Economic Integration of South Asian Women in Montreal, Canada.’ In Kurian and Ghosh, Women in the Family and the Economy: An International Comparative Study. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press. Giroux, H., and P. Shannon. 1997. Education and Cultural Studies: Towards a Performative Practice. New York: Routledge. Glesne, C., and A. Peshkin. 1992. Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction. White Plains, NY: Longman. Gloria, A.M., S.E.R. Kurpius, K.D. Hamilton, and M.S. Willson. 1999. ‘African American Students’ Persistence at a Predominantly White University: Influences of Social Support, University Comfort and Self-Beliefs.’ Journal of College Student Development 40, no. 3: 257–68. Goldberg, T. 1993. Racist Culture. Oxford: Blackwell.

184

Bibliography

Gomex-Peña, Guillermo. 1996. The New World Border. San Francisco, CA: City Lights Bookstore. Gordon, L. 1991. ‘On Difference.’ Genders 10. Grayson, P., and D. Williams. 1994. ‘Racialization’ and Black Student Identity at York University. Toronto: York University, Institute for Social Research. Griffin, O.T. 1992. ‘The Impacts of Academic and Social Integration for Black Students in Higher Education.’ In Lang and Ford, eds., Strategies for Retaining Minority Students in Higher Education. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas. Gupta, A., and J. Ferguson. 1992. ‘Beyond Culture: Space, Identity and the Politics of Difference.’ Cultural Anthropology 7, no. 1: 6–23. Hackett, G., and A.N. Byars. 1996. ‘Social Cognitive Theory and the Career Development of African American Women.’ Career Development Quarterly 44: 332–40. Hall, B.L., J.C. Kulig, K. Thorpe, and L. Pfeuti. 1998. ‘Understanding and Application of Culturally Diverse Issues within University Settings. Canadian Journal of Higher Education 28, no. 1: 105–28. Hall, E.T., and M.R. Hall. 1990. Understanding Cultural Differences. Yarmouth, ME: Intercultural Press. Hall, R.M., and B.R. Sandler. 1982. The Campus Climate: A Chilly One for Women? Washington, DC: U.S. Project on the Status and Education of Women, Association of American Colleges. Hall, S. 1991a. ‘Ethnicity: Identity and Difference.’ Radical America 23: 9–20. – 1991b. ‘Old and New Identities: Old and New Ethnicities.’ In King, ed., Culture, Globalization and the World System. New York: State University Press. – 1992. ‘New Ethnicities.’ In Donald and Rattansi, eds., Race, Culture and Difference. London: Sage. – 1996. ‘Gramsci’s Relevance for the Study of Race and Ethnicity.’ In Morley and Chen, eds., Stuart Hall: Critical Dialogues in Cultural Studies. London: Routledge. – 1997a. Race: The Floating Signifier. Northampton, MD: Media Education Foundation. – 1997b. Representation: Cultural Representation and Signifying Practices. London: Sage. Hamilton, R. 2001. ‘Making the Case for Diversity.’ The Gazette (Queen’s University), 6 November. Hawkins, F. 1972. Canada and Immigration: Public Policy and Public Concern. Montreal and Kingston: McGill-Queen’s University Press. Helmes-Hayes, R., and J Curtis. 1998. The Vertical Mosaic Revisited. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.

Bibliography 185 Henry, F., and C. Tator. 1994a. ‘Racism and the University.’ Canadian Ethnic Studies 26, no. 3: 74–90. – 1994b. ‘The Ideology of Racism: Democratic Racism.’ Canadian Ethnic Studies 26, no. 2: 1–14. – 2005. The Colour of Democracy: Racism in Canadian Society, 3rd ed. Toronto: Harcourt Brace. Henry, F., C. Tator, M. Winston, and T. Rees. 2000. The Colour of Democracy: Racism in Canadian Society, 2nd edition. Toronto: Harcourt Brace. Herrnstein, R.J., and C. Murray. 1994. The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in American Life. New York: The Free Press. Hilliard, A.G. 1989. ‘Teachers and Cultural Styles in a Pluralistic Society.’ NEA Today 7, no. 6: 65–9. hooks, bell. 1981. Ain’t I a Woman: Black Woman and Feminism. Boston: South End Press. – 1989. Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. Boston: South End Press. – 1992. Black Looks: Race and Representation. Boston, MA: South End Press. Huffman, T.E. 1991. ‘The Experiences, Perceptions and Consequences of Campus Racism among Northern Plains Indians.’ Journal of American Indian Education 30: 25–34. Hughes, D. and E. Kallen. 1974. The Anatomy of Racism. Montreal: Harvest House. Hurtado, S. 1994. ‘The Institutional Climate for Talented Latino Students.’ Research in Higher Education 35, no. 1: 21–41. Hurtado, S., D.F. Carter, and A. Spuler. 1996. ‘Latino Student Transition to College: Assessing Difficulties and Factors in Successful College adjustment.’ Research in Higher Education 37, no. 2: 135–58. Hutchinson, A., and P. Carpenter. 1992. ‘Can Women Be Misogynous or Gays Homophobic?’ Toronto Star, 5 March: A23. Immigration Canada. 1990. Immigration to Canada: A Statistical Overview. OttawaHull: Employment and Immigration Canada. ‘Immigrant Levels Reflect Backlash.’ 1996. Globe and Mail, 30 October: A1. Isajiw, W.W. 1977. ‘Definitions of Ethnicity.’ Ethnicity 1, no. 2: 111–24. – 1999. Understanding Diversity: Ethnicity and Race in the Canadian Context. Toronto: Thomson Education. Ishwaran, K. 1987. ‘South Asian Communities: Promises and Prospects.’ In South Asian in the ’90s: Conference Report. Toronto: Ministry of Citizenship and Culture. James, C. 1994. ‘The Paradox of Power and Privilege: Race, Gender and Occupational Position.’ Canadian Woman Studies: Race and Gender 14, no. 2: 37–51. – 1999. ‘Race, Ethnicity, and Cultural Identity.’ In James, ed., Seeing Ourselves:

186

Bibliography

Exploring Race, Ethnicity, and Culture. Toronto: Thomson Educational Publishing. 39–63. Jenkins, M.M. 1983. Removing Bias: Guidelines for Faculty-Student Communication. Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association. Jones, J.M. 1997. Prejudice and Racism. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1972. Also New York: McGraw-Hill. Kahn, A., and C. Cannell. 1957. The Dynamics of Interviewing. New York: Wiley. Kalam, Abdul A.P.J. 2002. Ignited Minds: Unleashing the Power within India. New Delhi: Viking. Kalsener, L. 2004. ‘The Influence of Developmental and Emotional Factors on Success in College.’ HEES Review – World Wide Web Edition 3, no. 2 (24 June) www.review.org/issues/vol3no2.html. Kamath, J. 2001. ‘The Story of the Saree.’ www.punjabonline.com. Karp, D.A., and W.C. Yoels. 1976. ‘The College Classroom: Some Observations on the Meaning of Student Participation.’ Sociology and Social Research 60: 421–71. Khan, A. 1998. ‘In the Maelstrom of Hope and Despair: The Prospects for South Asian Migration to Canada.’ In Laquian et al., eds., The Silent Debate: Asian Immigration and Racism in Canada. Vancouver: Institute of Asian Research, UBC. Khare, B.B., ed. 1997. Asian Indian immigrants. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt. King, Joyce E. 1994. ‘Perceiving Reality in a New Way: Rethinking the Black/ White Duality of Our Time.’ Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 4–9 April. Kisilevsky, B. 2001. ‘The Flaws in QUEST.’ The Gazette (Queen’s University), 26 February: 2. Klassen, T.R., and P.R. Carr. 1996. ‘The Role of Racial Minority Teachers in AntiRacist Education.’ Canadian Ethnic Studies 28, no. 2: 126–38. Kovel, J. 1970. White Racism: A Psychohistory. New York: Pantheon. Krauter, J.F., and M. Davis. 1978. Minority Canadians: Ethnic Groups. Toronto: Methuen. Lacy, S. 1995. ‘Introduction: Cultural Pilgrimages and Metaphoric Journeys.’ In Lacy, ed., Mapping the Terrain: New Genre Public Art, Seattle, WA: Bay State Press,. Lam, C.S.M. 1996. ‘The Green Teacher.’ In Thiessen, Bascka, and Goodson, eds., Making a Difference: The Lives and Careers of Racial Minority Immigrant Teachers. Toronto: Garamond Press. Lamont, M., and A. Lareau. 1988. ‘Cultural Capital: Allusions, Gaps and Glissandos in Recent Theoretical Developments.’ Sociological Theory 6: 153–68. Laquian E., A. Laquian, and T. McGee, eds. 1998. The Silent Debate: Asian Immi-

Bibliography 187 gration and Racism in Canada. Vancouver, BC: Institute of Asian Research, UBC. Lawton, A. 2002. ‘The Cultural Myth of Meritocracy.’ Employee Rights Quarterly 2, no. 3: 57–69. Law Union of Ontario. 1981. The Immigrant’s Handbook. Montreal, PQ: Black Rose Books. Lawrence, C. 1986/7. ‘The Id, the Ego and Equal Protection: Reckoning with Unconscious Racism.’ Stanford Law Review 39: 317–88. Lee, C.L., and G. Zhan. 1998. ‘Psychosocial Status of Children and Youths.’ In Lee and Zane, eds., Handbook of Asian American Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. 137–64. Lee, E. 1985. Letters to Marcia: A Teacher’s Guide to Anti-Racism Education. Toronto: Cross-Cultural Communication Centre. Lee, S. 1994. ‘Behind the Model–Minority Stereotype: Voices of High- and LowAchieving Asian American Students.’ Anthropology & Education Quarterly 25, no. 4: 413–29. Leman, N. 1997. ‘The Bell Curve Flattened: Slave Archives MSN Links.’ www.// Slatemsn.com/features/bellcurve/asp. Leo, J. 2004. ‘Stomping on Free Speech. Bill C-250 in Canada Controls Free Speech.’ U.S. News and World Report, 19 April: 14. Lewis, O. 1969. A Death in the Sanchez family. New York: Random House. Li, P.S. 2003. ‘Deconstructing Canada’s Discourse of Immigrant Integration.’ Working Paper no. WP04-03 (August), University of Saskatchewan. Maclear, K. 1994a. ‘The Myth of the Model Minority: Rethinking the Education of Asian Canadians.’ In Our School/Our Selves (July): 54–76. – 1994b. ‘Not in So Many Words: Translating Silence across ‘Difference.’’ Fireweed 44–45: 6–11. MadhavaRau, L. 1995. ‘Race Relations Policy Brought to Life: A Case Study of One Anti-Harassment Protocol.’ In the Chilly Climate Collective, eds., Breaking Anonymity: The Chilly Climate for Women Faculty. Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Malik, S.C. 1982. Determinants of Social Status in India. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. Marcias, J. 1993. ‘Forgotten History: Educational and Social Antecedents of High Achievement among Asian Immigrants to the United States.’ Curriculum Inquiry 23, no. 4: 409–32. Margolis E., and M. Romero. 1998. ‘The Department Is Very Male, Very White, Very Old, and Very Conservative: The Functioning of the Hidden Curriculum in Graduate Sociology Departments. Harvard Educational Review 68, no. 1: 1–31. Marshall, C., and G.B. Rossman. 1999. Designing Qualitative Research, 3rd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

188

Bibliography

Martin Y.M., and R. Warburton. 1998. Voices for Change: Racism, Ethnocentrism and Cultural Insensitivity at the University of Victoria. Report submitted to David Strong, President, University of Victoria. Matsuda, M.J. 1989. ‘Public Response to Racist Speech: Considering the Victim’s Story.’ Michigan Law Review 87. Mayo, K. 1927. Mother India. New York: Harcourt Brace. Mazumdar, S., and S. Mazumdar. 1994. ‘‘Of Gods and Homes’: Sacred Space in the Hindu House.’ Environments 22, no. 2: 41–9. McIntosh, P. 1989. ‘White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack.’ Independent School (Winter): 31–6. See also Peace and Freedom (July–August): 10–12. McIntyre, S. 1995. ‘Gender Bias within the Law School: ‘The Memo’ and Its Impact.’ In Breaking Anonymity: The Chilly Climate for Women Faculty. Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. McKelvey, C. 1991. ‘Beyond Ethnocentrism: A Reconstruction of Marx’s Concept of Science.’ New York: Greenwood Press. McMahon, F. 1999. ‘The Tragedy of Africville.’ Moncton Times and Transcript and Halifax Daily News, 17 January. McVeigh, R. 2004. ‘Structured Ignorance and Organized Racism in the United States.’ Social Forces 82, no. 3: 895–936. Merton, R.K. 1972. ‘Insiders and Outsiders: A Chapter in the Sociology of Knowledge.’ American Journal of Sociology 78, no. 1: 9–47. Miles, M.B., and A.M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis, 2nd edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Milner, D. 1983. Children and Race: Ten Years Later. London: Allan Sutton. Mindiola, T. 1995. ‘Getting Tenure at the U.’ In Padilla and Chavez, eds., The Leaning Tower: Latino Professors in American Universities. Albany: State University of New York Press. Minh-ha Trinh. 1992. Framer Framed. New York: Routledge. Moghissi, Haideh. 1994. ‘Racism and Sexism in Academic Practice.’ In Afshar and Maynard, eds., The Dynamics of Race and Gender: Some Feminist Interventions. London: Taylor and Francis. Mohanty, C.T. 1991a. ‘Cartographies of Struggle and Other Selections from C.T. Mohanty.’ In Russo and Torres, eds., Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. – 1991b. ‘Under Western Eyes: Feminist Scholarship and Colonial Discourse.’ In Mohanty, Russo, and Torres, eds., Third World Women and the Politics of Feminism. Bloomington: Indiana University Press. Monture-Angus, P. 1995. Thunder in My Soul: A Mohawk Woman Speaks. Halifax, NS: Fernwood.

Bibliography 189 Morris, A. 1992. ‘Political Consciousness and Collective Action.’ In Morris and Mueller, eds., Frontiers in Social Movement Theory. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Morrison, T. 1970. The Bluest Eye. New York: Random House. Moynihan, D.P. 1965. The Negro Family: Case For National Action. Washington, DC: Labour Department Office and Policy Planning and Research. Mukherjee, A. 1992. ‘A House Divided: Women of Colour and American Feminist Theory.’ In Backhouse and Flattery, eds., Challenging Times: The Women’s Movement in Canada and the United States. Montreal and Kingston: McGillQueen’s University Press. Naidoo, J., and P.J. Schaus. 1988. ‘Canadian South Asian Women in Transition: A Dualistic View of Life.’ Journal of Comparative Family Studies 19, no. 2. Nakanishi, D.T. 1993. ‘Asian Pacific Americans in Higher Education: Faculty and Administrative Representation and Tenure.’ New Directions for Teaching and Learning 53: 51–9. Neal, S. 1999. ‘Populist Configurations of Race and Gender: The Case of Hugh Grant, Liz Hurley and Divine Brown.’ In Brah, Hickman, and Ghaill, eds., Thinking Identities. London: Macmillan. Newman, S. 2002. ‘Liberty, Community and Censorship: Hate Speech and Freedom of Expression in Canada and the United States.’ American Review of Canadian Studies 32, no. 3: 369–99. Nieto, S. 1997. ‘Ethnicity and Education Forum: What Difference Does Difference Make?’ Harvard Educational Review 67, no. 2: 169–87. Novogrodsky, C. 1996. ‘The Anti-Racist Cast of Mind.’ In Perspectives on Racism and the Human Services Sector: A Case for Change. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. O’Donnell, L.M., and E.S. Green-Merritt. 1997. ‘Empowering Minorities to Impact the Established Culture in Eurocentric Institutions of Higher Learning.’ Highland Heights, KY: Northern Kentucky University. Oetting, E.R., and F. Beauvais. 1991. ‘Orthogonal Cultural Identification Theory: The Cultural Identification of Minority Adolescents.’ International Journal of the Addictions 25, nos. 5A and 6A: 655–85. Ogbu, J.U., and H.D. Simons. 1998. ‘Voluntary and Involuntary Minorities: A Cultural-Ecological Theory of School Performance with Some Implications for Education.’ Anthropology and Education Quarterly 29, no. 2: 155–88. Omi, W., and H. Winant. 1993a. Racial Formation in the United States, 2nd edition. New York: Routledge. – 1993b. ‘On the Theoretical Concept of Race.’ In McCarthy and Crichlow, eds., Race, Identity and Representation in Education. New York: Routledge. Patterson-Stewart, K.E., M.H. Ritchie, and E.T.W. Sanders. 1997. ‘Interpersonal

190

Bibliography

Dynamics of African American Persistence in Doctoral Programs at Predominantly White Universities.’ Journal of College Student Development 38, no. 5: 489–98. ‘Philippe Rushton.’ 2000. Canadian Press Newswire, 11 July. Phinney, J.S. 1990. ‘Ethnic Identity in Adolescents and Adults: A Review of Research.’ Psychological Bulletin 180: 499–514. Phinney J.S., and D.A. Rosenthal. 1992. ‘Ethnic Identity in Adolescence: Process, Context and Outcome.’ In Adams, Gullotta, and Montemayor, eds., Adolescent Identity Formation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Porter, J. 1965. The Vertical Mosaic. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Powell, J. 1998. Postmodernism for Beginners. New York: Writers and Readers Publishing. Pushkin, D.B., and M.H. Colon-Gonsalez. 1998. ‘Access to Knowledge and Critical Thinking in General Chemistry via Social Constructivism: Pedagogical and Curricular Opportunities for Minority Science Majors.’ Paper presented at the 1998 AERA Annual Meeting in San Diego, CA, 13–17 April. Raj, S. 1980. ‘Some Aspects of East Indian Struggle in Canada, 1905–1947.’ In Ujimoto and Hirabayashi, eds., Visible Minorities and Multiculturalism: Asians in Canada. Toronto: Butterworths. Rajagopal, I. 1990. ‘The Glass Ceiling in the Vertical Mosaic: Indian Immigrants in Canada.’ Canadian Ethnic Studies 22, no. 1: 96–100. Ram, K. 1991. ‘Capitalism and Marriage Payments.’ In Ram, Mukkuvar Women: Gender, Hegemony and Capitalist Accumulation. Sydney: Allen and Unwin. Ramcharan, S. 1991. An Attitudinal Study of Visible Minority Students at the University of Windsor (mimeographed report). Windsor, ON: University of Windsor. Razack, S. 1992. ‘Storytelling for Social Change.’ Paper. Toronto: OISE/University of Toronto. – 1995. ‘The Perils of Talking about Culture: Schooling Research on South and East Asian Students.’ Race, Class and Gender 2, no. 3: 67–82. – 1998. Looking White People in the Eye: Gender, Race and Culture in the Courtrooms and Classrooms. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Reeves, F. 1983. British Racial Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Reinharz, P.S. 1992. Feminist Methods in Social Research. New York: Oxford University Press. Rex, J. 1970. Race Relations in Sociological Theory. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson. – 1973. Race, Colonialism and the City. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Reuter. 2000. Report Criticizes Dams for Human, Environmental Cost, 16 November. www.enn.con/news. Roscigno, V.J., and J.W. Ainsworth-Darnell. 1999. ‘Race, Cultural Capital, and

Bibliography 191 Educational Resources: Persistent Inequalities and Achievement Returns.’ Sociology of Education 72: 158–78. Rowley, S.J., and J.A. Moore. 2001. ‘When Who I Am Impacts How I Am Represented: Addressing Minority Student Issues in Different Contexts.’ Roeper Review 24, no. 2: 63–7. Rushowy, K. 2000. ‘U of T Faculty: Where Minorities Are Not Very Visible.’ Toronto Star, 10 January. Ryan, J. 1999. Race and Ethnicity in Multi-Ethnic Schools. Cleveden, UK: Multilingual Matters. Saha, P. 1970. Emigration of Indian Labour (1834-1900). Delhi: People’s Publishing House. Said, E.W. 1979. Orientalism. New York: Vintage (republished 1994). – 1986. ‘Intellectuals in the Post-Colonial World.’ Salmagundi 70–1 (Spring– Summer): 44–64. – 1993. Culture and Imperialism. London: Vintage. Samuel, E., E. Krugly-Smolska, and W. Warren. 2001. ‘Academic Achievement of Adolescents from Selected Ethnocultural Groups in Canada: A Study Consistent with John Obgu’s Theory.’ McGill Journal of Education 36, no. 1: 61–73. Sarup Singh Alag. 2001. www.punjabonline.com. Scheper-Hughes, N. 1992. Death without Weeping: The Violence of Everyday Life in Brazil. Berkeley: University of California Press. Schlesinger, A.M. 1992. ‘Was America a Mistake? Reflections on the Long History of Efforts to Debunk Columbus and His Discovery.’ Atlantic (September): 16–23. Schneider, R. 2001. ‘Shylock the Roman.’ www/britishtheatre.com. Searls, S. 1997. ‘Race, Schooling and Double Consciousness: The Politics of Pedagogy in Toni Morrison’s Fiction.’ In Giroux with Shannon, eds., Education and Cultural Studies: Towards a Perforative Practice. New York: Routledge. Sears, D.O. 1988. Symbolic Racism. In Katz and Taylor, eds., Eliminating Racism: Profiles in Controversy. New York: Plenum Press. Sears, D.O., and D.R. Kinder. 1971. ‘Racial Tensions and Voting in Los Angeles.’ In Hirsch, ed., Los Angeles: Viability and Prospects for Metropolitan Leadership. New York: Praeger. Selltiz, C., L.S. Wrightsman, and S.W. Cook. 1976. Research Methods in Social Relations. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Sheldon, A. 1992. ‘Conflict Talk: Sociolinguistic Challenges to Self-Assertion and How Young Girls Meet Them.’ Merrill Palmer Quarterly 38, no. 6: 95–117. Shadd, A. 1994. ‘“Where Are You Really From?” Notes on an “Immigrant” from

192

Bibliography

North Buxton, Ontario.’ In James and Shadd, eds., Talking about Difference: Encounters in Culture, Language and Identity. Toronto: Between the Lines. 9–16. Siddiqui, H. 2001. ‘Racism Is an Extension of Canada as an Immigrant Nation.’ Kingston This Week, 6 July: 16. Simon, R.I. 1992. Teaching against the Grain: Texts for a Pedagogy of Possibility. Toronto: OISE Press. Sivanandan, A. 1990. Communities of Resistance: Writings on Black Struggles for Socialism. London: Verso. Sleeter, C. 1994. ‘Multicultural Education, Social Positionality and Whiteness.’ Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, 12–18 April. Smith, D. 1987. The Everyday World as Problematic. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. Smith, E. 1992. ‘A Comparative Study of Occupational Stress in African American and White University Faculty.’ Lewiston, NY: The Edwin Mellon Press. Smith, D.E., P. Bourne, and L. McCoy. 1995. Girls and Schooling: Their Own Critique. Gender and Schooling Papers, no. 1. Toronto: Centre for Women’s Studies in Education, OISE. ‘Sojourner Truth.’ 2001. www.webcam/duano/truth/html. Solomon, P. 1992. Black Resistance in High School: Forging a Separatist Culture. Albany: State University of New York Press. Solomos, J., and L. Back. 1995. ‘Marxism, Racism and Ethnicity.’ In Stanfield, ed., Theories of Ethnicity. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. – 1996. Racism and Society. London: Macmillan. Spellman, E.V. 1988. ‘Gender and Race: The Ampersand Problem in Feminist Thought.’ In Spellman, Inessential Women: Problems of Exclusion in Feminist Thought. Boston: Beacon Press. Sperber, B., and D. Wilson, 1986. Relevance Cognition and Communication. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Spivak, G. 1988. ‘Subaltern Studies: Deconstructing Historiography.’ In Guha and Spivak, eds., Selected Subaltern Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. – 1990. Post-Colonial Critic: Interviews, Strategies, Dialogue. New York: Routledge. Srinivas, M.N. 1984. Some Reflections on Dowry. Delhi: Oxford University Press. Srivastava, S. 1996. ‘Song and Dance? The Performance of Antiracist Workshops.’ CRSA/RCSA 33, no. 3: 291–315. St Lewis, J. 1996. ‘Identity and Black Consciousness in North America.’ In Littleton, ed., Clash of Identities: Essays on Media, Manipulation and Politics of Self. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Statistics Canada. 1996a. ‘Education, Mobility and Migration.’ www.StatCan.CA/ Daily/English/980414, 16 April.

Bibliography 193 – 1996b. Census. Internet Cat. No. 93F0026XDB96002. – 1997. The Daily. 4 November. – 2003. Census. statcan.ca. Steele, C.M. 1997. ‘A Threat in the Air: How Stereotypes Shape Intellectual Identity and Performance.’ American Psychologist 52: 613–29. Sternglanz, S.H., and S. Lyberger-Ficek. 1977. ‘Sex Differences in StudentTeacher Interactions in the College Classroom. Sex Roles 3: 345–52. Sue, D.W. 2003. Overcoming Our Racism: The Journey to Liberation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Sue, S., and N.W.S. Zane. 1985. ‘Academic Achievement and Socioemotional Adjustment among Chinese University Students.’ Journal of Counseling Psychology 32: 570–9. Sullivan, A. 1995. ‘Realizing Successful Integrative Anti-Racist Education.’ Paper, Department of Sociology in Education, OISE, Toronto. Taylor, M.J., and S. Hegarty. 1985. The Best of Both Worlds: A Review of Research into the Education of Pupils of South Asian Origin. Berkshire: Nfer-Nelson. Three Years in Canada. 1974. Green Paper on Immigration. Ottawa: Manpower and Immigration. Tinker, H. 1975. A New System of Slavery: The Export of Indian Labour Overseas, 1830–1920. London: Oxford University Press. – 1976. Separate and Equal: India and Indians in the British Commonwealth. Vancouver: UBC Press. – 1977. The Banyan Tree: Overseas Emigrants from India, Pakistan, and Bangladesh. London: Oxford University Press. Tinto, V. 1975. ‘Dropouts from Higher Education: Synthesis of Recent Research.’ Review of Educational Research 45: 89–125. – 1993. Leaving College: Rethinking the Causes and Cures of Student Attrition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Toronto Board of Education. 1991. Anti-Racist Education Handbook. Toronto: Learnxs Press. Tracey, L. 1999. A Scattering of Seeds: The Creation of Canada. Toronto: McArthur & Company. Trepagnier, B. 1996. ‘Silent Racism in White Women.’ PhD dissertation, University of California, Santa Barbara. Trueba, E.H.T. 1998. ‘Race and Ethnicity in Academia.’ In Valverde and Castenell, eds., The Multicultural Campus. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press. Trueba, E.H., R. Takaki, V.I. Munoz, S. Nieto, M.L. Anderson, and D. Sommer. 1997. ‘Ethnicity and Education Forum: What Difference Does Difference Make?’ Harvard Educational Review 67, no. 2. www.edreview.org/harvard97/ 1997/su97/m97fine.htm.

194

Bibliography

‘U.K: Fighting Our Fundamentalisms: An Interview with A. Sivanandan.’ 1995. Race & Class 36, no. 3: 73–81. Vedanta. 2001. www.vedanta-seattle.org. Wadhwani, Z. 1999. ‘To Be or Not To Be: Suicidal Ideation in South Asian Youth.’ MA thesis, McGill University. Wane, N.N. 2000. ‘Rethinking Teaching Using a Systems Discourse.’ In IsekeBarnes and Wane, eds., Equity in Schools and Society. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press. Ward, P. 1978. White Canada Forever. Montreal and Kingston: McGill–Queen’s University Press. Warren, W., E. Samuel, M. King, and J. Yealland. 1997. ‘A Study of Adolescents in Selected Ethnocultural Groups: School, Health and Home.’ Published report submitted to the Department of Canadian Heritage, Social Program Evaluation Group, Duncan McArthur Hall, Queen’s University. Weiss, C.S. 1981. ‘The Development of Professional Role Commitment among Graduate Students.’ Human Relations 34: 89–125. Wellman, D. 1993. Portraits of White Racism, 2nd edition. New York: Cambridge University Press. Werner, O., and G.M. Schoepfle. 1987. Systematic Fieldwork: Foundations of Ethnography and Interviewing. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. West, C. 1994. Race Matters. New York: Vintage Books. ‘What Difference Does Difference Make?’ 1997. Harvard Educational Review 67, no. 2: 169–87. What Is Hinduism? 2001. www.bindi.com. Wieviorka, Michel. 1995. The Arena of Racism. London: Sage. Williams, D. 1990. ‘Is the Post-Secondary Classroom a Chilly One for Women?’ Canadian Journal of Higher Education 20, no. 3: 29–42. Williams, J. 1985. ‘Redefining Institutional Racism.’ Ethnic and Racial Studies 8, no. 3: 323–48. Williams, P. 1987. ‘Spirit-Murdering the Messenger: The Discourse of Fingerpointing as the Law’s Response to Racism.’ University of Miami Law Review 42: 127–9. In Wing and Merchan, ‘Rape, Ethnicity and Culture: Spirit Injury from Bosnia to Black Africa.’ In Delgado, ed. 1995. Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Wilson, R. 1989. ‘Women of Colour in Academic Administration: Trends, Progress and Barriers.’ Sex Roles 21, nos. 1–2: 85–97. Winant, H. 1994. ‘Racial Formation and Hegemony: Global and Local Implications.’ In Rattansi and Westwood, eds., Racism, Modernity and Identity. London: Polity Press. – 1997. ‘Behind Blue Eyes: Whiteness and Contemporary U.S. Racial Politics.’

Bibliography 195 In Fine et al., eds., OffWhite: Readings on Race, Power and Society. New York: Routledge. Windshuttle, K. 1999. ‘The Romance of Orientalism.’ National Post, 23 January 1999. Wing, A.K., and S. Merchan. 1995. ‘Rape, Ethnicity and Culture: Spirit Injury from Bosnia to Black Africa.’ In Delgado, ed., 1995. Critical Race Theory: The Cutting Edge. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Wolf, N. 2000. ‘The Beauty Myth.’ In Iseke-Barnes and Wane, eds., Equity in Schools and Society. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press. Woodsworth, J.S. 1909. Strangers within Our Gates. Toronto. Working Group on Employment Equity Data. 1993. Women, Visible Minorities, Aboriginal Peoples, and Persons with Disabilities: The 1991 Employment Equity Definitions. Ottawa: Statistics Canada. Wylie, A. 1995. ‘The Contexts of Activism on “Climate” Issues.’ In the Chilly Climate Collective, eds., Breaking Anonymity: The Chilly Climate for Women Faculty. Waterloo, ON: Wilfrid Laurier University Press. Yang, P.Q. 2000. Ethnic Studies: Issues and Approaches. Albany: State University of New York Press. Yi, Z., and Z. Qinwu. 1998. ‘Conditions in China Influencing Outmigration.’ In E. Laquian, A. Laquian, and T. McGee, The Silent Debate: Asian Immigration and Racism in Canada. Vancouver: Institute of Asian Research, UBC. 75–84. Young, T.R. 1974. ‘Transforming Sociology: The Graduate Student.’ American Sociologist 9: 135–9. Young, K., and D.T. Takeuchi. 1998. ‘Racism.’ In Lee and Zane, eds., Handbook of Asian American Psychology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Zack, N. 1994. ‘My Racial Self Over Time.’ In Camper, ed., Miscegenation Blues: Voices of Mixed Race Women. Toronto: Sister Vision Press. – 1997. ‘Introduction: Aim, Questions and Overview.’ In Zack, ed., Race/Sex: Their Sameness, Difference and Interplay. New York: Routledge.

This page intentionally left blank

Author Index

Abu-Laban, S.M., 5 Abu-Lughod, L., 42 Adams, M.V., 23 Aguirre, A., 6 Ainsworth-Darnell, J.W., 76, 78, 79, 105 Alag, S.S., 90, 170 Alexander, J.M., 172 Alexander, K.L., 78 Altbach, P.G., 3, 14, 165 Anderson, M. L., 148 Anthias, F., 30, 79, 89 Arat-Koc, S., 49, 50 Asamen, J.K., 142 Back, L., 87 Backhouse, C., 102 Baker, G.C., 148 Bakhtin, M., 153 Ball, M., 16 Balibar, E., 46 Banks, J.A., 29 Bannerji, H., 11, 20, 21, 51, 101, 107, 119, 120, 143 Bean, J.P., 9 Beauvais, F., 131 Belkhir, J., 16

Bennett, K., 146 Bernard, J.K., 10 Berry, G.L., 142 Berry, J.W., 127, 128, 131, 138 Bhabha, H., 51 Blee, K.M., 31, 32 Bock, M., 63 Boersma, P.D., 81 Boice, R., 6 Bolaria, B.S., 17, 44 Bourne, P., 16 Boykin, A.W., 78 Brah, A., 87 Brandt, G., 110 Brown, L., 68, 73, 98, 138 Bruner, J., 64 Buchignani, N., 8, 23, 44, 45, 47, 164 Burney, S., 43, 64, 167 Byars, A.N., 73 Cabrera, A.F., 108 Cannell, C., 35 Carmichael, S., 113 Carpenter, P., 28 Carr, P.R., 148 Carter, D.F., 10 Carty, L., 119

198

Author Index

Celik, Z., 109 Chan, S., 11, 165 Chavez, R.C., 6 Chew, R., 168 Chin, J.L., 140, 174 Chitnis, S., 166 Christensen, C.P., 151 Chud, G., 9 Chun, K.M., 141, 142, 159 Citizenship and Immigration Canada, 5 Cohen, M.N., 23 Cole, S., 170 Colon-Gonsalez, M.H., 64 Cook, S.W., 40 Cotler, I., 19 Crim, E., 24, 94 Curtis, J., 30

Eastman, K.L., 141, 142, 159 Einstein, A., 174 El-Khawas, E., 80 Elliott, J., 100 Ellsworth, E., 70, 155 Entwisle, D.R., 78 Escuerta, E., 6 Essed, P., 4, 18, 24, 26, 33–6, 39, 40, 41, 42, 88, 103 Esses, V.M., 166

Das-Gupta, T., 47, 48, 49 Dauber, S.L., 78 Davis, M., 47, 168 de Beauvoir, S., 81 Defour, D.C., 73 Degraaf, P.M., 169 Dei, G.J.S., 6, 12, 15–18, 20–2, 29, 65, 74, 83, 84, 98, 111, 117, 143, 148, 151, 160 Delgado, R., 130 Denzin, N.K., 38 Derrida, J., 70, 161 Desai, S., 52, 133, 137, 150, 152 Dickason, O.P., 111 Dines, G., 19 Dovidio, J.F., 10 Doxtator, D., 110 Dua, E., 19, 44, 46, 112, 121–4, 126, 143, 154, 167 DuBois, W.E.B., 22 Duclos, N., 16, 18

Gaertner, S.L., 10, 25 Gardner, R.C., 166 Ghaill, M., 87 Gandhi, M., 15 Gandy, O.H., 89 Ganzeboom, H.B., 169 Gardner, R.C., 166 Gay, D., 81 Ghosh, R., 58 Giroux, H., ix, 161 Glesne, C., 34 Gloria, A.M., 97 Goldberg, T., 137 Gordon, L., 16 Grayson, P., 163 Green-Merritt, E.S., 9 Griffin, O.T., 73 Guha, R., 168 Gupta, A., 51

Fanon, F., 22, 23, 117 Farkas, G., 79 Ferguson, J., 51 Fine, M., 6, 70 Fleras, A., 100, 118 Foucault, M., 64 Frankenberg, R., 87

Hackett, G., 73

Author Index Hall, B., 143 Hall, B.L., 10, 63, 153 Hall, E.T., 96 Hall, R.M., 80, 96 Hall, S., 42, 67, 88, 90, 93, 98, 99, 102, 103, 114, 129, 137, 161, 162 Hamilton, C.R., 113 Hamilton, K.D., 97 Hamilton, R., 147 Hawkins, F., 47, 168 Hegarty, S., 140 Helmes-Hayes, R., 30 Henry, F., 3, 5, 6, 7, 17, 23–5, 27–31, 44–8, 51, 78, 98, 101, 109, 115, 152 Herrnstein, R.J., 173 Hickman, M.J., 87 Hilliard, A.G., 148 Hirsch, B.J., 73 Hogedorn, L.S., 108 hooks, b., 129, 130, 153, 176 Huberman, A.M., 39 Huffman, T.E., 68, 138 Hughes, D., 27, 28, 30, 31 Hurtado, S., 6, 10 Hutchinson, A., 28 Indra, D.M., 8, 23, 44, 45, 47, 164 Isajiw, W.W., 52–58, 61 Iseke-Barnes, J., 83 Ishwaran, K., 59 James, C., 119, 161 James, I.M., 6, 151, 160 James-Wilson, S., 6, 151, 160 Jenkins, M.M., 65 Jones, J.M., 22, 30 Jones, R.A., 81 Kahn, A., 35

199

Kalam, A., 106 Kallen, E., 27, 28, 30, 31 Kalsener, L., 159 Kamath, J., 171 Karp, D.A., 81 Karumanchery, L.L., 6, 151, 160 Khan, A., 47, 49, 168 Khare, B.B.,4 Kinder, D.R., 26 King, J.E., 12 King, M., 84 Kisilevsky, B., 123 Klassen, T.R., 148 Kovel, J., 24 Krauter, J.F., 47, 168 Krugly-Smolska, E., 60 Kulig, J.C., 10, 63, 153 Kurpius, S.E.R., 68, 73, 97, 98, 138 Lacy, S., 161 Lam, C.S.M., 66 Lamont, M., 76 Lange, R., 9 Lareau, A., 76 Laquian, A., 3, 44, 47, 50, 167, 168 Laquian, E., 3, 44, 47, 50, 167, 168 Lawrence, B., 19, 121–4, 143, 154 Lawrence, C., 24, 126 Lawton, A., 145 Lee, C.L., 129, 140 Lee, E., 110, 111 Lee, S., 165 Lefebvre, M.L., 9 Leman, N., 174 Leo, J., 19 Lewis, O., 6 Li, P.S., 5, 17, 44, 50 Lincoln, Y.S., 38 Lomotey, K., 165 Lyberger-Ficek, S., 81

200

Author Index

Maclear, K., 39, 66 MadhavaRau, L., 106, 107 Malik, S.C., 167 Marcias, J., 66, 68 Margolis, E., 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 80, 105, 106, 111, 112 Marshall, C., 33, 34, 35, 40, 41 Martin, Y.M., 18, 19, 25, 91 Martinez, R.O., 6 Matsuda, M.J., 18 Mattis, W., 3, 7, 17, 23–30, 45–8, 51, 78, 98, 101, 109, 115 Mazumdar, S., 170 Mazzuca, J., 65, 74, 98, 111 McCoy, L., 16 McGee, T., 3, 44, 47, 50. 167, 168 McIsaac, E., 65, 74, 98, 111 McIntosh, P., 19, 20, 54, 70, 125, 155 McIntyre, S., 16 McKelvey, C., 27 McMahon, F., 173 McVeigh, R., 31, 57, 91, 117 Merchan, S., 130 Merton, R.K., 117 Miles, M.B., 39 Milner, D., 28 Mohanty, C.T., 29, 51 Mindiola, T., 6 Minh-ha T., 133 Moghissi, H., 107 Monture-Angus, P., 71 Moore, J.A., 21 Morris, P., 16 Morrison, L., 81 Morrison, T., 170 Moynihan, D.P., 6 Mukherjee, A., 66 Munoz, V.I., 148

Murray, C., 173 Naidoo, J., 58, 164 Nakanishi, D.T., 6 Neal, S., 87 Newman, S., 19 Nieto, S., 148 Nora, A., 108 Novogrodsky, C., 148 O’Brien, E.O., 6 O’Donnell, L.M., 9 Oetting, E.R., 131 Ogbu, J.U., 60 Omi, W., 6, 79 Padilla, R.V., 6 Pascarella, E., 108 Patterson-Stewart, K.E., 72, 83, 150 Peshkin, A., 34 Pfeuti, L., 9, 63, 153 Phinney, J.S., 131, 132, 134 Porter, J., 30 Powell, J., 169 Powell, L., 70, 89 Pushkin, D.B., 64 Qinwa, Z., 167 Raj, S., 45, 46 Rajagopal, I., 51 Ram, K., 166 Ramcharan, S., 7 Razack, S., 6, 23, 43, 65, 66, 90, 92, 114, 118, 143, 148, 161, 165 Rees, T., 3, 7, 17, 23–31, 45–8, 51, 78, 98, 101, 109, 115 Reeves, F., 28 Reinharz, P.S., 34 Remick, H., 81

Author Index Rex, J., 89 Ritchie, M.H., 72, 83, 150 Robert, P., 169 Romero, M., 66, 67, 69, 70, 71, 73, 75, 77, 79, 80, 105, 106, 111, 112 Roscignio, V.J., 76, 78, 79, 105 Rosenberg, D., 143 Rosenthal, D.A., 132 Rossman, G.B., 33, 34, 35, 40, 41 Rowley, S.J., 21 Rushowy, K., 147 Ryan, J., 15 Saha, P., 44 Said, E., 24, 109, 129, 137 Samuel, E., 60, 84 Sanders, E.T.W., 72, 83, 150 Sandler, B.R., 80 Schaus, P.J., 58, 164 Scheper-Hughes, N., 40 Schlesinger, A.M., 110 Schneider, R., 173 Schoepfle, G.M., 33, 34 Searls, S., 170 Sears, D.O., 26 Selltiz, C., 40 Shannon, P., 161 Sheldon, A., 153 Shadd, A., 135 Siddiqui, H., 43, 175 Simon, R.I., 110 Simons, H.D., 60 Sivanandan, A., 29, 89 Sleeter, C., 19 Smith, D., 16, 58 Smith, E., 6, 10, 58 Solomon, P., 111 Solomos, J., 87 Sommer, D., 148

201

Spellman, E.V., 102 Sperber, B., 64 Spivak, G., 50, 148, 168 Spuler, A., 10 Srinivas, M.N., 171 Srivastava, S., 100 Statistics Canada, 5, 51, 168 St Lewis, J., 23, 119 Steele, C.M., 67, 149 Sternglanz, S.H., 81 Subramaniam, S., 52, 133, 150, 152 Sue, D.W., 74 Sue, S.S., 141, 142, 159 Sullivan, A., 18 Takaki, R., 148 Takeuchi, D.T., 141, 142 Tator, C., 3, 5, 6, 7, 17, 23–31, 44–8, 51, 78, 98, 101,109, 115, 152 Taylor, M.J., 140 Terenzini, P.T., 108 Thorpe, K., 9, 63, 153 Tinker, H., 44, 167 Tinto, V., 9, 63 Tracey, L., 44, 167 Trepagnier, B., 25, 100 Trueba, E.H.T., 19, 105, 126, 148 Wadhwani, Z., 52, 137 Wallerstein, I., 46 Wane, N.N., 83 Wang, L., 11, 165 Wang, G.C.S., 141, 142, 159 Warburton, R., 18, 19, 25, 57, 91 Ward, P., 45 Warren, W., 60, 84 Weis, L., 70, 89 Weiss, C.S., 73 Wellman, D., 28

202

Author Index

Werner, O., 33, 34 West, C., 15 Wieviorka, M., 32 Williams, D., 80, 163 Williams, J., 30 Williams, P., 130 Willson, M.S., 97 Wilson, D., 64 Wilson, R., 124 Winant, H., 6, 79, 86 Windshuttle, K., 24 Wing, A.K., 130 Wolf, N., 136 Wong, L.M., 70, 89 Woodsworth, J.S., 44

Wrightsman, L.S., 40 Wylie, A., 16 Yang, P.Q., 163 Yealland, J., 84 Yi, Z., 167 Yoels, W.C., 81 Young, K., 141, 142 Young,T.R., 77 Yuval-Davis, N., 30, 79, 89 Zack, N., 23 Zane, N.W.S., 142 Zhan, G., 129, 140 Zine, J., 6, 65, 74, 98, 111, 151, 160

Subject Index

Accent, 56–7, 69, 74, 94, 95, 122, 146, 169 Acculturative stress, 127–31 Adjusting to Canada, 43–62; Canadian immigration trends, 43–50; comparing educational systems, 60–1; culture, 57; employment, 52–4; expectations, 56; family life, 57–9; identity, 59–60; immigration and South Asians in academe, 51–62; income and housing, 55–6; language, 56–7; reaction to immigration trends, 50–1; status and class, 54–5 Administration, lack of support, 124–6 Africville, 112, 173 Antiracism: curriculum, 10, 11 (see also Curriculum); perspective, 6, 12; scholarship, 3, 12 Arranged marriage, 92, 134–5, 171 Beauty myth, 136 Bell curve, 118, 173–4 Bhopal tragedy, 99, 172 Bias: class, 105–6; gender, 106–7 Bindi, 91, 171

Brain drain, 48, 167 Buddhism, 140, 174 Challenges: curriculum, 151–6; faculty–student, 143–9; peer group interactions, 149–51; psychosocial dimension, 156–62 Chinese immigrants, 46, 167 Class: and status, 54–5; bias, 105–6; discrimination, 77–9; membership, 163, 165 (see also Adjusting to Canada) Colonialism, 24, 29, 107, 123 Colonization, 29, 94–6, 166 Conflicting worlds, 128–9 Coping strategies, 140–2 Critical whiteness theory, 70 Cross-cultural counsellors, 159 Cross-cultural development, 151 Cultural capital, 79, 99, 169 Cultural electrocution, 136–8 Cultural insensitivity, 4 Cultural racism, 23–4, 89–93 Culture shock, 54–5, 57, 149. See also Status shock Curriculum, 13, 109–42; critique of race and racism course, 118–19;

204

Subject Index

deafening silences, 111–12; deep, 20; discourse, 109, 172–3; disregard of minority perspective, 117–18; dissatisfaction with course content, 112–13; Eurocentric, 111; exclusion/absence of antiracist issues, 113–15; hidden, 67, 71, 80, 106, 155; omission of histories of people of colour, 115; marginalization of minority students, 117; minority professors’ views, 119–21; monocultural focus, 116–17; text, 109, 172–3 Deconstruction, 64, 169 Definitions of racism, 22–32 Discourse: single-voiced, 153; doublevoiced, 153 Diversity, 153; counsellor hiring, 155 Doctoral candidates, 103–5 Dominant: group, 4; majority, 4 Double life, 130–1 Educational systems, comparison, 60–1 Employment: differential treatment, 52–4; equity, 175 Ethnic identity theory, 131–2 Equity Office, 18, 155, 166 Ethnocentrism, 27–8 Ethnographic: analysis, 37–8; approach, 32–4; interviews, 34–7; method and sample, 9–11, 40; study and significance, 41–2 Evaluations, of faculty, 124–6 Exclusionism, 70–1 Experience, personal, mediated, and cognitive, 18 Experiential knowledge, 17–18, 22, 64 Extracurricular experiences, 102–3

Eurocentric knowledge, 20. See also Curriculum Faculty-student: aloofness, 72–3; exclusionism, 70–1; grading. 74–6; hiring (see Challenges); insensitivity, 70; interactions, 65; insufficient guidance, 71–2; lack of informal contact, 73–4; stereotyping, 65; student interactions, 65; relationship, 13; teaching styles, 74; tracking, 76–7; unsupportive attitudes, 67–9; verbal communication, 69 Family life, 57–9 Federal Contractor’s Program, 147, 175 Gender: bias, 106–7; discrimination, 79–82 globalization, 79–82, 99, 120–1, 146 grading, 74–6 Hijab, 90, 170 Hinduism, 90, 117, 171–2 Holistic approach, 21–2 Human Rights Office, 18, 155, 166, 176 Hybridization, 132–3 Identity, 59–60; crisis, 131–6; hybrid, 133; multiple, 21; shifting, 21; theory, 131–2 Ignorance, 4; structured, 31–2 Immigration: and South Asians, 11, 51–2; culture, 57; and education, 60–1; employment, 52–4; expectations, 56; family life, 57–9; history, 12; identity, 59–60; income and housing, 55–6; language, 56–7; phases, 41–50; policies, 41–50;

Subject Index reaction, 50–1; status and class, 54–5; trends, 43–50 Income and housing, 55–6 Inclusivity. See Integrative antiracism theory Instructors: lack of administrative support, 124–6; resistance by mainstream students, 121–4 Integrative antiracism: critiquing Eurocentric knowledge, 20; differential power and privilege, 18–19; holistic approach, 21–2; inclusivity, 20–1; multiple and shifting identities, 21; personal experiential knowledge, 17–18; process of articulation of social difference, 16–17; questioning White privilege, 19–20; theory, 15–22 Interaction: faculty–student, 63–83; formal, 73–4; informal, 73–4; peer group, 84–108 Interviews: context, 35–7; in-depth, 34–5; qualitative ethnographic, 32–42 Japanese immigrants, 46, 167 Kamasutra, 92–3 Komagatu Maru, 45 Language, misinterpretation, 91. See also Accent Mainstream. See Curriculum Maximum potential, academic, 149, 154 Meritocracy, myth of, 17, 145 Migrant group, 163 Minority: group, 5, 163; instructors/ professors, 119–21; model, 66, 160, 165

205

Minimization, 94–8 Multiculturalism, 21, 153, 165 Narmada Valley project, 99, 172 Nation-building, 44 Organized racism, 31–2 Orientalism, 24, 129 Other, 129, 137; hybrid, 129, 130; minority, 23, 24, 89, 90, 125, 129 Pagri, 89 Pedagogical practices, 160–1 Peer group relationship, 13, 84–108; admissions (see Challenges); cultural racism, 89–93; doctoral candidates, 103–5; doubts about status and abilities, 93–4; exclusion, 94–8; extracurricular experiences, 102–3; feelings of visibility, 99–102; feelings of invisibility, 99–102; intangible experiences, 99–102; minimization, 94–8; post-Doctoral Fellows, 103–5; residence experiences, 102–3; silencing, 94–8; selfsegregation, 94–8; skin colour, 84–9; speaking up for one’s group, 98–9; vicarious experiences, 99–102 Point system, 47, 48, 51, 168 Political correctness, 100, 156 Postcoloniality, 51 Post-doctoral fellows, 103–5 Power and privilege, 18–9 Psychosocial dimension, 13; acculturative stress, 127–31; being ‘Brown’ and ‘Indian,’ 130; best of both worlds, 138–40; conflicting worlds, 128–9; coping strategies, 140–2; cultural electrocution, 136–8; identity crisis, 131–6; interpersonal rela-

206

Subject Index

tionships, 129–30; living a double life, 130–1 Racism: definitions, 22–32; aversive, 24–5; curriculum (see Curriculum, minority faculty); cultural, 23–4, 89–93; democratic, 25–6; everyday, 26; faculty (see Faculty–student relationship); hidden, 67; individual, 28–9; institutionalized, 29–31; organized, 31–2; peers (see Peer group interaction); polite, 27; psychosocial, (see Psychosocial dimension); skin colour, 84–9; silent, 25; structural, 31; symbolic, 26–7; systemic, 31; total, 32 Recolonization, 99, 172 Recommendations and strategies for change. See Challenges Residence experiences, 102–3 Resistance: to minority courses and instructors, 121–4 Saree, 91, 171 Self-esteem, 141 Self-segregation. See Peer group relationships September 11, 137, 159 Sexism. See Gender discrimination Sikhs, 44, 167 Silencing. See Peer group relationships Skin colour racism. See Racism Social difference, 16–17 Socioeconomic status. See Class

South Asian: ‘Brown,’ 130; culture conflict, 128–9; identity crisis, 131– 6; students and faculty members, 8–9 Spirit injury, 130 Status: and abilities, 93–4; and class (see Adjusting to Canada); shock, 54–5 Stereotype, 65, 115, 160–1; threat, 149 Strategies for change. See Challenges Structured ignorance, 31–2 Students: first-generation, 8, 39, 43, 48, 51–4, 165, chapters 3–7 passim; international, 8, 39, 40, 43, 51–4, 165, chapters 3–7 passim; secondgeneration, 8, 39, 43, 51–4, 165, chapters 3–7 passim Subaltern mentality, 50, 168 Suicide, 137 Teaching styles, differential, 74 Third World issues, 29, 49, 71, 95, 96, 99, 114, 118, 121, 125, 130 Tracking, 76–7 Vedanda philosophy, 141, 174 Vegetarianism, 90 Vicarious experiences, 100 Visible minorities, 5, 43, 137, 145, 147 Vulnerability, 141 Whiteness, 101, 149; concept of, 18–20, 54, 70, 123, 148 White privilege, 19–20, 135